You'll find a lot of sources through the search function.
Originally Posted by Vulgar42Ox
Generally many people discredit Bruce Lee because he was never adequetly pressure tested as a fighter. Whereas Muhammad Ali had the chance to PROVE he's among the greatest, Bruce Lee's greatest accomplishments were through the cinema.
To his credit most accounts verify that Bruce Lee was generally interested in learning how to fight unlike many(Seagal, Van Damme). However, through scenarios brought forth by his interaction with teachers like Gene Lebell it became apparent that Bruce was less a master of fighting and more of a student like the rest of us.
To me Bruce Lee simply represents a talented icon that got out of control in the rumor department.
Wasn't Yip Man an opium addict?
I've heard that, but I'm not sure if it can be verified or disproven.
Originally Posted by Nestorius
He knew his chi sau, to a point, although as far as I was told he didn't learn anything beyond the chum kiu form. So no biu gee or weapons.
[rumor]There's an old story where Bruce went to Ip Mann and offered to buy him a house to teach him the wooden dummy form. Bruce didn't even know that he was supposed to learn Bil Jee next. Mann was very offended and basically told Bruce to go **** himself. Apparently Lee then learned the dummy form from someone else by trading for dancing lessons.[/rumor]
I also hear Yip man was rascist(ie Lee had some dutch blood didn't he?)
Well . . . I found a copy of RW Smith's work cheap online. I will post my impressions of his chapter when I get the damn thing. RW has his "issues" such as actually believing in Chinese Martial Arts. . . .
I don't think Robert Smith actually visited Yip Man's school. In Martial Musings, he was referring to an interview with or article written by James Demiles, one of Bruce Lee's early students. I believe he was a student when Lee lived in Seattle.
Demiles supposedly wrote that when Lee returned from a trip to Hong Kong he was depressed because he had been schooled by many of Yip Man's students. I've never seen this verified by another source and have not seen the original text by Demiles so I'm not sure about it's accuracy. Robert Smith does have a tendency to talk a lot of trash in that book, he also critiqued the Gracies, Mas Oyama, Maung Gyi, and Bruce Tegner.
According to Guro Inosanto, Lee never learned any of the Wing Chun weapons and only knew a portion of the wooden dummy form (I believe up to the 7th section or so as it's broken down in Jun Fan). I believe Guro Inosanto went to Hong Kong to study more Wing Chun after Lee's death.
When he was there, he learned the rest of the wooden dummy form and possibly some of the empty hand forms as well. In talking with some of the Wing Chun practitioners that knew Lee when he was still living in Hong Kong, many of them said that Lee was a good fighter, but not a good Wing Chun practitioner. That's the picture I've gotten from lectures at Guro Inosanto's seminars and the instructor's camps.
Great . . . I quote off the top of my head and someone else actually has the book.
You are MEAN!
Anyways. . . I tend to take RW with a BIG scoop of salt, though I might enjoy the invective from a purely Junian standpoint.
I have his chapter on Draeger, and he seems disappointed that Draeger pursued arts that . . . like . . . you know . . . worked rather than chase the "softer" arts of China. However, Smith has been in the game as long as anyone else, and he has a right to an opinion.
Your description of Lee is probably quite valid. You may wish to skim the "Fang Shen Do" threads to see what a complete prat has tried to do with Demille's work . . . like . . . steal it.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO