Tae Kwon Do vs Karate

Hi Everyone,

First of all let me wish everyone Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year.

Secondly, I know nothing about Martial arts, though I would like to go for Tae Kwan do.
Would you guys care to explain the difference between Tae Kwon Do and Karate or with any other Martial arts.
Or why is it better for me to go for tae kwan do? .. I don't know how to sum up my question but here:
Which one of em' ( M A; ie, tae kwando, karate, judo , jujitso, kung fu etc...) is the best to go for?

Thank you.

Have a wonderful day!

Hi NEO,
Look at post "which ma to take" in talk forum. Me personally, I've taken both.The TKD I took focused on tournaments and neat "looking" techniques but that could be just the instructor. My current ma is Goju karate and we focus on real uses of the traditional kata. You will get different oponions from different people.
TKD is korean lots of kicks/mostly sport oriented today.
Karate is Okinawan/Japanese some are sport oriented today also but many different styles of karate focus on different things.
Good luck, I hope you get as much out of it as I have. Train til' you die.

All American Goju Karate.

Try not to think of it as which art is best, but which art meets the goals you are setting. Tae kwon do as opposed to karate not much difference in hand methods but tae kwon do employs much more foot techniques, but then again it depends on the style and teacher. Most Jujitsu puts emphasis on ground control and Judo on throwing methods but once again it depends. The best way to go would be to sit down and evaluate what you want out of training then search for a location and instructor that offers what you need. Different arts should mesh and for self defense you need much more then hth if thats your goal.

Thank you SANCHIN31 and AgenT for your reply. I believe my kicks are already very high, even higher then my head level with regard to straightness and accuracy plus I can do various kinds of kicks, i.e. Roundhouse Kicks, Side Kicks, Spin Kicks, Jump Kicks, Tornado Kick..

I am fast, flexible and am able to do few major tricks i.e. Kip up, Handstand, Handstand walk, flips.. but these are all the things I learned it on my own. So I am not sure where n' when would I have to use those kicks in a street fight. I am not weak nor I have personal enmity. It is because of my interest in Martial Arts. So I thought it would be a good idea to put all these abilities in use and in the same time be prepared to protect myself for a real multi opponent fight.

Why not try MMA (Mixed Martial Arts)?

It covers much more than either Karate or TKD (which are essentially the same anyway).

Good luck [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

TKD? for SD....no way man.

Karate?....maybe the Kyokushin.I've only otherwise watched Shotokan or Wado-Ryu which I didn't think was as good....or MT

JUDO SAMBO BJJ JJ...all good

XMA?...why not just kill yourself and save someone else the energy .....

Thank you kickcatcher and Cactusmat but Unfortunately, I have no idea about such terms. This is my very first time I hear such things lol :P and I am not sure if I can find a place where they teach these stuff.

I have to disagree on karate being the same as TKD. While they employ many of the same hand techniques karate contains kicking punching trapping grappling standup shortrange and long range takedowns,throws and groundfighting methods very similier to jujitsu and taijutsu. If you want sport go for TKD if you want self defense go with karate JUTSU not karate do as their are nothing the same in those to methods. Ones for self improvement ones for combatives. Neo street assualts are much different then what most people think. Self defense is based on simulation, no matter how close to reality the simulation is it will never simulate what a person really goes through. If you want a defense against multi opponents personally I'd use a firearm. Its best to just flat out avoid violent situations though, dont trap yourself in a situation beyond your control.

Thank you AgenT for your wonderful advice.

Hi Neo,

TKD (for the most part) should provide a nice avenue for conditioning-particularly in leg work and cardio. However, little is stressed on progressive resistance training and grappling. Like mentioned before, TKD is mostly martial sport and will train you pretty good for other sports (football, soccer, lacrosse, etc in terms of coordintation, stamina and timeing these sports require).

It has murky history and controversy but so does boxing-but I enjoyed it tremendously while I trained in the dojang and now I semi train with manuals at home along with Kung Fu to keep flexible in my "silver years".

Give all to your martial art and it will give right back. Good luck and enjoy!

Happy New Years,
B-2

I gotta agree with AgenT on the multiple opponant fight scenario. In reality, most fights involving more than one attacker are unwinnable. No MA is going to totaly prepare you for this kind of thing. Find what works for you personaly, and stick with it. When it comes to MA's, regardless of which one you choose, you get out of it what you put into it. Best wishes on your futue training! [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG] Peace! Matt

actually i agree that tkd and karate are WAYYY more simelar than they are different. (infact gen. choi hong hi admitted that it is based on shotokan karate, he studied with gichin funakoshi) the big difference lies in the teaching of each respective art.
karate has always been and always will be about kata and bunkai (interpretation of movements)..which im sorry to say many tkd schools fail to teach, and yes i agree much of it is watered down or sport oriented.
in the end...kata is kata..whether you call it poomse, kata, hyung, forms, patterns...they are all the same. there is NOTHING that is in karate that is not also in taekwondo...if you know how to look for it [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]
if you study tkd and are interested in more practical applications, and wonder WHY you REALLY do those forms (much more than to get your next belt and look pretty doing it)...seek out some instruction from a karate teacher, im sure he will give you some private lessons on how to dissect your forms and interperate the movements for yourself.
kind of odd coming from me since i no longer practice forms (i dont think they are neccessary)..but i do still find them intriguing to say the least, especially if you can think outside the box so to speak, there is no such thing as a block, even though that is what it is called, that does not mean that is the only way you can USE that "movement" (not block), there are various reasons, theories as to WHY they are called blocks, which is an unwinnable argument at best, so lets not go there. suffice to say that "a block is a strike" ..literally! if you think this way then you are free to "block" in any way you see fit or are comfortable with, like perries or simple palm blocks. and you realize that your "high block" can be a devastating forearms strike smashed into your attackers jaw or throat.

Karate DO uses kata extensively to explain the movements, which most of the self-defense and combat methods were taken out when Itosu began teaching in the school systems, heavily watering down real karate. Honestly Karate when it was a defensive art was practiced in secret so techniques would not be stolen, and also if it was public the stylist would be excuted in most cases. People today can only speculate what the movements in kata were for. Karate do isnt and never was designed for combat it was a spiritual path used to build charater it does contain the same basics as the jutsu side but isnt near as effective, when it was said one breath one strike one life in karate jutsu that was a probability as one clean strike could kill. Karate jutsu as it was taught did use kata and it was always one tradition one kata and those kata changed constantly from person to person each one was a warm up and had principles of combat behind them and each had one clear purpose to kill or incapacitate, Karate in okinawa was known for many years as the art of homicide. Karate do does contain many tkd methods. Karate jutsu on the other hand contains very few kicking methods and striking methods which were mostly open hand. all aimed at vital targets and all simple to do, tkd if it still contains throwing and grappling is now rarely taught I havent found anyplace that teaches these aspects realistly under full resistance. In original karate there were no air techniques and it resembled chinese kempo and muaythai more then other arts and is mostly shortrange strikes, alot and I mean alot of grappling and takedowns designed to throw a opponent right down at your feet similier to judo it did have one major difference in reality there was no way to breakfall against karate throws most would drop you right on your neck for a quick kill, and dimmak methods to maximize the strikes. Kempo I do agree with you on the blocking aspect there are no blocks in karate every movement is a defense offence and counterattack. Shotokan is a good method but there is little the same in karate jutsu methods and shotokan. Karate jutsu is more a combination of shotokan,goju,issyhin and shorin ryu. These are more sub groups of the original art. Despite what most people think Kata was practiced very little in actual karate jutsu most time was used to toughen the hands and feet and doing basic kihon. Put a jutsu stylist who knows the same as a do stylist and the jutsu stylist will win everytime. Thats because modern karate is a game not a combative art. okinawan Ti was very dangerous and lethal system designed only for combat.

i agree with some of what you said here, about itosu watering down karate intentionally (and for good reason as well) but...the moves are still in karate do, as well as karate jutsu and taekwondo, but as you said, its just not taught, maybe its not even known to them!! a high block is a high block no matter if your art is do or jutsu...what makes it jutsu is that you are concerned with actually using it and not the "do" aspects as much.

"Shotokan is a good method but there is little the same in karate jutsu methods and shotokan. Karate jutsu is more a combination of shotokan,goju,issyhin and shorin ryu. These are more sub groups of the original art"..all of these arts are DO arts, look them up you will see they are goju ryu karate do, isshinryu karate do, shotokan karate do, and shorin ryu karate do. i have talked to karate jutsu sensei and the kata they teach are the same ones everyone else teaches(slightly different through each person as you said but naihanchi is naihanchi, which is called tekki in shotokan)..they just use them differently. so basically goju ryu karate do, could very well be goju ryu karate jutsu, depending on how it is used and taught. thus...many of the same techniques are contained in tkd, and as for aerial techniques,even in tkd from what i have seen not many (if any) aerial techniques are used in the actual forms/hyungs

as for the "ikken hisatsu" or one strike one kill thing...i dont think its meant literally, for example in kyudo and kyujutsu, you only have on arrow...so you better make it count, so you train as if you have only one strike to kill your opponent, even though you have many more. it could also be represented by saying that that "one strike" is the one that counts most because it sets up your opponent for follow up techniques...so in a way that one strike leads to the kill. they can also be referring to kyusho jutsu (dim mak/pressure poins) where if done correctly, arguably one strike is all you need.

remember that the "do" arts ARE the jutsu arts, only taught differently. juDO came from juJUTSU, aikiDO and aikiJUTSU, kenDO and kenJUTSU...etc

"Despite what most people think Kata was practiced very little in actual karate jutsu most time was used to toughen the hands and feet and doing basic kihon." i disagree, it is well known that MUCH time was spent on kata, sometimes learning and practicing only one kata for 5 years or more, before learning another kata. every practitioner ive met from do or jutsu all agree on one thing, kata IS karate. the other things like body conditioning is supplimental to the kata, which is the heart of karate. it is said that choki motobu practiced naihanchi over 100 times a day!

also you should not confuse okinawa te (ti) with tote which later became known as karate (both meaning chinese hand) the first character (kara or china) was later changed again to a different kara..meaning empty. te was indigenous to okinawa, with chinese traveling to okinawa and vice versa their respective arts mixed and mingled, and thus the chuan fa (kempo or fist method) from china was blended with okinawan te to form tode or tote (china hand)..and thus karate

lastly karate jutsu does not describe a specific style...any style CAN BE jutsu, depending on how its taught.

check this out www.shotokankaratejutsu.com

I agree with alot of what you say. I definatly agree kata is the essence of karate, but how many people actually realistically take the time to make the movements in kata effective how many people today can actually give realistic bunkai to every movement in kata or make them effective. Karate is a combination of shorin kempo and okinawan ti methods thats were kanku dai and similier kata come from and the animal methods such as the snake spear and tiger claw. Who really knows though the simple fact is we were not there when okinawans used those methods and kata so how do we know what it was really like. history is often clouded by legend and commercial aspects a colorful history helps sell the product. I agree shotokan and other do arts can be used as jutsu methods. Judo is a big example of that. How much time is actually spent making kata movements effective though especially since in all honestly we have no way of knowing the intent of the founders of kata that knowledge was secret and died with them. Karate jutsu contains very few actual offenses and defenses. Unlike tkd karate still has a realistic approach if taught based on kata because even if the movements change the principles remain the same even in the basic kata every move has a elbow and grab. Even though the moves in the do art are the same as jutsu the meanings are much different Karate jutsu was developed in a time were it was kill or be killed Karate do wasnt and sadly to most it has become a game and childrens art with few people knowing its true purpose. The do aspects such as shotokan and goju taught specific aspects of karate jutsu and later became their own traditions the kata remained the same but the knowledge was mostly lost. Really at the core I believe the individual makes kata what it is and you should seek the applications not follow someone else movements as the might not work for you. That is their view and should remain theirs.

how many people actually realistically take the time to make the movements in kata effective how many people today can actually give realistic bunkai to every movement in kata or make them effective....enough, more and more each day, every karate (do AND jutsu) all bunkai their kata as ive seen...some more than others. all of this is strange coming from a guy who doesnt practice forms (me)...i used to, but to be honest i view them as fun, but unneccessary, just show the principles involved, and a fixed routine is not needed. (notice i did not say they are useless)

Karate jutsu contains very few actual offenses and defenses. Unlike tkd karate still has a realistic approach if taught based on kata because even if the movements change the principles remain the same even in the basic kata every move has a elbow and grab.
again i disagree, karate jutsu contains and unending array of offenses and defenses!!! that it the entire point they try to convey...its interpretation of the movements, not this move means this, and that move means that...each move can mean many things! there is a book on the down block alone with 75 variations of how to use it! its called 75 down blocks, by rick clark.(that is ONE technique, now..do that to every technique in ONE kata...and imagine the amount of stuff you can learn...now do that to every kata you know...)
about karate having a more realistic approach...approach is the key word here, they approach it differently, maybe you are thinking of kata too literally ...the only reason a karate down block is different from a tkd down block is because of bunkai(or approach if you will). the movement is practically exactly the same thing, why then do you say these moves are not in tkd...they are there! just not taught.
even if the movements change the principles remain the same even in the basic kata every move has a elbow and grab....AGREED!..even in a different style..tkd for instance [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG] however about the grab and elbow thing...it goes way deeper than that, that could be a literal translation of the techniques, that chamber (your elbow and grab) could be a grab as you said, the motion of it could be pulling your opponent into you, or it could be more literally seen as a rear elbow, maybe its a headlock... but do not ignore the OTHER arm in this technique, one pulls back for the chamber, but what is the other doing? a down block for example, could be a low strike, could be a hair grab and yank down to off balance your opponent..or many other things, maybe you pulled his wrist with your left hand, grabbed his hair with your right, all of a sudden your block has turned into a grappling technique/takedown.

I practice kata still but more as a warm up and meditation then anything. I see more and more karate do schools finaly studing bunkai thats good they are becoming more JUTSU everyday. What disturbs me though is 95% of what they come up with they cant apply even in sparring. You'd be surprised the number of karate do students that dont know the applications or even the translations to the kata they study yet move up through the ranks if a shodan knew the applications to just 3 kata I'd be sure they would be lethal. While there may be 75 minute variations to techniques, Karate jutsu will usually only teach 5-8 because like I said karate jutsu is geared only for combat, and in combat the more choices you have to pick from the slower you will be. Its common to see a karate do student say they know 30 kata or 300 techniques, to me this is a sad excuse for a student as it took decades to master 1 kata and yet they know 20 or 30. I disagree when you say karate jutsu has a unending array of methods thats karate do. Karate jutsu makes use off just the basics and usually only two kata so all together in the jutsu students arsenal they may have only 20-30 techniques and 10 of those are basic methods heavily refined, I've used karate alot in hth the kata I learned were kusanku and seisan I am confident I dont need anymore because these are more then enough for effective self-defense. I've found most students even very serious ones look for hidden flashy techniques in kata there are no such thing as original kata wasnt for sport. You'd be suprised how many people dont see a elbow strike everytime they chamber or a pull when they chamber or a application to spin the attacker off balence and throw them when they turn. When you look at it that way 1 kata has a multitude of effective methods and 2 have plenty. These arent flashy but they are effective. Once again thats just my interpertation of basic kata such as fuku gata ichi and Gekisai dai ichi. I would be interested in hearing some of your interpatations for seisan and kusanku if you've done these kata. There is a wealth of practical knowlede in kata sadly most rbsd people ignore their worth. I'm an example that kata alone can make you a fighter as I rarely sparr or do workouts but I do alot of kata it keeps me very fit. That combined with knowledge based on fights I've been in makes me effective alot of the time because I know what to look for in kata.

I disagree when you say karate jutsu has a unending array of methods thats karate do. Karate jutsu makes use off just the basics and usually only two kata so all together in the jutsu students arsenal they may have only 20-30 techniques and 10 of those are basic methods heavily refined

There is a wealth of practical knowlede in kata
exactly what you disagreed with. whether or not you choose to use it is up to you however.

to put is most basically...do or jutsu, its irrelevant what you call it, kata is kata, its how its TAUGHT that is the difference
each basic has a plethora of ways it can be used even if you dont see them.
i dont think you are getting my point, if your teacher doesnt teach many many variations of each technique that is one thing, but that does not mean they are not present. if you can use a chamber as an elbow so can anyone else who does forms, the only difference is if it is taught or not, either way it is still in the form

I've found most students even very serious ones look for hidden flashy techniques in kata there are no such thing as original kata wasnt for sport....if they found them there, then they ARE there...or they couldnt have found them there.

When you look at it that way 1 kata has a multitude of effective methods and 2 have plenty. These arent flashy but they are effective. ....again you said it yourself, 1 kata has a multitude of effective methods, and 2 has even more. that is why i said karate jutsu (actually any martial art that contains forms at all)has an unending array of techniques, because the interpretations of how each one can be used is unending.

I get your point, but it dont matter if 300 moves are present in kata. 295 of those techniques are ethier minute variations like the low block, or they just dont work in a violent situation. You take one kata I doubt your going to get many techniques that work in a real violent situation as kata is mainly about perfection and unless you know what to look for most movements dont work in a chaotic situation. RBSD people see kata as unrealistic because most of the techniques people come up with simply dont work, and the exercise to most is static. Its more about getting proper principles then moves anyway. While the interpretations are endless, as I said the number of effective techniques as they apply to you is not. Out of 2 45 move kata you may find only 3 techniques that you can actually use in a realistic situation. Those techniques if applied correctly may be all you need. Flashy movements like jump kicks fancy wristlocks and such usually dont work in a realistic situation no matter how many variations you find in kata, that doesnt mean any of them will be effective. For example out of the 75 ways a low block can work only 4 may work for the situation your in. The problem with that is your instincts will be clouded by haveing to choose from the other 71 variations that are not needed, time in combat is precious and if wasted can get you killed, thats why most rbsd people dont do kata. How kata is taught IS the difference between Jutsu and Do, Jutsu= skil Do=way. Take someone who has experiance in violent situations and teach them a kata, and more often then not they can get applications that do work they find much less in kata but what they find gets the job done. If I teach kata at all to students its only to students who have experiance fighting as they wont waste their time fooling with unrealistic applications that dont work. They know what they can and cant do and look for that in kata.


[This message has been edited by AgenT (edited 01-06-2005).]

it all depends on what you want to do. the only thing i got out of teakwondo was the kicking. to me katas, paterns it wastes time, but then again people enjoy katas and paterns theres no such thing as the best martial art they all have weak points and strong points, every ones and indavidual. what do you want to get out of martial arts? to me the most beneficial is cross traing what i did, was first up was taekwondo then kick boxing then boxing then grappling and now i'm reserching trapping. thats 15 years worth of training with a year or two break in between to see where i'm at and what i'm gonna do. now i pass all my knowlage on to others

agent..then why practice kata at all? if 3 or 4 moves is all you need out of each one, then why not just learn those 3 or 4 moves?

Kata is not needed to be effective you said that yourself. The purpose of kata is to present several different methods so that the INDIVIDUAL can choose and isolate the types of offensive and defensive movements that work for them. The same 4 moves might not work for everyone but a different person may get a different yet equally effective set of applications for the same 4 movements. Katas about adaptation and the individuals strenghs and weakness. Its main purpose being to build attributes like speed, balance and fluidity.

Kempo_Jutsu

"Why practice kata at all"

Off the top of my head.

-Because its required--don't much care for some aspects of my job--but I kinda like being able to pay my rent--so I do them.

If your asking someone to teach you their art--then you should learn what they teach--if later you don't want to use it--thats your business-but while your in class you should do what the teacher wants.

You going to tell your boxing coach that you want to learn boxing but you don't want to do roadwork or skip rope?

-Because the kata are another way to practice techniques--besides on the heavybag.

Hey Neo. I would suggest try classes of each and then determine what you want. If you already have good kicking abilities you may do very well in either, maybe more so in Taekwondo. If you choose Taekwondo look to see if the teacher also incorporates Hapkito as many do. This will give you some ground work, tossing, leg sweeps, arm bars, blocks, strikes, etc. I honestly believe that the teacher and what he/she teaches is better then a specific martial art.

Contrary to belief, not all Taekwondo schools are sport orientated. Again look and ask questions. Forms are prevelant in most martial arts and our Basic Pattern that is learned in Taekwondo is also learned in Shotokan Karate. In WTF Taekwondo you will find full contact sparring and this is extremely useful for speed, agility and being able to read your opponent. Not to mention you can get used to being hit thus taking some of that fear away.

No matter what you choose, choose for yourself and what you want. Try some classes, talk to the teacher(s) and students. Here is a link to a website that explains most martial arts. You may find that others are what you are looking for. Keep an open mind. Good Luck.
http://usadojo.com/martial-arts-styles/about-arts.htm

Kata is not needed to be effective you said that yourself. The purpose of kata is to present several different methods so that the INDIVIDUAL can choose and isolate the types of offensive and defensive movements that work for them. The same 4 moves might not work for everyone but a different person may get a different yet equally effective set of applications for the same 4 movements. Katas about adaptation and the individuals strenghs and weakness. Its main purpose being to build attributes like speed, balance and fluidity.

agreed, yet the fact remains that you do not get what i am saying, yes you can choose from the "multitude of techniques" in kata, you may indeed find only a few for yourself, but the fact remains that kata has a PLETHORA of possibilities. that is my point. whether or not you choose to study them, use them or whatever is up to you. but they ARE there...even in a DO art.
and about the "minute variations"...get the book, and you will see what i am failing at trying to say here lol
using the same technique in a variety of situations, from blocks, grabs, strikes, and holds...is not something i would call minute variations.

I didn't know by my first post here, I'll learn way more then I could possibly from anywhere else. Thank you guys. I really appreciated.

actually, if you want to learn, join a good school [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Hi guys, GooseTKD here from Australia, just registered especially so that I could reply to this forum. It seems that there are some misconceptions about Taekwondo that need to be ironed out. This is my oppinion as a practitioner of TKD for the last 5 years and having reached my 9th gup (next is Cho Dan Bo, then black belt).

TKD is not a martial sport, it is a MARTIAL ART in all aspects. Yes a lot of people use it because it has been adopted as a sport in the Olympics but do not forget its history. TKD was developed in Korea (origionally called Taekyon and Subak) and was used as a countermeasure against invasions from neighbouring countries, usually performed on horseback. This resulted in TKD's use of high and powerful kicks and more of a focus on kicks rather than hand strikes.

Hand techniques and self defence are a major part of TKD still and are a permanent part of the gradings where a student has to perform a set number of kicking, punching and blocking techniques, as well as demonstrate capable fighting ability, self defence techniques ad breaking capabilities.

The use of taeguks (patterns) in tkd are used to traing the body in the set motions that define the martial art. Each pattern has a reason behind the kind of stances and the patterns that they form when viewed from above. Go to the WTF website for a more detailed explanation (www.wtf.org). Taeguks are as much a part of TKD as kicks are, they form the basic building blocks of the art of TKD and are linked to the spiritual aspect of the TKD philisophy of Yin and Yang.

As for TKD vs Karate. There is a big difference both in the history but also in the fighting style itself. Yes all martial arts share common components. But TKD and Karate differ a lot in the execution and use of the techniques each ises. Karate in general is a very low fighting style employing strong low stances. TKD on the other hand uses high fluid stances predominately and is a more fre flowing than some Karate styles.

Tae Kwon Do has no link to Subak, and at best a tenuous link to Taekkyon. Tae Kwon Do did not exist until after World War II, and was certainly not developed to fight against cavalry from invading countries. Long sticks with bits of metal attached on the end are generally much more effective, much safer for the user, and require much less training time to use effectively for that purpose.

Having said that, there's no doubt Tae Kwon Do has roots in martial art. It's a direct descendant of Karate, which is generally considered to be a martial art. Same basic material. They just differ in the emphasis and developmental trends. Karate has for the most part remained the same since the 50s, though there's been a movement towards deeper analysis of kata for throwing and locking applications. TKD has generally moved towards sport, to the point that some schools teach material that's only suited for ring use and would probably get you killed in real combat. That's not to say there aren't sport Karate schools or TKD instructors emphasizing practical value though. Just general trends.

