When reading a lot of threads on various subjects pertaining to how well Bruce Lee could fight, I found that for the most part you can break it down into two groups: Those who say Bruce Lee wasn't a fighter due to x or those who claim that Bruce Lee was the greatest fighter ever. In the process I found that there are flaws in the argument on both sides. Let me start with the most common question. Did Bruce Lee ever fight in the ring? The answer is yes. Critics like to use that argument of "Where's the video of this fight (or photo)? In fact here's an example of just this argument "No never, there is no evidence of Bruce Lee ever fighting outside of movies, including in his schools when he was teaching." Fact: They not only found the individual who set up the boxing match between Gary Elms, but he had photos of them fighting. Why do some of his critics claim there are no evidence of Bruce Lee fighting in the ring, even though there clearly is? The answer has to do with modernization. In 1958 most people probably didn't have cameras, much less video cameras. A lot of individuals that make this argument either fail to realize this or they did not do very good research. Now that doesn't mean the Bruce Lee fans are 100% correct either. One argument they like to make is that Bruce Lee struggled the first two rounds as he was adapting to the way western boxing was done, but easily knocked Gary Elms out in the 3rd round. Fact: The fight was a 3 round boxing match. According to the man that sponsored the fight, Bruce Lee did not knock out Gary Elms, but rather it went the full three rounds, also he mentioned that Bruce Lee didn't struggle in the fight, but rather he stated that he doesn't think Gary Elms managed to land a single blow on him. To be fair though this fight was not a Professional bout, but this does indeed show that Bruce Lee had at least fought in the ring. The other popular argument for and again Bruce Lee is comments from people that knew Bruce Lee. I'm going to first look at the comments by Joe Lewis and Chuck Norris, as their names come up the most. Critics like to point out that Joe Lewis stated that Bruce Lee wasn't a fighter. Fact: True. Joe Lewis has stated that Bruce Lee wasn't a fighter, but thought he was a good teacher. The problem with this criticism of Bruce Lee is that it's a weak argument. For one they normally take what Joe Lewis says out of context. In fact most of the time after making these comments Joe Lewis would also say things like how he only trained with Bruce Lee 3 or 4 times and never saw Bruce Lee fight in the ring. So what is Joe Lewis really saying? Once taken in context it becomes clear that Joe Lewis is saying that he doesn't really know if Bruce Lee could fight since he doesn't have the data necessary to come to that conclusion. In other words he doesn't know. Then there is the comment by Chuck Norris stating that Bruce Lee is the greatest non-fighter or words to that effect. Fact: Chuck Norris did indeed make comments similar to this, but again people seem to pick and choose. The leave out the part where Chuck Norris states that Bruce Lee didn't really train to fight in the ring. Do you know what else critics like to leave out? When Chuck Norris made this comment he later on clarified by stating that although Bruce Lee didn't train to fight in the ring he still believed that he had to potential to be among the top 3 fighters in his weight division. Now fans that doesn't mean that Bruce Lee is the greatest fighter ever. The common theme to this is many of Bruce Lee's friends and colleagues believed that Bruce Lee had the drive, skill-set, and determination to probably compete in the ring, but ultimately no one really knows how well Bruce Lee could have fared in the ring.
fact: gary elms probably wasnt a 3 time british boxing champion but rather (if he did exist) a local amateur fighter making bold claims. there is literally no evidence ive seen that gary elms existed outside of that bruce lee story.
I'll have to find the link showing the photos of the fight between Gary Elms and Bruce Lee not to mention that I mention it wasn't a professional bout. There was also an interview by the man who sponsored the fight.
If you are going to state things as a fact, it is good to have your sources/ evidence posted as well. I am going to guess the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes you present. There are more choices to be had here besides "not a fighter at all" and "greatest fighter ever."
