why teakwondo consists of little grappling

I have been training tkd for 10 years. For the period of 10 years, i have been training with other teakwondo associations and also with some military students. As I have been practising this art, I noticed that there is not a single grappling method. Why?

Grapplin wasn't popular until Gracie brought it her a few years back in the UFC.

Vicky

That may be TKD current incarnation.

But back in the 70's and 80's TKD had soem to alot of grappling--depending on which school.

Most (most NOT all) of current TKD seems (seems NOT is) geared for Olympic type sparring where grappling is not allowed.

Kinda the same reason most judo schools don't teach strikeing much anymore (an dthey used too)--its not used in competiton.

that is why i wrestle for my school it teaches grappling and i train in tae kwon do for striking

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cxt:

Vicky

That may be TKD current incarnation.

But back in the 70's and 80's TKD had soem to alot of grappling--depending on which school.

Most (most NOT all) of current TKD seems (seems NOT is) geared for Olympic type sparring where grappling is not allowed.

Kinda the same reason most judo schools don't teach strikeing much anymore (an dthey used too)--its not used in competiton.[/QUOTE]

I never saw any Korean schools in the 70-80 that had grappling? It didn't get POPULAR until Gracie brought it out of the closet in the UFC. I"m sure, to cover my ass that there were a few schools around but nothing like it is today.

Maybe the Koreans looked to some other art for their grappling and so they practised striking seperately.
http://victory44709.tripod.com/koreangrappling/

http://www.koreangrappling.com/
http://members.tripod.com/koreangrappling/index.htm

(IMHO)

[This message has been edited by Lokkan-Do (edited 06-29-2004).]

Schanne

Kinda depends on what you consider "grappling".

I trained a a TKD school in the late 70's and there was a a pretty large grouping of throws, takedowns, joint locks, projections etc.

Grappling as in say collage wrestling or Greco-Roman or ground fighting or Garcie "stuff" no, not much.

About the same with the karate I study--most of it contains what I consider to be "grappling" application and training.

I don't know--close enough for a general statemen.

TKD we do has grappling too.

I think TKD does have grappling, it's just "by proxy". By that, I mean that TKD's forms have been heavily influenced by karate, with TKD copying some kata move-for-move. Within these kata are numerous grappling applications but, unfortunately, most TKD instructors aren't aware of this and don't have any knowledge of the grappling applications of their forms and so it just doesn't get taught. A great shame really.

CXT,
Grappling: on the ground wrestling, arm bars, chokes, leg locks, from the guard, from the half guard, ankle cranks, wrist locks and so on...this stuff was never tought to us back in 70-80's. A matter of fact I will bet the majority of traditional MA's never heard of it or saw it's applications until Gracie and the others brought to the USA through the UFC.

Schanne

Are you reading my posts??

Pretty clear ie I was specifc in terms of the "grappling" used in TKD of that period.

ie, throws, projections, joint locks etc.

Pretty clear that THERE WAS NOT much "ground fighting" aka they kind of things found in Greco-Roman, Gracie style stuff, etc

So yes, did PLENTY of "wrist locks" "arm bars" "chokes" DID NO "ground work" "ankle cranks" "working from the guard" etc.

Clear enough this time??

By the by, your WAY off base in terms of what "traditional MA's heard or saw."

About grappling--the Gracies entire base of techniques come DIRECTLY from Judo--taught to them by a Japanese teacher.

Some refinements to be sure--but the fundamential base is good, old fashioned traditional judo--which is a child of traditinal jujutsu.

Which is a very, very, very, old art.

Things like the "ankle cranks" you mention are found in a couple of jujutsu ryu that are 200-300 years old.

So I'd have to argue that in terms of what the Gracies do, or grappling period the really "traditional" martial artists would have seen MANY things like what the Gracies do.

Heck, in karate there are several applications from Nahanchi kata that are very close, "kissing cousins" to the "mount" and "guard" positions you mention.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cxt:

Schanne

Kinda depends on what you consider "grappling".

I trained a a TKD school in the late 70's and there was a a pretty large grouping of throws, takedowns, joint locks, projections etc.

Grappling as in say collage wrestling or Greco-Roman or ground fighting or Garcie "stuff" no, not much.

About the same with the karate I study--most of it contains what I consider to be "grappling" application and training.

I don't know--close enough for a general statemen.

[/QUOTE]

AGREE, But I think your missing my pouint as well. Yes the art is very old but it just got really introduced and "marketed" the last few years....not arguing with you just trying to shed some light.

Would'nt the answer be Hapkido, which is if I am not mistaken the Korean form of grappling. And I am pretty sure that Hapkido in a pretty Old Art!!!!


Brian

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Brian Mullen:
Would'nt the answer be Hapkido, which is if I am not mistaken the Korean form of grappling. And I am pretty sure that Hapkido in a pretty Old Art!!!!


Brian[/QUOTE]

We have to determine first what we consider grappling? Hapkido is mostly throws and takedowns from an agressor,after the agressor is taken down he is put into submission, so I suppose you could say it has Grappling in the style. But there is no wrestling around on the ground from the guard or anything like Jujitsu style of grappling. HPK incorporates wrist locks and standing arm locks etc.

Ladies, ladies, ladies.

J and Silent Bob in the hiz..err..no.

This is only what *I* learned when *I* studied TKD at *ONE* particular school. Okay?

A) Kicks. both high and low.
B) Punches/hand strikes
C) Elbow strikes
D) Knees.
E) Take downs/Throws.
F) Standing locks/submissions
G) Ground defense/offense
H) Grounnd Locks/Submissions.

The school was a WTF TKD school. Now I am not saying it was as indepth in the F, G, H department as it was in the Kick/Punch department. But it was covered, quite well, I might add.

This was a school before the Gracies went on UFC. It is just how they taught TKD there. Period.

Maybe that school is the ananomly (spelling?).

[QUOTE]Originally posted by schanne:
We have to determine first what we consider grappling? Hapkido is mostly throws and takedowns from an agressor,after the agressor is taken down he is put into submission, so I suppose you could say it has Grappling in the style. But there is no wrestling around on the ground from the guard or anything like Jujitsu style of grappling. HPK incorporates wrist locks and standing arm locks etc. [/QUOTE]
Not all Jujitsu is the same right???
And as for Hapkido is just throws and take downs i believe you are slightly misinformed,The "submissions" that you speak of would be breaks on the street. Hapkido was designed to take out a puncher/kicker.
What the Gracies did was just brought an ancient art back into the light and gave it a new name. Here around were I live we have the AKTA ( American Korean Tae Kwondo Assocition) were Grand Master Choon Lee Incorperates Hapkido with the "reg" tae kwon do. So I guess (grappling) in traditional tae kwon do has always been around, you just needed to know were to look!!!!

Tae Kwon Do is an Olyumpic sport. It was concieved with that in mind in the late 1950s. The rules of the sport don't allow for grappling so why train for it? While just about every TKD school or club has a certain element of self defense taught, you have to remember that scoring a point it what TKD is about, not winning a fight. While some may not agree with this assessment, just do a little research on the histroy of Tae Kwon Do.

And think about it. How often do you train to kick to the kneecap? Do you ever train in street clothes like you be wearing if you do get into a fight? Do you train to attack the soft body parts often such as the groing, eyes and throat? Do you study the autokinetic reactions that hardwired into the human nervous system so you will know how a person will react to a specific blow?

I've never seen a TKD school that does these things. Tae Kwon Do tends to be a martial sport. There is nothing wrong with that, I'm not trying to knock TKD, I'm simply saying it is a specific format, designed for a sporting contest. If that is what you are interested in, along with all that goes along with it such as phiscial fitness, deispline and such, then TKD is a great way to go. However it want to learn how to WIN A FIGHT, there are better, more effective and more effecient.

Self defense is best approached in layers with the most involved and deepest layers being in simply awareness and avoidence rather than physcial contact.

Anyone else think that the above post is so wrong it is almost beyond commenting on?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Uriel:
Anyone else think that the above post is so wrong it is almost beyond commenting on?[/QUOTE]

No, not really. I think he has a point. TKD is now trained for as a sport more than a martial art. It's the same with most judo clubs, the sporting aspect has taken over. If it isn't used in the sport, why train for it.