Hey Neo

Best thing to do is find a few different Martial Arts Schools and pay them a visit. Speak to the Instructors and students, ask to see the instructors certificate to see if he or she is properly qualified. Also find out who there instructor is and check to see if they have a first aid certificate. Find out how much classes, uniforms and gradings will cost and ask if it is vital you get a uniform. Also check out Internet sites as well for information. Take part in the different classes and see what is best for you and maybe try buying a martial arts magazine for information.

Hope this might help

Cheers
Corruptor

Hi GooseTKD

I suggest you check back on some of the previous discussions on the subject of TKD's history.

From what you've stated, you've been fed a load of BS by someone.

What you've stated is one of the most inaccurate and incomplete histories for TKD put forward so far.

I suggest some serious research is required on your part.

JohnL

The history side of my post comes from the WTF website, again I suggest that you have a look at "www.wtf.org" and look up ht e history of Taekwondo. Even our academy's head instructor Grand Master Shin Boo Kim, who is Korean, say that Taekwondo is not a descendant from Karate and has a historical and cultural link to Subak and Taekyon. Although Korea was occupied by Japan does not mean that the martial arts of Taekwondo was erradicated. I will agree that the name Taekwondo is new but still have difficulty beleiving that it is a direct descendant from Karate. Again I would suggest that you have a look at the WTF site, and even do a search on the Internet to reseach this topic. I have had an interst in Taekwondos history for some time now and from what I can find out it does not have a link to Karate.

Hi guys,

I thought I would give my two cents on the subject. First off anyone wanting a history of WTF Taekwondo (GooseTKD?) should take a look at this.
http://www.sos.mtu.edu/husky/tkdhist.htm

I personally feel that TKD is a martial art in its own right and that any similarities to karate are superficial. The Koreans took the shape of the art only. The techniques were applied in their most basic form as at that time the Japanese Karate teachers didnt know anything more.

Over time Taekwondo has developed into it's own system. The understanding of kicking techniques and the martial skills that surround them is more complete than any other art I've encountered, in fact most dont realise that much of the standard Karate kicking techniques were learned from the Koreans (hence they do not occur in the older Kata).

Modern ITF takes more from boxing than Karate in it's hand techniques, and WTF.. well if u can find a non sport school their techniques are still more Karate, but again the science of the kicking art is it's own animal.

The forms (kata) of Taekwondo developed by the Koreans never had much meaning beyond divorcing the system from it's Japanese origins. The WTF have/are absorbed Hapkido and Tang Soo Do into the umbrella term of Taekwondo. It is from these arts (plus whatever cross-training the instructor does) that most martial applications and self defence skills are taken.

The generic TKD training methods are very aerobic and a great aid to fitness. By comparison I'd say Karate is usually more strength focussed but as ever it depends where you go.

As for the do or Jutsu, the difference is in how the arts are trained, but really just in name. Many instructors have no interest in the psuedo political manouvering by those who want to distance themselves from their teachers because they have modified their training. In other words many who go by the title Karate-do train with just as much technique application and self defence/fighting study as those who go by Karate jutsu. Finding a good school for any art is always a matter of trying out the school and discussing your concerns/goals with the instructor. I will concede though that schools that say they are Karate-jutsu are more likely to teach with a focus on using the art for real, just dont discount anyone because of the name.




[This message has been edited by Shonuff (edited 01-13-2005).]

Isn't this subject fun

This is my last post to this forum as it is quite obvious that my opinions about the history and origins of TKD cause a bit of controversy between people.

My knowledge of the history of TKD comes firstly from my instructors and the head of our academy and secondly from a looking up resources from the Net. Finding credible sources on TKD origins is quite hard as usually they do not include any refernces or links to other credible texts. The majority of my readings come from sites such as the World TKD Federation official, Taekwondo Australia, ITF etc. I take these as credible sources as they come from the governing bodies of TKD and are mre likely to be true/credible than personal opinions (including mine).

Whether you agree with me or not I still beleive that although the name Taekwondo is relitively new the martial art (not sport) itself is still based on the origional forms of subak and then taekyon.

See you later

GooseTKD

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GooseTKD:
This is my last post to this forum as it is quite obvious that my opinions about the history and origins of TKD cause a bit of controversy between people.

My knowledge of the history of TKD comes firstly from my instructors and the head of our academy and secondly from a looking up resources from the Net. Finding credible sources on TKD origins is quite hard as usually they do not include any refernces or links to other credible texts. The majority of my readings come from sites such as the World TKD Federation official, Taekwondo Australia, ITF etc. I take these as credible sources as they come from the governing bodies of TKD and are mre likely to be true/credible than personal opinions (including mine).

Whether you agree with me or not I still beleive that although the name Taekwondo is relitively new the martial art (not sport) itself is still based on the origional forms of subak and then taekyon.

See you later

GooseTKD[/QUOTE]

I dont think anyone meant to upset you GooseTKD, but martial arts history is always twisted by politics. After 30-odd years of Japanese occupation do you really think the Korean's while trying to rebuild their nations pride would advertise the fact that their new national art is based almost exclusively on Japanese Karate??? Its like asking a cold war communist country who liberated them from the Nazi's (they would have told you Russia regardless of which allied nation it was).

Also if the arts have totally different origins how do you explain their innumerable similarities (right down to some of the forms)? Do some more research and you will find that the official party line isn't the most accurate. The same is true for Karate. The amount of myth in Karate history is astounding, and all because of politics.

Lastly if you had no desire to learn, or at least debate information presented why bother posting here at all? Nowhere will people agree with you all the time.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GooseTKD:
Whether you agree with me or not I still beleive that although the name Taekwondo is relitively new the martial art (not sport) itself is still based on the origional forms of subak and then taekyon.
GooseTKD[/QUOTE]

There's a simple way to test this. Go learn Subak and Taekkyon, and then go learn Shotokan Karate. Note the differences and similarities.

OK so this is my last reply, he he, so please bear with me. Just one last little tidbit before I finish my side of this conversation.

This quote is taken from the World Taekwondo Federation website. It concerns the occupation of Korea by Japan and the notion that TKD is derived from Karate,

"However, the Japanese colonial government totally prohibited all folkloric games including Taekkyon in the process of suppressing the Korean people. The martial art Taekkyon [Taekwondo] had been secretly handed down only by the masters of the art until the liberation of the country in 1945. Song Duk-Ki, one of the then masters testifies that his master was Im Ho who was reputed for his excellent skills of Taekkyon, "jumping over the walls and running through the wood just like a tiger." (explanation of taekkon techniques in muyedobo-tongji (general illustrations of techniques) (scene of contest).

At the time, 14 terms of techniques were used representing 5 kicking patterns, 4 hand techniques, 3 pushing-down-the-heel patterns, 1 turning-over-kick pattern and 1 technique of downing-the-whole-body. Also noteworthy is the use the term "poom" which signified a face-to-face stance preparing for a fight. The masters of Taekkyon were also under constant threat of imprisonment, which resulted in an eventual of Taekkyon as popular games.".

These site are where I get my information from. Regardless of politics I do not think that the WTF would lie about the background and origin of TKD.

As to the similarities between TKD and Karate. All MA's have similarities, whether it be the patterns or moves. But even considering these I have observed that the styles are different not only in the forms but in the execution and ethos of both the arts.

Hey GooseTKD

"These site are where I get my information from. Regardless of politics I do not think that the WTF would lie about the background and origin of TKD."

If you believe this, you need to wake up and smell the roses.

As I said. Check out previous threads on the issue of TKD's history, you'll find it interesting.

As for karate having as many versions as TKD as it's origin, I think it has far more myth and legend. People continually put forward their opinions of what the true origins of various MA's are but they're invariably slanted toward what they want the history to be.

I think that the histories of most MA's are lost in the mists of time and when you're relying on un-documented evidence it may never appear. Even when you rely on documented history, it's a question of who whote it and what slant they wanted at the time.

Karate guys are no more honest than TKD guys when it comes to the history of styles.

JohnL

It's pretty safe to say the WTF does indeed lie. They have a vested interest in glorifying and nationalizing the history of Tae Kwon Do as much as possible. But as JohnL has said, everyone lies about style origins. Do your own research instead of taking your instructors' words as the gospel truth.

There is no differance between Tae Kwon Do, Karate, Kung Fu, whatever. Sure, movements and philosophy differ, but the ultimate purpose is the betterment of one's self. This isn't what you want to hear, is it? Most people are drawn to martial arts to kick ass (sorry), so let me tell you what you want to hear. During the Japanese occupation of Korea, Koreans were forbidden to practice Tae Kwon Do, so it became an underground art, practiced in secret handed down from father to son. Many Koreans left to China to study thier arts (such as Kung Fu) and even to Japan to study thier arts (such as Karate). When the occupation ended, the Koreans came back, bringing with them all thier knowledge. Many forms of TKD exsisted, some of the resembleing Karate, some Kung Fu, some Judo, etc. It wasn't until recently that the World Tae Kwon Do Federation unified Tae Kwon Do into what it is today. Because of it's rich history, TKD incorperates a unique blend of all arts, and I think you will find everything you are looking for in Tae Kwon Do. But realize this, it is only a name.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
There is no differance between Tae Kwon Do, Karate, Kung Fu, whatever. Sure, movements and philosophy differ, but the ultimate purpose is the betterment of one's self. This isn't what you want to hear, is it? Most people are drawn to martial arts to kick ass (sorry), so let me tell you what you want to hear. During the Japanese occupation of Korea, Koreans were forbidden to practice Tae Kwon Do, so it became an underground art, practiced in secret handed down from father to son. Many Koreans left to China to study thier arts (such as Kung Fu) and even to Japan to study thier arts (such as Karate). When the occupation ended, the Koreans came back, bringing with them all thier knowledge. Many forms of TKD exsisted, some of the resembleing Karate, some Kung Fu, some Judo, etc. It wasn't until recently that the World Tae Kwon Do Federation unified Tae Kwon Do into what it is today. Because of it's rich history, TKD incorperates a unique blend of all arts, and I think you will find everything you are looking for in Tae Kwon Do. But realize this, it is only a name.[/QUOTE]

Its a nice idea, but its not true. Not what you want to hear is it?

Karate TKD and Kungfu are not the same. Using the term kungfu as though it was one style is a pet peeve of mine as within the vastness of Kung fu styles alone there is countless variety in movements philosophy strategy and everything else that denotes one activity from another.

Even the idea that these MA's are all for the betterment of the self is a Japanese Karate idea. It does not even extend across all styles of Karate let alone all kung fu. It reached TKD because... thats right, TKD is born from Karate. TKD has grown into a unique style but it's origins are not ancient.

This was not just the revisionism of a few western historians, this has come from numerous interviews with the founding farthers of Taekwondo. The young military/government men who had been trained in Karate and who were charged with re-igniting Korean nationalism and making the youth of the country strong and proud. They have all stated that their art was originally Japanese Karate, no additions. Hell, Tang Soo do is the direct Korean translation of the old term for Karate!

Over time they changed the emphasis specifically to differentiate it from Karate. They changed the kata so they were original korean. Then their political successors spread the word that Taekwondo was ancient Korean with no Japanese links. All they needed was for the natonalism and dislike of all things Japanese to wipe the populations memory of what the Japanese did martially and for gullible westerners to follow their lead without questioning.

Although nothing to do with TKD history Master Travis's accuont of TKD history is very similar to that of Chinese Kung fu. Replace "Japanese occupation" with "communist take over" and send the kung fu masters to Taiwan USA and the philipines and you're spot on.