I'm not sure that we'll get from this thread. It's been done to death. Every video on You Tube that claims to show rare footage has been seen tens of thousands of times and the stories are now just that, stories. I've been told than dan Inosanto has private footage of Bruce in fights (and street fights), but they'll never be made public. So with that said there are maybe those who know how good a fighter bruce was, or how he may have faired in the ring, but they don't see the need to cash in on the arguement. As for the rest or us, well we'll have to made do with stories from those that just weren't there and the grainy home videos that are available. You can of course go and train with Dan Inosanto or Richard Bustillo, become a close friend and then maybe over a beer you'll get nearer to the truth.
I agree I should have found the link showing those photos first and cited them. I agree that there are more argument's that lie some where in the middle ultimately though what I was trying to convey was the impossibility of determining how well Bruce Lee would have done in the ring and not creating just another X vs Bruce Lee. I just used the two most extreme examples. I'm sure some of my wording is off as well. Ironically I was one those who didn't believe that Bruce Lee fought a person in the ring at least until I ran across the article. I just need to find it again.
So I found another forum site that shows some of the pictures from the article I read, although this guy on the forum states that Bruce Lee knocked Gary Elms out, whereas the article I had read states that it went the full 3 rounds with no knock out...This wasn't my original source, but at this time it's the only thing I could find. http://kampforum.no/forum/index.php?topic=21331.0 Now looking back I also have to wonder if my source was a good source? Maybe I should have chose my words more carefully rather than listing it as a fact...Although, I still don't think it hurts my argument that there isn't any viable way to be sure how well Bruce Lee could have done in the ring since he never fought professionally. Again this thread was meant to talk about his potential in the ring and not a Bruce Lee vs the World type of argument.
We'll never know, like it was said above, all we got is stories and hearsay. Cameras were not as readily available and no one really thinks of filming stuff. Even if you do somehow become amazing friends with Dan lnosanto, and he does spill some beans, how much would be truth anyway? A really fun story I like was Bruce and Sammo Hung were on set, tensions were high between them. Sammo clearly didn't like Bruce and apparently disappeared to a room to fight followed by one of the Producers. They both walked out as friends and apparently refused to say the outcome.
I've got proof he was in the ring fighting. Bruce Lee vs Chuck Norris EA SPORTS UFC: http://youtu.be/MOEy0KWqLlc sorry. Saw an opening.
the thing is, who lee fought doesnt matter. the fictional story of gary elms (really try to find a record for gary elms in british hong kong) is of no consequence. theres no need to compare JKD to boxing when most JKD folk now learn boxing. his style/philosophy does work even if he wasnt a fighter because he likely trained with some resistance. his students and their students are good fighters. if he was a good fighter and everyone from his lineage sucked and they taught people to suck then thats all that would matter, JKD would suck in the here and now but it doesnt. so theres no point discussing how good of a fighter he was
The boxing match was 1957, Bruce won it after it went the distance and far from "the opponent couldn't land a blow" Bruce was decked at one point He had also consitently refused to train with the team and won the match on pressure and aggression as much as any technical skill. It was said the boy had won the tournament 3 years in a row This is from his mother and sister I wish people would stop trying to "set the record straight" about things by feeding into the mythos around Bruce. Furthermore if a high school sports event is the evidence you are using as to how good someone was later in life then I could have been an international Lacorsse player...it's an asinine argument
Interesting point! We have to remember that back in 1958 Bruce Lee had just moved to the United States and was just beginning the get exposure to other systems. We also have to remember that Bruce Lee did have a background in Boxing from his brother prior to his arrival in Seattle in 1958. I've always found this debate pointless for 2 reasons. 1) Prior to 1964 Bruce Lee was an avid Martial Artist who fought on the street as well as had some experience in the Martial Arts sport arena. 2) Why keep beating a dead horse? Well NEVER know if or how Bruce Lee would've done in any ring or street in the 21st century. Even Jun Fan Jeet Kune Do has evolved more then many think Bruce would've taken it.