Robert Dohrenwend's article on the history of Ch'ongdokwan has a few choice quotes in it from various high-ranking TKDists about TKD being a "martial sport": http://www.sos.mtu.edu/husky/tkdhist.htm

I hesitate to say that's why it was devisd, but it's certainly what it's becoming.

see your keyword is "now becoming"

Hajume! Sijak!
No, here's the skinny. TKD began back in the sixth century AD. It began as a means of fighting for the Hwa Rang (warrior corps). The style was then called Soo Bak of Ta Kyon, or simply Hwa Rang Do (there is a form named this often performed for black belt in TKD) Hwa Rang Do still exists in some form today. Anyway, this was practiced to protect the Korean king, who was often threatened by the Chinese and later the Japanese. The invading forces were often better fitted for battle, and on horse-back. So, jumping and flying kicks were developed to knock these guys off their mounts and such. This being a military system, time was of the essence, so grappling usually didn't take place. You see, while you wrestle with one person, another would stroll by and whack your head off! So, contrary to popular belief, TKD did not originate as a sport, it was very much a martial art, and one of the oldest. You see, most martial arts have a foundation in jiu jitsu, but this took place in Japan, which was very much a closed society at this time. TKD originated separately from the grappling arts. It was designed eventually to be a kicking and punching art, hence the name: tae (foot), kwon (fist), do (way). It was from 1909-1945, during japanese occupation that TKD began to branch into the sport world. Koreans were banned from practicing TKD at this time. The system split into sport and combative styles. Tang Soo Do became known as the combative style of TKD, and tae kwon do became known as the sport system. There were originally 7 kwans (styles) of TKD, when it originated in 1955 with General Choi. Only one style kept the TKD name, but remained combative (Jung Moo Kwan). At this point, TKD still was in pure form, thus having incorporated no grappling. Kicks, punches, hyungs, sparring (began in 60s-70s), board breaking, and one step spar are the hallmark of TKD. it is a hard style, thus relys on one hard kick or punch to end a fight, just as Shotokan Karate, Yoshukai Karate, or any other hard style. Today, pure TKD does not oncorporate grabs, breakfalls, throws, and grappling. Yes, you may train in a TKD school that teaches you these things, but that is because an instructor has seen the need for those techniques and has adapted the system to incorporate those techniques. Hapkido did originally serve some of this purpose in Korea, but today because of mass media and that we live in such a global society, many schools are trying to become as complete a system as they can. They do this by adapting the most effective techniques of any system to theirs. Find a school that does this well, while still has a good core of TKD or some other art is my advice.

Sorry Slayr, your "research" is so way off base it's not even funny...

Um, and you are? Thats okay, you assume I have trained only for mere months I am sure.

I do know a few things about this issue and have several sources. Lets not make accusations.

Consult these references and report back: Tae Kwon Do by General Choi Hong Hi, Tae Kwon Do by Yeon Hee Park, Yeon Hwan Park, and Jon Gerrard, or Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do by Richard Chun just to start. Let me know if you need any morereference material. i will be happy to supply it.

[This message has been edited by Slayr (edited 07-06-2004).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Slayr:
Um, and you are?[/QUOTE]

Somebody who doesn't follow the "sensei says" school of research. And I don't make any assumptions about your training. I've heard the same BS on TKD history from guys who have trained in the style all their lives.

The sources you quote are little more than Korean nationalist propaganda. I'd suggest looking at the articles of Dakin Burdick, Robert Dohrenwend, John Hancock, Eric Madis, Stanley Henning, and Manuel Adrogue to name but a few. Might cause you to question the grand ultimate poobahs of TKD and their "historical" research.

History, as they say, is written by the victors.

Or was it a joke played on the dead by the living?

Your pick.

One history is korean propeganda. The other is japanese propeganda. Just depends on your appetite.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Uriel:
One history is korean propeganda. The other is japanese propeganda.[/QUOTE]

Maybe, but since the "Japanese propaganda" has generally been written by non-Japanese practitioners of Korean martial arts who have provided evidence to back up their assertions, as opposed to the Korean nationalist approach of repeating folk tales, it should seem obvious which is the more intelligent, unbiased and believable theory.

neither are believable.

good god, where is andy kaufman when you need him?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Uriel:
neither are believable.

good god, where is andy kaufman when you need him?[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure how you work that one out. I'd personally take the Korean story over TKD appearing out of thin air. And I don't see how a dead, second-rate comedian has anything to do with it either. But, I'm willing to listen. Please, enlighten us.