The idea that any martial art is for the purpose of bettering oneself is marketing propaganda. Martial arts are born out of the need to efficiently control, maim, or kill other human beings ( depending on your profession and required level of violence ). Of course, you really can't operate a martial art school in modern times and expect to be successful if you openly advertise you teach methods for efficiently maiming and killing people. That's why you sell it as an activity for the betterment of oneself. Self-betterment is a mindset, you can find the same amount of self-betterment in flower arranging or ditch digging as you would in any martial art school.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KylejustKyle:
The idea that any martial art is for the purpose of bettering oneself is marketing propaganda. Martial arts are born out of the need to efficiently control, maim, or kill other human beings ( depending on your profession and required level of violence ). Of course, you really can't operate a martial art school in modern times and expect to be successful if you openly advertise you teach methods for efficiently maiming and killing people. That's why you sell it as an activity for the betterment of oneself. Self-betterment is a mindset, you can find the same amount of self-betterment in flower arranging or ditch digging as you would in any martial art school.[/QUOTE]

To Shonuff:
"I do not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
~Spencer

To KyleJustKyle:
OK, martial arts are to kill and maim? Let’s review the very first origins of Martial Arts. There are many different views here, but most historians agree that it started in China. Keeping in mind we are presenting Martial Arts as an unarmed self-defense. Buddhist monks generally would stay at their temples in the mountains, however, if they needed supplies they would have to come into town with a purse full of gold to buy them. Since monks were not allowed by their religion to carry or use weapons, they made inviting targets for sword wielding bandits. Ergo, the monks developed out of necessity, a way of unarmed self defense. Most of the fighting stances actually started from a prayer stance. To ignore the spiritual aspect of Martial Arts is to ignore the fundamental basis which makes these techniques and art. You criticize "Way" as a marketing technique, but most people start Martial Arts to learn to kill and maim, but they end up on the path towards enlightenment. You criticize me as an idealist, but wern't all great men? Bruce Lee, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, all idealists. I view my ability to kill and maim as only a percipitate of my seeking of self betterment.

[This message has been edited by MasterTravis (edited 01-17-2005).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
To Shonuff:
"I do not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
~Spencer

To KyleJustKyle:
OK, martial arts are to kill and maim? Let’s review the very first origins of Martial Arts. There are many different views here, but most historians agree that it started in China. Keeping in mind we are presenting Martial Arts as an unarmed self-defense. Buddhist monks generally would stay at their temples in the mountains, however, if they needed supplies they would have to come into town with a purse full of gold to buy them. Since monks were not allowed by their religion to carry or use weapons, they made inviting targets for sword wielding bandits. Ergo, the monks developed out of necessity, a way of unarmed self defense. Most of the fighting stances actually started from a prayer stance. To ignore the spiritual aspect of Martial Arts is to ignore the fundamental basis which makes these techniques and art.[/QUOTE]


Ah, to be young!

What's that first word again? Martial? What could that mean?

MasterTravis:

What you state is almost certainly not historical truth. For one thing, weaponry in Chinese styles is typically developed to a much greater degree and diversity than in Japanese or Korean styles. If monks created the styles, it's not likely that they would have created so many styles and forms for swords, spears, and other very non-Buddhist weapons.

If you are accepting that Martial arts began with buddhist monks then you are also accepting that it originated in India not China. (Look up Bodhidarma). If you are accepting MA's began in India then you are accepting that they began with the warrior castes of ancient (before christ) times and that they were primarily weapons based.

Its also true that weapons based fighting were much more common in Chinese MA (even in Shoalin styles). Unarmed was a just in case scenario that only became more popular in this century (or the last) due to weapon carrying restrictions. The same is true of Japanese arts. There are actually far more weapon styles than unarmed in Japanes and even Okinawan (not the same thing) styles as Samurai were soldiers who carried weapons with impunity until the Meiji restoration (it may have been earlier).

Shonuff:

You bring up an interesting point. Just by looking at the progression of ryuha development through Japanese history it's evident that unarmed combat was a minor specialization, while weapon skills were predominant. There's also an argument to be made that the unarmed combat of the time was practiced with the view of battlefield utility, ( fully armoured combatant vs another fully armoured combatant, possibly with a weapon ), and the techniques have gradually been modified for unarmed combat since the Tokugawa shogunate. It's harder to trace this development on the Chinese side, but it would be reasonable to assume a similar progression occurred.

I made mention of Occam's Razor in another thread, and I think it applies here as well. It makes more sense to think that warrior class people would be responsible for the creation and improvement of martial arts. They were the ones with the most stake in the success of their skills, and the ones with the most background knowledge to build and improve those skills with. Monks developing martial arts does not make sense to me. Monks are typically poor, eat crappy vegetarian food and live in crappy barracks. What is there for bandits to steal? If the monastery somehow acquires vast wealth, then it's a powerful enough political and economic force to either acquire protection from the government or hire on professional soldiers for defense. That's not to say monks did not learn martial arts skills and even improve/create new styles, as some evidently did. But they were probably not the driving force behind the evolution of Chinese martial arts.

I also don't accept the one source hypothesis for martial arts origin. It seems ludicrous to think that ONLY the Indians or ONLY the Chinese were able to create martial arts, and everyone else in the world just copycatted. Much more likely to think that every civilization which had to go to war had some form of martial art development, and that the reason Asian martial arts have been passed down while those of other nations have not ( for the most part ) is because of various social/economic/political influences.

Wow... that's alot to respond to... I'll try to be brief. Someone mentioned Bodhidarma, and I never said he started martial arts. Martial Arts expirianced a dry spell where it kind of faded off into the background. The famouse Indian monk, Bodhidarma, traveled to China during this period, and in his travel was suprised at the poor health of the monks (I'm being nice, frankly, they were fat) so he introduced it to them as a means of physical excersize. Someone said "what's the first word, martial." Then why don't they just call it Martial? Why call it a Martial Art? Because it is a way of self expression and self improvement. Everyone argues my historical information, but I stated flat out that they were arguable. Dispite thier orogins, I cannot see why everyone is so vehemently opposed to the idea, heaven forbid, that Tae Kwon Do might just help you be a better person. Furthermore, that was never the point of this tread. The point was that Tae Kwon Do is a melting pot of many different techniques and cultures, and that the person who started this thread, if he even bothers to check it anymore, would probably be satisfied with Tae Kwon Do. What could anyone possably have against that? Sorry, I was trying to be brief.


[This message has been edited by MasterTravis (edited 01-17-2005).]

Kyle its interesting that you mention the likely hood of military origins for MA. I was going to mention before that I once heard a theory that the martial arts in china were taught to the monks of the Shoalin Temple in return for allowing them to shelter in the temple. I'm also one who disagree's with the one suorce idea for martial artists, it is clear that a variety of nations had martial traditions independant of the Shoalin.

MasterTravis, I thougt it had been well established that TKD was a wothwhile pursuit for the threads originator. My issue was with the spreading of myths and historical inacuracies.

I dont expressly have an issue with TKD "making you a better person" although I think something is wrong if you NEED TKD to teach you how to live. I simply pointed out earlier that the origin of the improvement of character idea was from Karate, (along with the fighting techniques stances and movements), not TKD or even budhist Shoalin kung fu. The teachings of Buddha were to make u a better person, kung fu is for fighting.

The term Martial Art is a modern western term. It was based on the fact that Asian MA's are studied with the dedication and attention to detail of the arts. Also the fighting was a much more aesthetically graceful and pleasing than the brawling westerners had become accostumed to. Also the word Martial is an adjective, you don't call anything 'Martial' on its own. The term art expands beyond the purely artistic.

Just out of curiosity how does Taekwondo training make you a better person???

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shonuff:
Kyle its interesting that you mention the likely hood of military origins for MA. I was going to mention before that I once heard a theory that the martial arts in china were taught to the monks of the Shoalin Temple in return for allowing them to shelter in the temple.
[/QUOTE]

I have heard that as well. The theory is Shaolin served as a sanctuary from the government for political insurgents, criminals, and the like. Supposedly these people simply took on the appearance of monks to disguise themselves and fit in, while continuing their martial arts practice. Over time their skills were assimilated into the Shaolin umbrella of styles.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
Martial Arts expirianced a dry spell where it kind of faded off into the background. The famouse Indian monk, Bodhidarma, traveled to China during this period, and in his travel was suprised at the poor health of the monks (I'm being nice, frankly, they were fat) so he introduced it to them as a means of physical excersize. Someone said "what's the first word, martial." Then why don't they just call it Martial? Why call it a Martial Art? ).][/QUOTE]


Your logic, historical veracity, and grammar are all horrible.

First of all, I must thank pyungshin for so blatantly insulting me, proving to all that he lacks the poise and sophistication to even make a vain attempt at being nice.
Now that I got that out of my system…
Shonuff; let’s get a little more philosophical then we have been. If you take God out of religion, what are you left with? Quite simply, what remains is a set of moral principles and guidelines by which one should live. You said, “I think something is wrong if you NEED TKD to teach you how to live.” Tae Kwon Do is my religion. Nearly every person belongs to one religion or another, from which they receive moral and spiritual guidance and support.
With that said, let me tell you about my history in TKD. As a child, my parents would sit down with me and try to get me to study for school, (I was young, five or six, this was a strict little private school) and during this “study session,” I would be writhing around complaining, making it impossible for my parents to study with me. I started Tae Kwon Do at this time as an after school program; My master was less then admirable and I learned next to nothing, but it grounded me in the basics of Martial Arts. More importantly, however, I learned invaluable lessons such as disciple, confidence, and respect (much like what you would learn in most religions, ey?). I think I have effectively illustrated my point, but allow me to recap; to some, Martial Arts may simply be an effective way of self defense, but to others, it is their preferred way of seeking happiness. Take Morihei Uyeshiba, the father of Aikido; he has often been referred to as the greatest priest in Japan. This is true of many great martial artists, such as the Buddhist Monks of the Sholin(sp)… the list goes on. I choose to see this as a sign that philosophy is very important to the Martial Arts, maybe even the root. (Since we are talking specifically about Tae Kwon Do, maybe I should mention how the elite warriors of Korea, the Hwarang, were required to study classical, philosophical literature.)
I am being a little long winded, but I have more to say. If Martial Arts are about “killing and maiming” only, then I would not study it. A sound heart is very important to Martial Arts. The knowledge you gain from the study is deadly, and if a Martial Artist had no moralistic values or expectations to rule his actions, the reputation of Martial Arts would be left in shambles as a pretty style for brutish killers. Values that most schools teach are not for the good of commercialization, they are for the good of the students. Any master who teaches in order to serve his pocket book has no business teaching. Our Martial Arts is a brotherhood – scratch that – a familyhood. As a parent must teach his or her children moralistic values so that that child my effectively function in society, so must a Master to his or her students (for purposes of concision, I shall henceforth say he). My Master is my other father, my peers are my brothers, my students are my children. You, reading this, are also my fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters; even pyungshin, who I have become irritated with; I do not hold it against him, and I apologize for my initial comments towards him.
Pyungshin also criticized my historical references, saying, “Your logic, historical veracity, and grammar are all horrible.” Allow me a more calm and composed rebuttal. Logic… I would call it philosophy, and therefore it is an opinion and is personal, which, therefore, cannot be wrong. You may disagree with it, but that does not make it wrong. Furthermore, my historical references are based on what I read, you have before argued that this is a dramatization made in order to draw “customers,” (family members); who cares. Based on his biographical information, Saigo Takamori wasn’t the great man that history makes him out to be. History made him out to be the savior of Japan who fought the war against the soulless modernists and who gave Japan back her true self. When in reality, most Japanese viewed him as a savage rebel who was holding Japan back from her true potential (again, you are probably going to argue my historical references, but forget it, that’s not my point). My point is that sometimes a person’s legacy is more important than their reality. Children can look up to Saigo and base their moral off of what he is said to have been, despite who he really was. The same holds true for Martial Arts, despite where it truly originated from, the idea that enlightened Buddhists used it to expand and unify their minds and body, is not a bad concept by which to base your practice. And in reference to my bad grammar, I write as I think, with little editing. During high school, I took Advanced Placement (AP) English classes every year and scored very high on every AP tests. If I take the time to sit down and formulate a well crafted essay, I can come up with something very fluent and pretty, but I this has no bearing on our current discussion. I will interpret (and I say this objectively, with no offense intended) you criticism as an emotional outburst. I wish to show you your reply again, to show you how puerile it was, “Your logic, historical veracity, and grammar are all horrible.” I may have set my grammar aside when I wrote this, but your weak syntax, horrific diction, and immature attitude are equal to none; you didn’t even bother to support your claims.
I’m sorry, I got off on my own puerile tangent, and I apologize. Perhaps we should set our differences aside so we do not end up being a nuisance to each other when our comments appear in the same threads.
Despite all I wrote, I still have not said all I feel it is necessary to say, but my point has been clearly made and I will spare you the rest of my thoughts for another time.

