Probably the only thing worse than listening to someone try and describe Jeet Kune Do as a style or system ("Bruce Lee style"?) is the often heard definition of JKD as "a little of this, and a little of that". Many have tried to jump on the JKD bandwagon by training in 15 different arts at one time than claiming that they are "doing" Jeet Kune Do, since Bruce had instructed everyone to investigate as many different styles as possible.

This is usually called cross training, because training in Kickboxing, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, and maybe Filipino Martial arts, should cover all the bases as far as training is concerned. But Jeet Kune Do Concepts has nothing to do with styles, systems or "ways". Doing 15 different martial arts at the same time does NOT equal JKD. But how else can we experience and apply what we train unless we expose ourselves to as many different scenarios as possible?

If the JKD man is concerned with "totality" in fighting (the search for a truly realistic approach to analyzing conflict, combat, "the fight") the study of a martial art can actually be detrimental to seeing the big picture. So why would studying 6 different arts, each with its own narrow view of "the fight" be any better? Is MORE always better?

Martial arts systems and styles are basically specializations in a particular range or scenario. For example, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is a superior grappling system because it concerns itself with, and trains exclusively for, fighting on the ground. Wing Chun is hands down the best perspective on close-in fighting and trapping because this is the system's "specialization". The problem is, a "fight" (street fight, life and death situation) is not a specialized scenario. Specialization is only for doctors and insects. As a seeker of the truth in combat, you cannot limit yourself to specializing in a particular environment, scenario or set of circumstances. You do however, need to "truly understand" all the ranges, circumstances, and nuances of what makes a fight a FIGHT.

If you approach each martial art system as one big "drill" for a particular range or scenario, you will have a big shift in how you approach your training. For example, the art of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, with all it's techniques, competition rules, training methods, philosophies, lore, etc, becomes one big Training Drill for fighting in a specific situation (the grappling range). Boxe Francaise Savate will be your Drill for kicking and punching. But you only truly grasp the essence of what a particular art is trying to teach you if you "empty your cup" and approach it unfettered with how this will fit into your "cross-training".

You will not appreciate the strategy and attribute development of Savate if you are constantly thinking about how you would "enter and takedown" nor will you learn how to properly pass someone's guard in a BJJ class if you're too busy imagining yourself punching him in the groin or eye-gouging. These scenarios also need to be trained, and you must always try to include training to train for ALL ranges/scenarios simultaneously, but only by isolating a set of circumstances and training within those parameters, will you then be able to understand how that will apply to your understanding of The Fight. You will eliminate things from your "fighting baggage" not ADD ON new techniques as you would "cross-training" in different arts.

Ultimately, your training should consist of perfecting attributes and experiencing scenarios, not collecting techniques from 15 different martial arts systems.