Abraxas, I teach history, have a degree in it and am well aware of biases. There are never any stories in history that are free of biases. Unless you are 1300 years old, then you do not know the "facts" any more than anyone else. I am, by the way, not a TKD loyalist. I think it has its place in training, but it is not by any means the Mecca of all arts. For the record, my teacher has nothing to do with my knowledge of the past. I am not a yes-man to him. He taught me to question everything.

Yes, you are making assumptions to the fact that I have not trained my whole life and that you are more knowledgeable than the rest of us. Look, I am just a humble martial artist trying to lend a helping hand to other students while cenversing with seasoned martial artists about whatever topics I can. I think that this is what martial arts is about. However, I think that putting down other people and their training is not what martial arts is about. this forum should be a place of respect, just as the dojo/dojang. When you relate to things that others say as BS, you are only revealing the fact of how little you truly know about the martial arts. This is just my opinion as a humble lifelong martial arts student.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Abraxas:
I'm not sure how you work that one out. I'd personally take the Korean story over TKD appearing out of thin air. And I don't see how a dead, second-rate comedian has anything to do with it either. But, I'm willing to listen. Please, enlighten us.[/QUOTE]


Awww..did I upset you? I'm sowwy...

Sorry, I've been out of pocket for a few days. Check out the following link:
http://www.sos.mtu.edu/husky/tkdhist.htm

While I don't make any claims that it is 100% accurate, it does coenside closly with most other accounts of the history of Tae Kwon Do. By the way, the 1950s was not that long ago and the information concerning the actual bring together of the seven major Kwons under a single umbrella of the name Tae Kwon Do is generally agreed upon, if not the exact person who coined the term.

The entire purpose of WTF is to be the presiding body over the Olympic sport. There have been numerous disagreements and bitter agruments between the WTF and the ITF but the WTF is far more widespread around world BECAUSE it's an Olympic sport.

Disagree if you like. I've done Tae Kown Do on and off for a long time and recently (1 1/2 years ago) started in Chung Do Kwon Tae Kwon Do. Before that I trained in Youn Wha Ryu and I've had to learn all the new forms but I'm now a brown belt in this style.

Hey don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking TKD, I'm simply pointing out that it is an Olympic sport and the emphisis is on scoreing a point. I would also point out that the basis of pre modern martial arts systems simply don't have the advantage of knowing the human body like we do today. There are also lots of things that you train for when sparring that CAN be a bad thing in a street fight. It depends a lot on how you train and your mindset.

There are modern combat techniques that are superior. Just ask the Navy SEALS who train in SCARS rather than any ancient art.

I enjoy TKD, the fitness, the flexibility, the friends but I have no illusions that it is the end all of H2H combat.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Slayr:
I think that putting down other people and their training is not what martial arts is about. this forum should be a place of respect, just as the dojo/dojang. When you relate to things that others say as BS, you are only revealing the fact of how little you truly know about the martial arts. This is just my opinion as a humble lifelong martial arts student.[/QUOTE]

You're absolutely right. I probably came across as an a***hole earlier and that wasn't my intention. I was having a bad day and expressed my self more forcefully than I meant to. For that I apologise.

However, I stand by the fact that I have made NO assumptions about you're training and I don't believe I ever insulted you're training. I simply disagreed with you're version of historical events. If I assumed that I'm more knowledgable on this subject than anybody else here, then I would have to say you are guilty of the same sin, with your first post being very much in the manner of "Here's the deal with TKD..."

That said, I do respect the fact that you actually have an opinion on this subject and are willing to express it. Which brings me to Uriel. No mate, you didn't upset me. It was an honest question. If both me and Slayr are wrong, I would really like to hear what your view on TKD's historical roots is. So far, I haven't seen you express a single opinion on this thread other than stating that other people are wrong. That's all well and good but this is a discussion forum and to discuss things you generally have to offer a counterpoint as well, otherwise its not so much a discussion and more of a kids' playground squabble. "You're wrong cos you are!" hasn't really been an acceptable arguement in my books since I was around the age of six.

Understood, Abraxas, no harm done.