Travis you may believe whatever fantasies you want, but I dont agree with the promotion of myth as fact.

If Taekwondo is your religion and was the place where you learned to behave then good for you. Personally my parents did a perfectly good job, but I realise not everyone is so lucky. Like I said I have no issue with the spiritual side of martial arts, just the historical.

Travis, I wish you would use paragraph breaks more effectively.

I don't want to get drawn into a discussion about morality, suffice to say I don't believe there is such a thing as inherent morality.

I'm no expert on priests in Japan, but I do know that within the Aikido community Ueshibi is venerated as almost godlike. Who else calls their style founder O-sensei ( not including later styles trying to imitate Aikido's founder veneration )? If you're getting the Japan's greatest priest information from there I would not call it an unbiased source.

I did not say that martial arts was only for killing and maining. There's also controlling, for when it's politically unwise to kill or maim someone you have to take into custody. That is what martial arts is, deal with it. The movements and techniques were created with those goals in mind. That does not mean you cannot find personal meaning and life fulfillment in what you're doing. With the right mindset you can find fulfillment in cooking, or scrubbing the floor. That does not mean these activities are inherently life enriching, or that martial arts is. You get out of it what you want to put into it.

[This message has been edited by KylejustKyle (edited 01-19-2005).]

I've received fulfillment from cooking but not from scrubbing floors. I don't think many would but perhaps have a sense of accomplishment. I think that martial arts provide a different type of fulfillment … but I may be wrong. I do know for myself that martial arts such as Taekwondo have provided me with discipline, respect and some direction. Killing and maiming have never entered my mind, nor has controlling to take into custody. But again each of us joined for our own reasons so one person's reasons are just as right as another.

As for the history, on any subject for that matter, there is information for and others that conflict. Especially now with the internet, anybody can post a site with history that is not necessarily true or less accurate. Unless is comes from a refutable source who is to say what history is true or not. Take Taekwondo for instance … I have seen so much information that my head spins as to what it true. History is written by the victor.

Dereck, you make some very good points.

I would just like to clarify that most my historical points were found by reading interviews with the originators of Taekwondo, and well researched historical texts. I don't keep MA magazines so I cant make direct references or quotes, however the article for which I posted a link (possibly on another thread) for the history of Chung do Kwan lists its sources. A thorough search over the net will corroborate what I write, but I tend to find those who cling to misconceptions have no desire to find confirmation of the truth.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shonuff:
Dereck, you make some very good points.

I would just like to clarify that most my historical points were found by reading interviews with the originators of Taekwondo, and well researched historical texts. I don't keep MA magazines so I cant make direct references or quotes, however the article for which I posted a link (possibly on another thread) for the history of Chung do Kwan lists its sources. A thorough search over the net will corroborate what I write, but I tend to find those who cling to misconceptions have no desire to find confirmation of the truth. [/QUOTE]

Shonuff,
I share your opinion on accurate history. I think we've even chatted about the Chung do kwan connection we share. You are one of those folks I would love to have the chance to meet and kick back with.

As far as the developement of virture, Ive trained longer than most ,and remain, a pig.

oldman

Well, I think this has been great. While we still have some basic differences, it seems that we have come to some common agreements and conclusions.

Hi Oldman,

the feeling is mutual although you'd probably laugh at my TKD skills these days [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Im on vacation in Denver until the end of feb, where abouts are u?

Travis, I agree. Many could learn from your ability to discuss without letting irritation get the better of you.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
First of all, I must thank pyungshin for so blatantly insulting me, proving to all that he lacks the poise and sophistication to even make a vain attempt at being nice.
.[/QUOTE]


Glad to be of service!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
Take Morihei Uyeshiba, the father of Aikido; he has often been referred to as the greatest priest in Japan. .[/QUOTE]


No he's not.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
If Martial Arts are about “killing and maiming�Eonly, then I would not study it. A sound heart is very important to Martial Arts. The knowledge you gain from the study is deadly, and if a Martial Artist had no moralistic values or expectations to rule his actions, the reputation of Martial Arts would be left in shambles as a pretty style for brutish killers. Values that most schools teach are not for the good of commercialization, they are for the good of the students. Any master who teaches in order to serve his pocket book has no business teaching. Our Martial Arts is a brotherhood �Escratch that �Ea familyhood. As a parent must teach his or her children moralistic values so that that child my effectively function in society, so must a Master to his or her students (for purposes of concision, I shall henceforth say he). My Master is my other father, my peers are my brothers, my students are my children. .[/QUOTE]


I think its clear to everyone what your overly-romanticised view of the issue is.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
I would call it philosophy, and therefore it is an opinion and is personal, which, therefore, cannot be wrong. You may disagree with it, but that does not make it wrong. Furthermore, my historical references are based on what I read, you have before argued that this is a dramatization made in order to draw “customers,�E(family members); who cares. Based on his biographical information, Saigo Takamori wasn’t the great man that history makes him out to be. History made him out to be the savior of Japan who fought the war against the soulless modernists and who gave Japan back her true self. When in reality, most Japanese viewed him as a savage rebel who was holding Japan back from her true potential (again, you are probably going to argue my historical references, but forget it, that’s not my point). My point is that sometimes a person’s legacy is more important than their reality. Children can look up to Saigo and base their moral off of what he is said to have been, despite who he really was. The same holds true for Martial Arts, despite where it truly originated from, the idea that enlightened Buddhists used it to expand and unify their minds and body, is not a bad concept by which to base your practice. And in reference to my bad grammar, I write as I think, with little editing. .[/QUOTE]

So your position is that you have no obligation to be logical, accurate, or clear. Isn't that convenient?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shonuff:
Hi Oldman,

the feeling is mutual although you'd probably laugh at my TKD skills these days [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Im on vacation in Denver until the end of feb, where abouts are u?

Travis, I agree. Many could learn from your ability to discuss without letting irritation get the better of you.[/QUOTE]

Shonuff,
You U.K. guys have those "crazy long" vacations. I'm about 12 hours east of you in the Kansas City area. TKD skills? I'm one of the few that would agree to the statement " anything above the waist is a waste". I know you have been looking deeper into the forms and applications. It's and interest of mine also. Enjoy all denver has to offer. Dont break a leg.

oldman

[QUOTE]Originally posted by pyungshin:
So your position is that you have no obligation to be logical, accurate, or clear. Isn't that convenient?[/QUOTE]

I am tired of your insolent, disrespectful tone. I have tried to be respectful to you, despite our differences in opinion, but you have not extended me the same courtesy.

I decided to reply an hour after I read your post, so that my reply would be clear and reflective, and I say this in a totally calm attitude... F*** you.

[This message has been edited by MasterTravis (edited 01-20-2005).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:


I decided to reply an hour after I read your post, so that my reply would be clear and reflective,

[This message has been edited by MasterTravis (edited 01-20-2005).][/QUOTE]

Who are you kidding? It probably took you an hour just to read it. Aho.

I have nothing more to say to you.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
I have nothing more to say to you.[/QUOTE]


Which is exactly as much as you had to say in the first place.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Neo:
Hi Everyone,

First of all let me wish everyone Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year.

Secondly, I know nothing about Martial arts, though I would like to go for Tae Kwan do.
Would you guys care to explain the difference between Tae Kwon Do and Karate or with any other Martial arts.
Or why is it better for me to go for tae kwan do? .. I don't know how to sum up my question but here:
Which one of em' ( M A; ie, tae kwando, karate, judo , jujitso, kung fu etc...) is the best to go for?

Thank you.

Have a wonderful day![/QUOTE]

Neo this is a very common question. Given your post is on the TKD forum you must have a TKD school in mind. Go check it out.

There is a lot of MA stuff on the net for your research into the history and forms of MA.

Once you have completed your research and looked at your local schools you can make a informed decison.

The differences between TKD and karate at the entry level are not stunning.

The history of all MA are the same. One guy teaches another guy, who teaches another guy, who talks to some other guys and they work the problem.

The instructor is perhaps more important than the specific version of MA being taught. A good instructor was taught be a good instructor, who was taught by a good instructor. Look for someone with a good "linage" and look for someone who can teach well, reguardless of the style. As you get more into it, you'll likely experiment with various forms, and all of them will make you a better martial artist.

Best of luck.

He who strikes the first blow admits he's lost the argument.
-Japanese proverb-

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
"He who strikes the first blow admits he's lost the argument."
-Japanese proverb-[/QUOTE]


-from the Big Book of Banalities

Pyungshin, are you being an ass on purpose?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shonuff:
Pyungshin, are you being an ass on purpose?[/QUOTE]

Pigvomit cannot help himself.He is doomed to a life of pathetic insults befitting a moron. He's an ass on purpose and his purpose is to be an ass.
Hi my name is pigshun,I get on ma forums and prove to everyone that I'm an idiot,me like to be stupid...dir...dir...I'm a keyboard superhero..No way am I a LOSER!!!

In an oyster, an irritant given enough time can create a pearl. Only time will tell if pyungshin can create something of value or just irritate.

oldman

[This message has been edited by oldman (edited 01-21-2005).]

What I suggest for you is to do taekwondo and a grappling art at the same time. I say this because you can be the best in tkd but if you end up on the ground in a real fight you have a less chance of winning the fight. Most taekwondo schools teach hapkido which is a korean grappling art and also effective. So if you go to a dojo ask if they teach grappling with the kicking and punching martial art,so go to a school of hapkido and taekwondo.

Wow! It feels so great to hear everyone say the things I was thinking.

MasterTravis: I think you will find many people though have different opinions they just won't let things go. Just don't bring yourself to their level and move on. Slinging crap never helps and from my experience telling somebody off ... only escalates things ... never helps the cause.

Pyungshin: I think you will have to admit you took this a little too far. The banter back and forth only wasted good thread space and I'll never get back the minutes wasted reading it hoping something useful could be found.

I am far from perfect. Heck, this forum is a part of many of our lives and I know in the real world I'd like to reach across and strangle some people. I never like to admit I'm wrong and will fight tooth and nail to back myself up … even if it is into a corner. Martial arts however have helped me to be more focused and tolerant of others, which I and others bring to this forum. I think that Mr. V, most of the moderators and members would agree.

You just watch … I'll get caught one day and I will be eating this … and rightly so!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
Wow! It feels so great to hear everyone say the things I was thinking.[/QUOTE]

I believe that's called "silence" in your case.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dereck:
MasterTravis: I think you will find many people though have different opinions they just won't let things go. Just don't bring yourself to their level and move on. Slinging crap never helps and from my experience telling somebody off ... only escalates things ... never helps the cause.

Pyungshin: I think you will have to admit you took this a little too far. The banter back and forth only wasted good thread space and I'll never get back the minutes wasted reading it hoping something useful could be found.

I am far from perfect. Heck, this forum is a part of many of our lives and I know in the real world I'd like to reach across and strangle some people. I never like to admit I'm wrong and will fight tooth and nail to back myself up … even if it is into a corner. Martial arts however have helped me to be more focused and tolerant of others, which I and others bring to this forum. I think that Mr. V, most of the moderators and members would agree.

You just watch … I'll get caught one day and I will be eating this … and rightly so![/QUOTE]

I agree. I probably said a few things I shouldn't have, I should've just ignored pyungshin, which is what I shall do.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MasterTravis:
I agree. I probably said a few things I shouldn't have, I should've just ignored pyungshin, which is what I shall do.[/QUOTE]


To date, you have not displayed an ability to do so. Gambatte!

damn good question. but lets do it this way: a dog and a wolf are different, dogs- domestic and wolf, well, wild. But all in all, they're basically canine. So taekwondo and karate is a bit like that, and General Choi also borrowed techniques from Shotokan Karate to put into ITF taekwondo. So its basically the same so what is to argue about that "my art is better than yours"

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Neo:
Hi Everyone,

First of all let me wish everyone Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year.

