[quote]rg73 wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
People can debate how good a martial artist
He never really fought competitively, so no, we can’t debate that.
or physical specimen Bruce Lee was or wasn’t.
He wasn’t. There is nothing to debate there.
The fact remains that he started a martial arts trend in the U.S. by opening up the instruction to non-Asians when it was not cool to do so.
No he didn’t. I’m curious as to how people had been studying judo for a good, what, 5 decades before Bruce came onto the scene in the US, and Karate/TKD for about 2 decades before he showed up. Bruce was among the first, but not the first to teach Kung Fu to non-Chinese. Although Don Draeger didn’t seem to have any problem getting anyone to train him in Kung Fu, Kali, Silat, or anything else. So someone was breaking that ground way before Bruce.
He also was a pioneer in breaking with the traditional ways of teaching martial arts. Like him or not, he will likely be a topic of discussion for years to come.
This is not even remotely true. Kano was the first one to do this. Which is why JKD degenerated into a bunch of drill fags and Judo is still a live evolving art. Oh but, Bruce was the first to synthesize a bunch of arts and incorporate the best parts. Ummm, no. Kano again. Except Kano actually tried everything at full speed, full contact, against resisting opponents. Bruce didn’t. Also, the Kajukenbo guys in Hawaii were mixing and matching different arts and teaching people of various ethnic backgrounds decades before Bruce.
Another thing for the flamers to come, regardless of whether or not he was the first to do what I’ve written above, he is acknowledged to be the first,
No, he’s not. Only people who don’t know any better acknowledge him as such.
much like a Spanish Jew is an Italian-American hero for discovering America when in fact he wasn’t.
Again, only the uninformed believe this. Committing genocide or making a $100 million movie is better PR than the truth, no?[/quote]
HAHAHA!
HA!
HARRRRR!!!
D-F’n-B