Hi TwoGun, I agree with much of what you said in the recent post. But, there are systems that have the name of TKD which are not affiliated with any national or international orgs. (WTF, ITF...). I do realize that TKD is not a complete system in any way, but all styles today are not Olympic systems. There are a few combative systems which allow you to actually hit your partner and not play tag. These schools are hard to find, but some actually do train in street clothes and such from time to time. Notwithstanding, though, my experience is that these schools are not usually what I consider to be 100% TKD, they have adapted to be more "real" and kept the name and techniques. Take it for what it is worth, it is just what I've seen here in the South US.

Oh I know. I guess I shoud have qualified my statment by saying saying conventional Tae Kwon Do schools. I worked out under one Master Man H. Han in the north Dallas area and he was an amazing instructor. He spent, what I have come to realize, an inrodinate amount of time working with his more advanced students on techniques for the street. But He was unusual in that he not only was a master of TKD but also of Hopkido and he was a 4th Dan in Judo and he had studied in China for several years. He simply had a far different view than other TKD instructors I'd had previously.

The thing about his school was he could really, really push you and he would once or twice just to see how long it would be before you came back. I mean many students wouldn't show up again for a week or two after a workout like that. But if you did show up again the next day, he pushed you more and more. If you could stick with you, had some first class training that was viable and effective on the street.

But CONVENTIONAL WTF/ITF schools do tend to point "score a point" orientited. And why not? It's an Olympic sport.

You said it TwoGun. I agree.

Why does Hardees consist of so little McDonalds?

Didn't the original question state something about Grappling & TKD???? LOL

I have been training Archery for 10 years. For the period of 10 years, i have been training with other Archery associations and also with some military students. As I have been practising this art, I noticed that there is not a single Firearm method. Why?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by oldman:
I have been training Archery for 10 years. For the period of 10 years, i have been training with other Archery associations and also with some military students. As I have been practising this art, I noticed that there is not a single Firearm method. Why?

[/QUOTE]

OK I'll bite........What the heck are you talking about????? [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/confused.gif[/IMG]

goldencrane
Vicky Shah, made this post on 6/28 beginning the thread
" I have been training tkd for 10 years. For the period of 10 years, i have been training with other teakwondo associations and also with some military students. As I have been practising this art, I noticed that there is not a single grappling method. Why?"
As you wrote in you're earlier post there many styles represented on this forum. TKD has remarkable variety and scope. There are certainly grappling applications in the art. History plays a role in the different methodologies. Different branches have different priorities. To say that there are no grappling techniques would not be accurate. Vicky speaks from expeirence regarding her branch, not the whole tree.
Concerning my previous post,
"I have been training Archery for 10 years. For the period of 10 years, i have been training with other Archery associations and also with some military students. As I have been practising this art, I noticed that there is not a single Firearm method. Why?"
It just substitutes other methods into her post to help people ponder the question without suppyling a simple answer. Vicky has been studying "archery " for ten years, right next to a gun range and never heard a shot.

goldencrane,
By the way, I think we are neighbors.

grappling can be found in kalarypayutt which is one of the oldest martial arts. It has been practised in india for approximately 1000 years and it is where most modern styles descend from, via bhodydharma(sorry for the spelling) then china, then okinawa, Japan korea etc. Greco roman wresling has been around for hundreds of years and it is nothing but grappling. Any lock that can be performed standing can be done on the ground.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by oldman:
goldencrane,
By the way, I think we are neighbors.[/QUOTE]

Quite possibly [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by reaperblack:
grappling can be found in kalarypayutt which is one of the oldest martial arts. It has been practised in india for approximately 1000 years and it is where most modern styles descend from, via bhodydharma(sorry for the spelling) then china, then okinawa, Japan korea etc. Greco roman wresling has been around for hundreds of years and it is nothing but grappling. Any lock that can be performed standing can be done on the ground.[/QUOTE]
And your point is??????

The question is'nt were grappling came from but why TKD has very little if any in it!!!!

my point was in reply to an earlier post that grappling was a relatively new art, which had only really came about thanks to bjj. There is little grappling in tkd because it is descended from okinawan karate, and the theory here is that when you grapple you take yourself out of the fight. Karate is only to be used against multiple opponents, when you grapple multiple opponents you get killed!!!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by reaperblack:
my point was in reply to an earlier post that grappling was a relatively new art, which had only really came about thanks to bjj. There is little grappling in tkd because it is descended from okinawan karate, and the theory here is that when you grapple you take yourself out of the fight. Karate is only to be used against multiple opponents, when you grapple multiple opponents you get killed!!![/QUOTE]

"Karate is only supposed to be used against mulitple opponents"???? [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/confused.gif[/IMG]

Okinawain Karate does have grappling in it. And TKD does aswell, It just is'nt taught. Take any Kata/Form and you will find plenty of grappling techniques!!!