Secondly, I know nothing about Martial arts, though I would like to go for Tae Kwan do.
Would you guys care to explain the difference between Tae Kwon Do and Karate or with any other Martial arts.
Or why is it better for me to go for tae kwan do? .. I don't know how to sum up my question but here:
Which one of em' ( M A; ie, tae kwando, karate, judo , jujitso, kung fu etc...) is the best to go for?

Thank you.

Have a wonderful day![/QUOTE]

well this topic is very long, and i cant read all of it, and i appologize if this has been stated before, but my previous Tae kwon do instructor told me that a plain and simple difference is that in Tae Kwon do, you focus more on kicks than you do punches

In Karate, they focus on Punches more than they do on their Kicks, thats a basic example of the diff. hopefully that helped

I do not believe that one art can dominate over another. Each, in their own right, has its advantages.

Now, anyone who keeps track of what I write, knows that I just joined a TKD dojang. All can agree that I know nothing of the origins. I do know, however, that they are very similar. Some just focus on different aspects of the fighting world. One is ground oriented, another will mainly do punches, another will focus on kicks, etc...etc...

The main point is this...they all can be used in a deadly manner. I've seen a 4th degree black belt in TKD kick a guy who was bigger than him. Now, the guy was holding a body shield and when the 4th kicked, the force sent the shield holder back 6 feet. Now, the guy was most certainly ready for the kick, but I guess not "that" ready.

Basically, what I am saying is this:
It doesn't matter what MA you pursue, it is what you do to hone it and the dedication you have towards it that makes you lethal in a combative situation. Most of the fights that I have seen are with a few people who have no clue about fighting. I always stand back and witness these things when they do happen, I don't interfere. Well I'd see at least one guy conducting himself like he knew what he was doing...yet when the punch was thrown, he did not know the first thing about punching correctly.

I know this is nowhere in relation to the discussion at hand. I apologize for that, but I just felt like sharing that. I do know that all martial arts are 100% alike. All use kicks, throws, punches, blocks, and such to bring an opponent down. All can be lethal when someone uses it for offense instead of defense. How one stands, how the punch or kick is delivered, how the block is thrown, etc...that is what makes them different. Some arts focus using elbows and knees, while others prefer distance fighting using mainly kicks. They are all great to study.

Personally I like TKD. The TKD dojang I go to really focuses on old school TKD...not the "sport" side. Point kicks are something you do not here at this school. I love it, and I'd recommend it to anyone. At the same token, I'd also recommend sitting in a few classes, and see which style you believe is best for you. Honestly, I didn't know what style would be best for me. The school had a wonderful atmosphere, and everyone was helping everyone. That is what matters when you are first starting out. Once you get the basics down, and hit around green belt, you really are getting an idea about what you want in MA. Still, in my TKD school, you only START sparring when you hit green. So, in that sense, you'd still have to stick with the MA for a while longer. After about a year or so of training in a MA, you can tell if this is the style you want. By then you have a great idea, and can go from one dojang to another, with an excellent idea of the type of fighting you want.

Go with what feels best...that is the best advice I know of.

i'd say go with karate, traditional preferably, if you want to be better prepared for street fights. tkd looks cool and all, but as they've said before it's mostly for competitions, and won't help too much on street. but i'd suggest learn both, and just combine them to your own comfortable style, then learn other M.A. and just add those too, and come up with your own style. combing m.a. is just much better, cause it can cover many areas that one specific m.a. won't.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cobra:
i'd say go with karate, traditional preferably, if you want to be better prepared for street fights. tkd looks cool and all, but as they've said before it's mostly for competitions, and won't help too much on street. but i'd suggest learn both, and just combine them to your own comfortable style, then learn other M.A. and just add those too, and come up with your own style. combing m.a. is just much better, cause it can cover many areas that one specific m.a. won't. [/QUOTE]

I 100% agree. Always approach MA with an open mind. Never limit yourself to just 1 style.

That is my goal. TKD...and who knows where I will move from here...but I will go somewhere and learn something else. I'm sticking with just TKD until I make Black Belt. After black belt, I may migrate to another MA.

wow i've been reading so much stupid crap about "WTF" lieing about the history of taekwondo?
1st off to start, if you think that TKD copied KARATE only because of the fact that TKD was introduced after WW2. then you are sadly mistaken. the fact that japanese forces took over and occupied korea resulted in korea's struggles to keep thier national heritage. peoples names had to be japanese, they had to write japanese or get tortured, were looked down upon, and indeed TKD or any other "korean" festivity/activity/martial art was forbidden. and if practiced and caught, would result in deadly torture and often death. TKD relates to taekyon very much, in fact TKD's basic roots are Taekyon, just like English comes from Latin. same thing. if you know anything about TKD and history, you would know that Taekyon is a martial art just as old as Kung Fu. except when Taekyon was made and being spread across the Korean peninsula, like how the japanese controlled the korean peninsula during the WW2 era for 36 years, the Chinese were controlling Korea in a mutual agreement. and as a result, China would not permit the Koreans to introduce a martial art of their own into neighboring countries for "glory" and "fame". anyways getting back onto the subject. Taekyon --> TKD. i doubt 1/2 the ppl the denied that TKD came from Taekyon and instead came from KARATE knows what Taekyon even looks like. if you've studied the style and are familiar with it, you would immediately recognize the quick agility and grace that are common in both Taekyon and TKD. and even Karate's beloved master, Masutatsu Oyama, is a south korean by the nickname of "ChoiBaeDal" (realname: ChoiYongEui). and like i said, if you even know who he is based on asian websites (which yes are in fact more valid than american fan sites about Masutatsu Oyama), you would know that he was a Korean that studied taekyon and moved to japan. the only reason why he is credited for "Kyokushin Karate" is the fact that if he were to be in japan showing a korean martial art with a korean name, he would never have customers, people would hate on him (racism of koreavsjapan is bigger than it is now), and he would never have been recognized as a great martial artists. and as a result, he had to learn japanese, had to change his name from ChoiYoungEui to MasutatsuOyama, and instead of being credited for creating an "Ultimate(MartialArt of) Taekyon", because of many years in taking the japanese martial art of Karate, he was credited for "Ultimate(MartialArt of) Karate". even in his documentary made in JAPAN(see the japanese people love him and would obviously be a more credible source than a korean(racism) or some american) said that he taught his japanese students in the same vigor and strength that he was taught in TAEKYON (NOT KARATE). the man was truly korean and truly a lover of TAEKYON, he fed his students korean food all the time while he lived in japan, not japanese food (again this is in the documentary film).

as for the general "Karate VS TKD" the difference in styles. is not "they are the same and they incorporate the same things as kungfu, etc, etc," its that TKD incorporates many things that Taekyon does and in fact it has emphasized even more on kicks, and has the greatest "move list" of kicks than any other martial art. while Karate's movements differ than that of TKD by a crap load. look at their poomse/kata its completely different, in addition to block patterns and different sequences in blocking. and also their whole "emphasis" behind kicking is different. if you've seen anyone GOOD (not some stupid guy who thinks they are good bragging on the internet like a retard how awsome their knockout with a roundhouse kick was) then you'll see that TKD kicks emphasize on hip twisting, leg turning, and after you kick pulling your leg back quickly for a "chain combo" (you see TKD emphasizes on kicks so you gotta be able to kick over and over again really fast, and obviously pulling your leg back after kicking your target allows you to continue on a streak faster). while Karate kicks do not emphasize on pulling your kicks back after hitting your target, and their kick rotation is also different. while TKD kicks usually start the "snap" after the kickingleg has lifted from the ground, Karate kicks start the "rotation" for the kick when their foot is planted on the ground. (thats why tkd kicks are faster than karate kicks, you can say IT DEPENDS ON THE PERSON, all day long, but look at TKD competitions and Karate Competitions, TKD is much faster).

lastly, TKD being simply a competiton sport is the most ridiculous othing in the world. if this is the case, why is it the most taught martial art in the whole world. the only reason why people think it is a sport is because of the Olympics. everyting in olympics is a sport, and although TKD emphasizes much on sparring and was eventually inducted to the OLympics as an official sport. so does every other martial art. does KyoKuShin Karate not sparr? does KungFu not sparr? the only difference is TKD wears padding and its on the Olympics. so the reputation of being a "pure" sport is so much greater, cuz you think "TKD = STEVEN LOPEZ" instead of the real martial art it is. TKD comes from TaeKyon and they both were created many years ago, except WTF was finally formed after dirty japs left korea, and so many people unwanting to do some reasearch just come and say IT CAME FROM KARATE CUZ AFTER JAPAN INTRODUCED KARATE AND THEY LEFT KOREA, SOME TKD COMES UP FROM KOREA. SO TKD COMES FROM KARATE. the most ridiculous thing i've heard. go see how they train TKD at korea, and u'll see its more than just a sport. only in america do they have lack of teaching and teach like as if it was a basketball/football game.

Though I agree with much of what you said, and don't want to jump into your rant, I have to take exception to this:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xxjinhyungxx:
only in america do they have lack of teaching and teach like as if it was a basketball/football game. [/QUOTE]

That's a HUGE (and therefore, not very accurate) generalization. Yes, there are some schools in America that fit that description, but there are also many more that teach TKD as a true MA. I'll put my training up against the legendary Koreans any day. As a matter of fact, this summer (If I can pull it off) I'll be training at Yong-In.

Oh, and for anyone who wants to dismiss TKD just because it's offered as an Olympic sport, so were Judo and Karate. So that must mean they're not true MA's....Sounds foolish doesn't it.

XX

Pretty much nonsense bro.

Oyama himself never claimed he studied Taekyon, he did however mention BY NAME the karate guys he trained with/under.

Including a Korean expert in Goju Ryu, and of course Funakoshi. As well as some others.

But no Taekyon.

I finally got through the 1st page & couldn't immagine going through pages 2 & 3. If I'm repeating, sue me.

My point: It never surprizes me to hear the "2000 year-old MA" myth from TKD folkes. I understand the Korean wish to expell anything Japanese in order to bolster patriotism but now the myth has taken on a life of it's own. Having been repeated generation after generation it somehow becomes "true". Koreans have been free of Japan for 60 years so why can't they let it die? I believe that it's rooted in envy. They try to be more like the Japanese in the economic/manufacturing world but are still in 2nd place(which will you buy, a Toyota/Honda or Hyundai/Kia, Sony or Samsung). I believe that Koreans have the ability to compete w/ Japanese w/o resorting to propaganda. Judo was nearly 100% dominated by Japanese but lately Koreans have been giving Japanese a run for their money. But that's not enough...they've got to call this Japanese art "Yudo" to maintain a Korean flavor. Same w/ Kendo...watch a "Kumdo" class & try to notice any differences. See what I mean? The mature thing to do is to admit & reveal the true history (not Goose's fantacy)...Japanese freely admit that karate came from Okinawa w/ strong influences from China. I guess there are too many big ego's involved.

Thanks for the soap box.

Oyama himself never claimed he studied Taekyon, he did however mention BY NAME the karate guys he trained with/under. - cxt

wow... u must be completely devoid of his whole lifestyle and his LIFETIME achievements, (yes note LIFETIME, not TIME IN JAPAN). obviously u prob. went to google, typed www.google.com and then searched matsutatsu oyama life biography. or something close to that and got your information. and i have to admit, those american websites are PRETTY DARN ACCURATE in terms of karate achievements/training/the widespread of kyokushin karate, but please. go to any asian (chinese/korean/japanese) website (you see they have more credibility) and it'll say that he trained in taekyon.

Passion I appreciate. Bigotry I dispise. "dirty japs" are your words & your true feelings. You sound like a Nazi claiming that no Jews were ever exterminated. Re-write history among your close-knit group all you want because INDEPENDANT historians have written in support of the true role of the Hwarang, Japanese influence on early TKD/TSD & the role od sport in TKD. No one disputed that during & prior to WWII, the Japanese were viscious & cruel to the Chinese & Koreans. But Japanese accept China's influence on Karate w/o such heated anger. Wake up...the world isn't flat.

you know. ihave to admit, quite a monologue there hedkikr, i did find that the comment posted on 04-04-2005 03:17pm, was rational. but this one that u write after my making fun of that "xtc"'s credibility, u write senselessly. and as a result, i'll try my best to try and answer what you have written in your "My point: It never surprizes me to hear the "2000 year-old MA" myth from TKD folkes."

now. you bring up the first point, korea simply wishes to expell japanese things so that korea becomes #1 and japan becomes #2. and you call that simple envy and jealousy. the truth is boy, that japan never admitted their wrongfulness in taking over korea. if you know anything about asian history, u'll know that the 3rd attmept(in which they finally succeded) was in WW2, where tehy took over large chunk of china and all of korea. now, lets get to the point. after (thanks to the USA) korea was freed from the japanese, the japanese left miserably, suicided, blabla. but they NEVER APOLOGIZED. instead, they wrote books and more senseless stories about their "strong battles". a strong battle they did fight, yes, but the part where they write in thier history books that "korea attacked japan first, and therefore japan, in an act of defense, attacked and colonized all of korea". where do i get this? i get this from asian websites and i've lived/born/gone to korea, i see books like this all the time (recieving criticism of course). so i decide to read it, and wow, can u believe it? it really says that. if you nkow ANYTHING about asian history (see you first have to have some sort of credibility hedkikr before u make conclusions based on some "encyclopedia' information), you will know that it was japan who attacked korea 3 times not reverse. and in fact, japan's 1st attack vs. korea was by a korean emissary. u see since japan was an island country, their ppl (to put it simply) were just dumb fisherman. and as a result, korea and china often sent emissaries there to retrieve information, trade, etc. and in the process a korean emissary started living there, became "emperor", had sons, and staged the 1st attack against korea. of course it failed, but the point im trying to say is even in early history korea was the one to teach japan. (makes sense dont u think? korea's 5000 years old, controled by numerous countries 1000 times, and one of those times was china. so wouldnt u think that it would be taught everyting the chinese were taught before the japanese? i mean china > korea, before china > japan. so i think if u think logically, it would kinda make sense that china taught korea everyting before they taught japan ANYTHING).
now 2nd point: you say "since this false myth/gayness/lies/propoganda lies all in their envy, i mean its been almost 60 years why cant they let it die?". well the answer again is the fact that they write in THEIR JAPANESE HISTORY BOOKS taht KOREA ATTACKED JAPAN FIRST AND THEEREFORE JAPAN WAS "FORCED" TO TAKE OVER KOREA. is that true? of course not. but japan blatantly denies it. look at the movie "The Patriot", it depics USA vs Britain, and it depicts britain as ,basically, barbarians (which they were not. they werent as vicious as seen in the movies). so if u dont know already, britain was angry and demanded an apology, and THEY GOT ONE (b/c they really werent like that in the wars in britain vs usa). now comes movie "Pearl Harbor" about USA vs Japan. japan gets depicted as barbarians, they demand an apology, they DONT GET ONE (b/c the whole world was saying "wtf? are u retarded, thats really how u guys were"). so hrmm they deny that they took over korea for no reason other than vicious colonization, and then they deny that pearl harbor is true.... is something fishy?
Point 3: (o yeah if u havent figured out yet, i get all my sources from asian history books, yes ASIAN NOT JUST KOREAN, and asian websites. i'd say im more credible than the white man who searches google) "They try to be more like the Japanese in the economic/manufacturing world but are still in 2nd place(which will you buy, a Toyota/Honda or Hyundai/Kia, Sony or Samsung)." hrm... u know korea and japan are the worlds leaders in techonology. and are constantly switching from 1st/2nd place. o yeah and u bring up samsung vs sony? samsung makes the worlds #1 semi-conductors and #1 lcd screens and #1 cellphones(arguably). i dunno if sony does that except for games. but then again, basing the success of a PSP/PS2 vs Samsung Phones, is kinda senseless and ridiculous.
Point 4: "But that's not enough...they've got to call this Japanese art "Yudo" to maintain a Korean flavor." wow that is the MOST senseless thing i've heard from you yet. now why would tehy call it "yudo" hrm... well thats cuz thats how YOU PRONOUNCE IT IN KOREA, AND HOW YOU PRONOUNCE IT IN KOREAN ACCENT. thats like saying "america is brainwashing everyone living in america, b/c they pronounce the captial of France as "p-a-r-i-s"(yes w/ the "s" pronounced) instead of "p-a-r-r-y. b/c in french dialogue the s is silent. and wow i could sya that for just about every captial, city, word, in the world. saying that japan is creating propoganda and being a fag cuz they pronounce korean capital as "seoul" instead of "suh-ool" and so they are saying it in a "japanese accent to maintain a japanese flavor, and show everyone that they still control korea". is that retarded or what? lol its the accent that makes korean ppl say "YUDO" not "TO MAINTAIN KOREAN FLAVOR".
point 5: "Japanese freely admit that karate came from Okinawa w/ strong influences from China. I guess there are too many big ego's involved." hrmm. well korea(taekwondo) does admit that 2000 years ago they got their martial art from taekyon. and taekyon admits that it recieved its influences from china. but im guessing u dont know that since taekwondo related to taekyon is absolutely false. so you wouldnt even bother reasearching taekyon (i doubt u even know what it looks like), and so you wouldnt know that taekwondo as well recieves strong influences from china.
point 6: "The China-Japan-Korea" connection. if you know anything about asian history (yes lke i said u need to know what ur talking about instead of reading google.com garbage), you'll know that both contries korea/japan recieve their writing/words/etc. from china. of course korea was the only one to make an alphabet, but nonetheless its like latin (english comes form latin). now korea would say a word like "Chu" and in chinese it would be "chui" but it would have same meaning. and it would be written in korean letters vs chiense caligraphy. same is for japanese. pronounciation will be like "Chu" but its CALIGRAPHY is almost (if not exactly) like chinese caligraphy (im talkingabout comparing the traditional "non-simp" japanese to "non-simpf" chinese.). yet u look at korean words and japanese words, and when you hear them they sound almost exactly the same. why is that? b/c the japanese, like they got their writing from china, got their speaking from korea. there are historians that did discover that this fact (like i said asian websites) but japaan refuses to acknowledge this. perhaps THIS IS REALLY B/C OF EGO?
point 7: i say that i get my sources from asian books and websites (whether u'll belive me or not), but i simply dont go write them down for you. b/c what is a english speaking american gonna do w/ an asian website. u prob dont even have the lang. installed, so all u'll see i s @#)(*$)(lojidfio()*#)$(*#@){}{}{}[. so i mean.. its like "wtf is the point". but u know my question is where do you get YOUR credibility? hedkikr. im korean, and i tell you i get from aisan websites, not from KOREAN websites. that further increases my credibility that i would know about asian history (i demosntrated, i logically linked the chiense-korean-japanese influence together) and also it increases credibility that i would get my facts (about oyama) from japanese/chinese websites as well as korean ones. so my opinion isnt biased on oyama, its based on th einformation that i gather from all nations (korea/japan/china).

o yeah, never do i talk about "dirty-japs" or anything of the such. if i really wnated to oust japan from my vocabulary, i wouldnt say "go check asian websites (and yes if u know anytihng, japan is included in asia !! THINK!!). i would say "i got my sources from korean websites, and koera korea korea kroea kroea. butinstead i dont, i get them from asian websites, korea/china/japan. i stress this point b/c obviously u think ikm some sort of racist.
dont get angry b/c i have crediblity and acutal proof (through history) to "proove my thesis/argument", while u well, u i have google. :/ and again, a whiteman's search server. and i'd think an asian search engine talkinga bout "asian history" is more accurate than a white man's search engline talking about "asian history"

learn some history
gain some credibliity
then talk... the world isnt flat

o yeah i forgot to mention. the main reason why the westerners(US primarily, except for ppl like gemeni i thikn BUT THERE ARE VERY FEW OF THEM) thinks that TKD is from karate. is b/c when Master Jhoon Rhee www.masterrhee.com first came to the US, instead of callling it "TaeKwonDo" he started calling it Korean Karate. now why would he do such a thing? "PERHAPS B/C ITS REALLY FROM KARATE" no, no not really. its b/c while korea for 35 years had to change everyting to japan (ex: names, jobs, etc), Japan was already touring the world, teaching the peoples of their "martial art". so japan beats korea by 35 years in "advertising" their martial arts. so now jhooon rhee comes to the US, if he were to put "TaeKwonDo", ppl might just imstake it to be some medical herb or something. i mean if Karate is being advertised for 35 years, and then u get some random thing like "TaeKwonDO" then no **** , noones gonna go to it. thats like saying (in example) "Alzalkareb" instead of "Indian Boxing". i mean if u had Indian Boxing, u'd know "o its western boxing, in indian style. so indians copied and made there own, NEAT!! TIME TO LEARN IT". i mean u get what im saying here?
he did it to gain ppl, to teach his martial art. eventually he got famous, but since being first called "Korean Karate", it left such a big impact. n then ever since "TKD comes from Karate".

Damn...You one angry Korean.

As a matter of fact, I have studied Asian (China, Korea, Japan, India) history but it sounds as though you've had a lot more than I have. That's great (no sarcasm). But your level of anger derails you.

If you recall, Korean history wasn't the issue. Is it really that difficult to say karate influenced TKD even a little bit - like maybe the gi (used to look like a karate gi w/ a black lapel & pant stripe but now it's a poll-over). Why not use the original Taekyon pants & top?

Maybe I'll get out of "your house"...I don't want you to have a stroke.

For the most part I agree with you Jinhyung. I too believe that TKD has its roots in Taekyon, but it definately has gotten a big influence by karate. TKD itself is pretty modern, I mean the name itself is not that old, but I don't deny that it might not have been called by another name before. But it shouldnt matter too much now anyways as both are are vastly different now.

To bring up another point... Historically, culture and tradition in east asia has gone from china, through korea, to japan. Why would martial arts be the exception to all of this? It's simple logic, and yet I'm still saddened by some western views on the validity of korean martial arts. Some even going as far as blaming our culture as suffering some sort of inferiority complex towards the japanese. You have to understand the psychology and history behind all of it before you can jump to conclusions.

tae kwon do was made by General Choi, by combining Karate, and a koren footfighting style called Taek kyon(im pretty sure that how its spelled) to karate and TKD are simmiler. TKD has more foot fighting than karate though.

If you recall, Korean history wasn't the issue. - hedkikr

acutally korean history was a part of the focus. since you were the who disregarded its history for god knows what reason and decided to say that it was fake. i brought it up to tell you why its hard for koreans to say japanese influenced korea. because really, they didnt. they attempted to takeover the minds with pathetic propoganda tactics like forcing the korean people to change names and forcing the korean people to learn the japanese language/writing. and then even when they were ousted they still say that they took over korea b/c it was korea's fault. THIS EXACT HISTORICAL REASON is WHY korea doesnt (doesnt need to acutally, b/c if japan said to the USA we bombed pearl harbor b/c u nuked us first, i doubt ANY united states people would admit/acknowledge ANY japanese people/inventions/products) acknowledge anything of japan. b/c their history is flawed. like i explained to you earlier hedkikr.
btw the gi thing. that original gi is still used in taekyon and hapkido. but like i said TKD is different from those two. and when Jhoon Rhee made the new styrophome armor, and sparring became more public (since you dont have to kick wood w/ ur feet like they used to in the old days, SEE ITS NOT ONLY KARATE THAT TRAINED LIKE THAT !!! WWWWOWWWWW!!) the traditional gi's w/ the knots on both sides of the hip would constantly untie and fall apart and the practicicioner would have to retie them every 2 minutes. so they just changed to the (if it makes you happy YOU can say its japanese) convenient gi's. but im sure anyone w/ good eyesight can compare adida's TKD gi's with Karate gi's and notice a crap load of difference.

[This message has been edited by xxjinhyungxx (edited 04-06-2005).]

Good job Jinhyung.