But back to the original reason for my retort, If Karate is "ONLY" supposed to be used against multiple attackers, What are you supposed to do when it a conflict between 1 on 1 ?????

Reaper

I don't get it.

How can you say in your last post.

"grappling is a relitivly new art which only really came about thanks to bjj"

When in you previous post you established grappling as being 1000s of years old in the Indian tradiitons and many 100s of years old in Greco-Roman?

See, thats a couple of major contardictions.

If grappling only came about "thanks to the gracies"

Then how can it be 1000 years old?

Do the Gracies have a time machine?

Is grappling very old OR is it "new"

Can't have it both ways.

And then what has any of that to do with the question at hand?

Like I said, just don't get it.

I wasn't saying that grappling was new, I was replying to a statement that someone else had made that grappling was new. Karate is designed for multiple opponents and against a single opponent you are only supposed to pary and sidestep. If you are any good at Karate you should be able to counter any attack with only a pary. Providing that you have been learning a traditional style which contains the shorin triangle, I am sure that it has other names in other styles, but shorin ryu is the only style of karate that I have ever done. At least for more than a class, which would have ended in laughter. Any attack from a single opponent can be avoided. Multiple attackers must be removed from the conflict. This is where the "one strike one kill" idea, this doesn't neccesarily mean a "kill", it can be a limb destruction or KO. The movements in kata that you are referring to that can be applyed to grappling, can indeed be applyed to grappling, after all the only difference between stand and fighting and laying down is where the ground is. As I said before though that is not what these techniques where designed for. If you take those locks and pressure points that you can find in kata and apply them with the right stance, they are not locks anymore they are destructions. This of course depends on the style that you do and how much the kata have been altered from their original form.
What I am trying to say is that, as someone who used to think that grappling was the be all and end all of every fight, I can now tell you that it isn't. If you have a good foundation in locks, and pressure points, and your stances are good, you never need to grapple. Think about being in the middle of a battlefield, now imagine rolling around on the ground with an opponent while thousands of other men try to kill each other. you figure it out.
Ps I apologize if this message seems sarcastic, it wasn't meant to be
Reaper
One other thing the idea of parrying and stepping aside has been passed down in karate for at almost 100 years and is the first of ten statements made by Anko Itosu in 1908. In case you don't know who Itosu is he is responsible for the invention of the corkscrew punch, the pinan kata, and the division of both kusanku(kushanku) and Passai(bassai). This is also the same line as Funokoshi Gichin comes from, which is where shotokan karate comes from, which is where tkd comes from.
[This message has been edited by reaperblack (edited 08-13-2004).]

[This message has been edited by reaperblack (edited 08-14-2004).]

hi everyone if you would like to read some or see some grappling in tae kwon do such as armbars master richard chun wrote a book on tae kwon do in 1970 and it is a picture of what some tae kwon do had at that time.The book is called tae kwon do the korean martial art .

[QUOTE]Originally posted by schanne:
Grapplin wasn't popular until Gracie brought it her a few years back in the UFC.[/QUOTE]

IF YOU WERE LET'S JUST SAY 120 LBS AND YOUR ATTACKER WAS SAY 350 LB FOOTBALL PLAYER WITH COMING AT YOU FOR THE KILL SHOULD YOU GRAPPLE
NO, NO, NO
KICKING AND PUNCHING IS THE WAY TO GO
WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS THAT MAKES UP POWER

My instructor teaches his own style of taekwondo, and he includes grappling, and teaches us to aim for the joints, and chokes, etc

every1 here is talking about taekwondo, but korean grappiling is acually hapkido, or aikido in japanese, does that solve the problem?

taekwondo ....look at its name the art of hands and feet... not really grappling... bleh...

Anyways taekwondo is meant for fast blows... and as soon as u hit trust me get away.... hahah start circling around yur oponent again and then hit and retreat again.... but make sure yur kicks are low ..... theres a reason why they say the front snap kick is the most dangerouos kick..... think about it.... u kick straight to groin... people can die from that.... anyways... yeah taekwondos grapples arent anything like that of hapkido, all its takedowns are fast and decisie as well.. think of it as something like boxing.. boxers if they fight against a grappler they punch step back dodge whatever they try to do or maneuver away from their oponent again and then strike them from the side again and keep repeating.... well light weight boxres anyways

Reaperblack,

[QUOTE]Originally posted by reaperblack:
grappling can be found in kalarypayutt which is one of the oldest martial arts. It has been practised in india for approximately 1000 years and it is where most modern styles descend from, via bhodydharma(sorry for the spelling) then china, then okinawa, Japan korea etc.[/QUOTE]

For the record: THE "SINGLE BIRTHPLACE FOR ALL MARTIAL ARTS" THEORY IS A LOAD OF CRAP!

Martial arts did not develop in one area--they most likely are the product of PARALLEL EVOLUTION. All this nonsense about all MA coming from India, being transplanted to China, and spreading to the rest of Asia from there is just really weak. What about Europe and Africa? How does the whole Bodhidharma theory explain the wrestling illustrations at Beni Hassan, which date from around 2000 B.C./B.C.E.? And no, the suggestion that the Indian stuff actually comes from Ancient Greece, via Alexander the Great's campaigns, isn't any more convincing.

[QUOTE]Greco roman wresling has been around for hundreds of years and it is nothing but grappling. Any lock that can be performed standing can be done on the ground.[/QUOTE]

Get your grappling history and wrestling rules straight--what we now call "Greco-Roman" wrestling is actually a French invention from the 19th century (that explains all the French terms that are used, like suplex, parterre, etc). Secondly, there are no submissions in Greco-Roman--the goal is to throw and pin the other guy. Only techniques above the waist can be utilized. This makes Greco-Roman very formidable from the clinch position.

Peace,

A_M_P



[This message has been edited by Armed_Man_Piker (edited 09-26-2004).]

TKD was developed for farmers to combat armed cavalry. It is meant for a person on the ground to be able to unseat a person riding on horseback. Hence the flying, jumping, and spinning kicks. Not to mention that the legs are the longest and strongest weapon on the body!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WiseTiger:
TKD was developed for farmers to combat armed cavalry. It is meant for a person on the ground to be able to unseat a person riding on horseback. Hence the flying, jumping, and spinning kicks. Not to mention that the legs are the longest and strongest weapon on the body![/QUOTE]

Another myth, I'd say.

For an unarmed farmer to try to deal with an armed horseman (and with flying kicks, no less) is, in itself, rather ludicrous.

yeth, a near myth.

Ouch!!

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

Know your art!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WiseTiger:
Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

Know your art![/QUOTE]

I couldn't agree more completely with you. I also apologize for my comment. I hold history in high regard. Perhaps you could tell me what in year Koreas three kingdoms were unified? and under what King?. After that you could tell me what was the name of the buddist scholar who is credited with the developement of the "strict code " ?. After that perhaps we could go back to the question of Did General Choi lead or belong to any martial arts organizations before forming the ITF?. OR who was the President of Korea when
the name Tae Kwon Do established. Where did he go to college.In which university and country? What was his major? To what political Party did he belong?. What faith did he ascribe to?
Being an oldman theres nothing I enjoy more than tottering around the house or reading dusty books whilst sitting on my enlarged prostate.

Alex I'll Take TKD history for $500 please.

Phrased in the form of a question......

"Who" is being tested [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Sincerely
oldman



[This message has been edited by oldman (edited 10-08-2004).]

Seems like very little respect here for all of these sarcastic questions. Though history defines where the arts come from and is very interesting ... but my question would be will having WiseTiger answer your trival questions make a difference in your life or training?

I honestly could not answer most of these questions myself though I do enjoy reading this type of history ... and that of other martial arts as well. I do know that General Choi Hong-hi was instrumental in having Korea's military and police learn TKD and founded the KTA in 1965. When the government was upsurped and he fled then he established the ITF. The KTA is now the WTF which I think happened in 1973. I'm sure if I'm wrong I'll be corrected.