For the rest of the folks, do some homework before you decide to log on somewhere and feel like sounding smart & important behind your monitors. Realize that people trying to actually learn something might be taking ur dumazz comments to be true. How the heck did this become a history lesson anyways when some guy just wanted to know which ma to choose. becuz some morons decided to throw in "TKD is from Karate" or "Koreans need to not envy Japanese and make up lies" or "dont have a stroke man".

hell yea it makes sense for Jinhyung to be "pissed". u would be too if some fgt was throwing insults about ur culture that wasn't even true (that's u hedkikr w/ur dumbazz post about korea-japan envy. maybe u've been kicked in the head too many times) btw, samsung is the most profitable tech company in the world. Go ref businessweek. u say korea is 2nd in economic/mfg and use examples like "which will you buy samsung or sony"?? Economic or manufacturing capability isnt measured by "what do you want to buy?". now it's no big secret, economically japan is ahead of korea NOW (still room to catch up and it's happened in the last decade) but it makes sense that were behind considering what happened only 60 years ago. but like jinhyung said, that's not the reason. do u see korea hating on other countries that are more economically advanced? get ur facts & perspective straight. Koreans arent some angry people with a jealous rage towards anyone who's better than us.

Why don't you guys spitting trash about other cultures try to (1) think about it from other people's perspective first, what most of you guys are doing is insulting someone else's culture(2) Know the facts, the full facts. And if you've gone beyond that point and already insulted someone or their heritage on something you read online or studied at some junior college, then just admit when it's wrong and end it at that w/o turning it around on him with some poosy remarks like "you one angry korean" or "don't have a stroke man".

Bottom line, shut ur mouth on topics you really don't know too well about (and if u r not korean or were not in the japanese military camped in korea during the occupation, you pretty dont know much about it, so shut up) - emphasis on shutting your mouth if it's going to insult someone. For you fgts that think I'm going overboard, think about finding dumazzes writing insults about your country, that's not even true. I feel like I need to say something to prevent even 1 person from taking what these morons say as facts.

[This message has been edited by atbro (edited 04-23-2005).]

Hmmm,
Interesting discussion.
I have trained in WTF, ITF, Karate from both Nahate and Shotokan traditions and Hapkido. (Don´t get me wrong, that isn´t a brag-if you saw how good I was you´d be laughing. I have just been arounf for a long time and moved a few times.)
I have also trained in some Kung Fu, although not to the same extent as the above.
To be frank, it is clear to anyone that has trained in the Japanese/ Okinawan systems and the Korean systems that they are closely related. Sure, the Koreans use higher stances (mostly) and are generally less comfortable with hand techniques and combinations while the Japanese and Okinawan systems are less comfortable with kicks and kick combinations. Sure the Korean systems go for more double strikes than the Japanese/ Okinawan systems and the knifehand blocks are structurally different. (Although I would guess that the Korean knifehand block had its origins in Kata Chinto or Kata Bassai)
But; The lineage of the Okinawan/ Japanese Kata is well documented. The Korean Hyung (Tul/ Poomse) as we currently kow them did not appear until after WW2.
The Hyung practised after WW2 were identical to the Japanese kata derived from the Shotokan tradition.
The Hyung at least came from Japan. Having said that; let me also say that it is clear that TKD has stopped trying to not be Japanese and has become truly Korean. I am not convinced that Teak Kyon has found its way into the TKD reportoire, the techniques appear too different. But, the Korean predeliction for, and attitude towards, kicking that Taek Kyon informed has certainly made inroads. Yes TKD is mostly sport, in that most clubs emphasise sport. But that is a far cry from saying that TKD is all sport. You can certainly use TKD for self defence; although for my taste I would lean more to using Hapkido than TKD.
Neo, for my part it all comes down to range. If you are at kicking range then TKD is a pretty good art. The kicks are fast, fluid and powerful. But I have found that many TKD stylists get very edgy when you move in closer to punching range. Karate is usually a better art than TKD at that point. The Shotokan arts are more distant than the Nahate arts so range is a primary factor.
When I first started to train I preferred to fight at long range, cos TKD was the style. But as I got into closer arts I found I was more comfy at other ranges.

As you may have noticed there is a lot of politics in the martial arts. You would think that the TKD claim to a long and seperate history from karate would have worn out and died, but no. For my par, I think the claims to being distinct historically and in tehnique are tosh. If you ever study an art derived from China or the Phillipines you will realise just how radically different the arts can be. Yet TKD is remarkably similar to Karate.
Incidentally, the same thing went on in Karate. The Japanese have kind of obscured the Okinawan arts connection too. Yet the similarities are clear. The similarities are also clear between the Okinawan arts and some Kung Fu, especially Fukien derived systems. But at each point, as the art is made ¨local¨ a distinct flavour develops and things change.
But, TKD is much, much nearer to Karate than, for example to the Pak Hok Pai (Tibetan White Crane). I think that similarity speaks for itself really. After that, just trace the history of the Hyung/ Kata and much of the story unfolds.

Getting back to the real topic.

Neo, I agree with earlier posts that you should decide based on what your goals are. If you're looking to get into better shape, check out different places to see who practices hard and which ma's genearally have people in good shape etc.

If it's fighting ability you're looking for, there is no 1 ultimate ma and no ma is really responsible for "creating" good fighters. Good and legendary fighters have existed in all different ma's (bruce lee, mas oyama or choi young-ee as his real name etc. etc.). Also, no good fighter has studied or confined themself to 1 ma. They study different arts and take what works for them in real combat situations. Lastly, the best fighters are made from nature & nurture. It really depends on the person's abilities and their devotion to FIGHTING. Don't listen to people trying to say 1 is better than the other becuz of stoopid technical details (lower v higher stance, grapple v distance bla bla f'ing blah). Like i said you're born with it or you're not, you train hard or you don't, and you use what's best for you.

[This message has been edited by atbro (edited 04-23-2005).]

First let me say that the WTF DOES LIE. I don't know if any of you have heard of Steven E. Travis but he is the President of the North American TKD Association and our Professor (8th Dan) trained by a great man I wish I could have met but of all things cancer got to him and his name what Ray Sell one of the three founders of the Elkart Karate Studio but anyway when he was in the WTF he told us thast he used to win ALL the time and finally they got tired of being emberassed by an american they started to not call is points when he CLEARLY scored. (I've seen the tapes) Now when I say this I'm not exagerating they would not call at least 4 or 5 points a match! Well finally he got tired of it as did the rest of us (This is back in like the 70's so I mean our association when I say us) and hit the other fighter in the face and KO him cold. Now I know thats NOT sportsman like but afterwards we switched from the korean ran USTU to the american ran AAU.

jinhyung,

Dude. Chill for a minute...and I am sorry, but you really have to look at independent sources for your historical information. Take a look at this site for some more accurate information about the origins of TKD Kwans. This, by the way, was compiled by a Korean.

http://www.bstkd.com/ROUGHHISTORY.HTM

Again, I want to emphasize my point: stop posting ur under-researched, copy&pasted links and assumptions as facts when it's not, especially if it has a potential to be insulting. You are skewing the opinions and perspectives of other people.

Is it really possible your research online or wherever is better than numerous other scholars who are still in debate over the origins of TKD? You think a few papers or internet links are going to settle a debate that is probably older than you? Seriously you guys (including me) should not be posting these types of assumptions on the internet.

atbro,

Where's the insult. This was research done by Koreans who recognized what they were doing. This in no way takes away from the usability or efficacy of what TKD is. It just recognizes what their research showed. Now I am the first to agree that the internet is not always accurate, but what do you think about Koreans who teach TKD telling exactly the truth about their research.

I for one will probably think that these guys are more interested in honest technique than trying to bolster fiction!

-B

Atbro is spot on!
The effectiveness, usefulness of an art is dependent on context. If you want exercise and general fitness then you should probably avoid some of the more truly martial of the martial arts as many are actually detrimental to health in that they often defy the precepts of sports science.
If you want street effectiveness then you need to make other decisions.
If you are inclined to highly athletic/ gymnastic techniques then choose accordingly.
And then it is useful to choose styles, if you have more than one under your belt, according to the context in sparring.
I found for example, that I had no capacity using TKD or Hapkido to deal with a Choy Lee Fut stylist that I used to spar with a lot. But Kyokushinkai was perfect for the task.
The simple and direct techniques used to infuriate him. (His circular and multi angles techniques otherwise left me for dead!)

I've had the honor of studying TKD and Judo in the past and I am currently studying Aikido right now. With respect to the whether one form is greater or worse, all i can say is that they are DIFFERENT.

It is true that TKDis derived from Karate. Unfortunately, alot of Koreans refuse accept this due to a cultural hatred toward the japanese dating back to japanese imperialism over korea. However, the essence of TKD was derived from Karate. But then again, Karate was also derived from China, and the knowledge of atemi that Chinese brought to Japan was derived from India and etc etc. The lineage goes on and on.

The modern day TKD definitely focuses alot on the sparring techniques and less on the katas. This is unfortunate because the katas allows one to focus on one's ki as well as practice the important nuances of physical movement. However, this doesnt necessarly mean that TKD is ineffective. Because TKD focuses significantly on being able to deliver fast, consecutive, and precise kicks towards an opponent, particularly to the head, it can be lethal for any opponent. No matter how much an individual trains his/her body, a good blow to the head can easily be incapicatating or lethal. The advantage of TKD lies in the fact that a person's leg has a signifantly larger reach than the arm and allows the individual's body to stay protected. In addition, the speed with which these kicks can be performed can be rather surprisingly fast. However, TKD becomes less effective once an opponent comes within arms range. Therefore, TKD's main focus is essentially, mobility, speed, precision, and range.

Karate, regardless of the ryu, is focused significantly more on the hardening and strengthening of the body. Karateka subjects him/herself to tremendous amount of abuse in order to achieve this difficult goal. It also focuses on speed but such speed is tied to the power of the attack. It definitely has maintained it's focus on the katas, which allows a practitioner to focus on the inner energy. Karate's advantage lies in it's ability to sustain damage, and more, deliver devastating damange to the opponent, particularly towards the knee, ribs, and the head. However, a karateka rarely uses his/her leg to attack an opponent's head since that essentially uproots one's center point. He/she instead prefers to penetrate into the opponent's range of attack, and deliver a closer blow.

Note also that while a Karateka can be relatively heavy, TKD practioners are always quick and agile. This is not to say Karate is slow, but rather, it focuses on maintaining one's center of gravity, a theme you will see in almost ALL of Japanese martial arts, such as Jujitsu and Aikijutsu.

So the difference essentially boils down to speed/agility versus endurance/strength. Which is better suited to an individual? That depends on the person's physique and mentality. Although I am korean and enjoy TKD (yes, national pride), I stand at 6ft and weight 210lbs. I have no illusion of being abile to fly around like those 19year old TKD practioner. For me, Judo or Aikido will allow me to utilize my physical assets more efficiently and effectively.

Likewise, ALL martial arts, regardless of origin, founder, or philosophy will have builtin weaknesses not because the art is weak, but because the act of using a particular concept always has an innate opening. EVERY MOVE HAS A COUNTER MOVE. The ability to perceive an opponent's move, an intuition rather, is what seperates a mediocre fighter from a great fighter.

Along the same line of thought, the Samurai class of feudal Japan practiced many different styles of martial arts because they recognized that certain techniques and methods are unviable in different enviroment (does it make sense to try to draw a katana in a narrow/low corridor?). Karate was developed by the denizens of Okinawa because they did not have the weapons that the Samurai had. (and we haven't even mentioned Ninpo here).

Now, to address the fact that world's best fighers are NOT karateka or TKD or KungFu or etc. This is because no matter how great a martial artist, SIZE DOES MATTER. TKD, Karate and KungFu were designed with speed, focused strengh and/or mobility in mind. It was designed to give an individual an advantage over a larger person. But the truth of the matter is, a larger person WILL have a distinct advantage over a smaller person, regardless of the martial art. And a larger person, like myself, will utilize what is well suited for our body - jujitsu, wrestling etc. It is not that the technique is better. A tiny person practicing jujitsu will not have an advantage over a large karateka.

So the lesson is, stop ranting about how one particular martial art is worse than another. Because some day, you might get your lights knocked out by someone who practices that particular art. The ability to respect all forms of budo is an essential part of learning humility - the first step to becoming a true martial artist.

sorry for the long rant