None the less your enlarged prostate will not subside whether these questions are answered or not. Life will go on as it always does, with our involvement or not. I am sorry to hear about your enlarged prostate and wish you the best ... none the less!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dereck:
Seems like very little respect here for all of these sarcastic questions. Though history defines where the arts come from and is very interesting ... but my question would be will having WiseTiger answer your trival questions make a difference in your life or training?

I honestly could not answer most of these questions myself though I do enjoy reading this type of history ... and that of other martial arts as well. I do know that General Choi Hong-hi was instrumental in having Korea's military and police learn TKD and founded the KTA in 1965. When the government was upsurped and he fled then he established the ITF. The KTA is now the WTF which I think happened in 1973. I'm sure if I'm wrong I'll be corrected.

None the less your enlarged prostate will not subside whether these questions are answered or not. Life will go on as it always does, with our involvement or not. I am sorry to hear about your enlarged prostate and wish you the best ... none the less![/QUOTE]

Dereck,
I apologize for any disrespect. It was not my intention to be disrespectful. Maybe I took the "know your art" comment a bit personally. Again I hold history in high regard and don't consider those questions trivial. The fact is everyone of those questions effected where you put your wieght, and how much you bent your knees in class last night. A persons understanding of the history of their art and history in general inform their opinions, bias's, and perceptions.
As for having WiseTiger answer my questions affecting my life today? He does'nt need too answer them. I posed them purely for my pleasure, not for his answersthat may sound selfish but it's true. If he did take the time to answer them It would say alot about his knowledge about history and therfore his approach to training. It would give me the pleasure of more deeply knowing him and understanding his point of view.
Dereck, I hope I've answered your question. Will you answer on for me? How does not knowing the answer to those questions affect your training?
I don't think I've ever corrected anyone on this forum, Why would I, especially when I know I'm wrong.
Sincerely,
oldman

It seems you may be a little wise your self. Of course you already know the answer, not knowing does not affect my training at all. In class we clear our minds of everything before beginning so that we can focus on the tasks at hand. Knowledge of where your arts came from are good but my focus is to learn what I can now in class to grow. The rest is just gravy. Of course I also too could be wrong, I am middle age but young in the arts and have much to learn. I will keep an open mind for the future. Thanks

Don't be to quick to malign the Gravy. It helped me one day when I was having a little trouble swallowing what someone fed me. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

oldman

The wisdom is flowing now! This is what I call a discussion!

Oldman, I appreciate your comments. It is my belief that one must know why the art was developed if they are to have a true understanding of how to use it and how to teach it to others. So many schools these days just teach the how and not the why. When my students ask why we do flying side kicks or jumping kicks, they get a small history lesson (or maybe more than they wanted to know). Regardless, they now know why those kicks are the way they are. Otherwise, it is just another kick to them.

Case in point:
Before I started taking Taekwondo, I thought that it was simply a sport art that was developed in the 50's for use in the Olympic games. This obviously isn't true, but I only discovered that after I researched it and talked with other masters about the art's history. Now, Taekwondo means much more to me than it did before I started, and that makes the art come alive!

There are other posts out here that make all kinds of claims about the validity of a certain art. I would simply invite those who do not believe the background to research the art's history. If it is truly bogus, they will soon discover that fact.

As always,

Happy Training!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WiseTiger:


There are other posts out here that make all kinds of claims about the validity of a certain art. I would simply invite those who do not believe the background to research the art's history. If it is truly bogus, they will soon discover that fact.
[/QUOTE]

So tell us more about the claim about unarmed famers dismounting armed horsemen--do you have any historical examples of this being done with any decent rate of success (or even at all)? Are there any provisions in Tae Kwon Do (historical kata, for example) for dealing effectively with a mounted opponent who is trying to:

1. Riddle you with arrows from a composite bow?

2. Skewer you with a lance?

3. Chop you with a sword?

and

4. Trample you under the hooves of his steed?

I have been fortunate in my brief TKD career to have instructors who understand the significance of the movements that we do in our kyeu roogi and poomsae. We are often stopped mid way and asked why we are doing what we are doing e.g. a ridge hand strike,an elbow strike, a choke hold etc. It lets the student know what they are doing.

We often engage in combat sparring techniques which are similar to our step sparring with much more effective/devastating finishing moves. Our instructors readily point techniques that are appropriate for self defence and the ones that are more for show.

They all have their place though in the art and sport of TKD.