Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity

Posted by: EFRAIN

Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 03:11 AM

Hey guys just wanted to know what you guys think about TKD loosing it's popularity. Also why is TKD getting so much bashing from so many people nowadays and what can we do to prevent this. What can we do to help TKD from going down the drain in this new MMA world?


Bow out with respect from a TKD/BAGUA MARTIALIST
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 03:48 AM

Is TKD losing popularity? The only way to know would be to see how many TKD schools and/or practioners there are today compared to in the past. So far as I know, no one has attempted such a survey.

TKD bashing did not start "nowadays." I did TKD for 25 years and heard plenty of TKD bashing throughout all that time. The reason TKD gets bashed is simple: it is not a very good martial art. TKD deserves to get bashed, does get bashed, and not much can (or should) be done to prevent it.

How can we prevent TKD from going down the drain? TKD went down the drain years ago. As a martial art, TKD was always mediocre; it simply lacked the boxing and (especially) wrestling emphasis critical to real world self-defense. As TKD turned changed from martial art to martial sport it went from bad to horrible--nowadays, most dojangs just teach a fancy, acrobatic form of foot tag.

Sorry to be so blunt, but there it is. I am sure plenty of people will jump on me for my opinion. If it makes you feel better, beleive them and not me.
Posted by: EFRAIN

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 05:12 AM

No man thanx for being honest. Thats why I posted this. I want to see what people have to say. What system do you do by the way?
Posted by: WC_Lun

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 06:14 AM

Too many of the McDojos are run by poeple who say they are TKD stylist too. Many of these guys only have a couple to a few years experience then are told they have mastered the system and now can teach. That would water down any martial art to the point of uselessness.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 06:27 AM

I did ITF TKF for 25 years and have done judo now for 10.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 06:36 AM

Fileboy, so what is the difference between say, Kyokunshin or Shotokan and TKD? Why don't they get the bashing?
Posted by: JKogas

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 07:30 AM

As long as there are 5 year olds and mothers with enough disposable income and frayed ends of sanity, it will NEVER lose its popularity.

Just a thought.


-John
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 08:40 AM

I'd suggest it might be losing its popularity amongst 'hard-core' MAists but, as JKogas says, Barney the Dinosaur's BB-in-a-month program will always sell.
Posted by: RazorFoot

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 09:05 AM

Quote:

The reason TKD gets bashed is simple: it is not a very good martial art. TKD deserves to get bashed, does get bashed, and not much can (or should) be done to prevent it.



Sorry bud, I will agree that the way it is TAUGHT here in the US in many dojangs (WTF TKD), that it does not represent an effective art/style. I feel the art itself is sound. If you actually review the art in total, every strike and defense that is in many traditional Karate style and many styles of Kung Fu for that matter are in TKD. Are they ineffective as well?

Quote:

As a martial art, TKD was always mediocre; it simply lacked the boxing and (especially) wrestling emphasis critical to real world self-defense.




The Korean military and even our military (for a time) used TKD as a viable means of self defense for its troops. I would think with this being the case, there had to be some practical self defense use or it would not have been/continue to be used. I have never had a problem using TKD for real world self defense. Just like any other art, applying it properly makes the difference.

If you started a confrontation by trying to use a jumping knee strike to the head, you, more than likely, would be put on your butt just as quickly as someone trying to do a standing kick to the head. A jumping knee strike might be in your arsenal but you pick the time, angle, and circumstances when to use it properly if at all. TKD is no different. If I can kick you in the head with power, that doesnt mean I will ever do so if a ranged kick to the back of your knee is all I need to do. If someone shoots on me and All I need to do is sprawl, control his head (elbow to the base of skull (TKD technique), then break a knee with a downward sidekick, then that is what I do. Every art has real world self defense applications. You simply need to apply them in the right manner and at the right time.

Quote:

As TKD turned changed from martial art to martial sport it went from bad to horrible--nowadays, most dojangs just teach a fancy, acrobatic form of foot tag.




I can not argue that. IMHO, TKD has suffered from inclusion in the Olympics as a martial art. The martial sport has become much better, but the SD aspects have suffered as a result.

Quote:

Sorry to be so blunt, but there it is. I am sure plenty of people will jump on me for my opinion. If it makes you feel better, beleive them and not me.




Having had first hand experience with TKD in "Real world SD" scenarios, I would have to state that it does work. At least for me. Will it work every time and defeat every opponent, no, but then, neither will any other art.

Does TKD have gaps? Yes, which is why I cross train. As learning about SD evolves and matures, arts need to do the same or they will become obsolete. I think a lot of TKD schools have begun to teach the entire syllabus of TKD techniques again because of this and have added some ground work to "keep up with the times" so to speak.

ITF TKD is, IMHO, a more viable SD art than WTF TKD as taught in most schools today but TKD can be and is effective when taught properly. Target selection and choosing the right technique at the right time are the most important factors to consider.

As with everything else, opinions vary.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 12:52 PM

Quote:

Is TKD losing popularity? The only way to know would be to see how many TKD schools and/or practioners there are today compared to in the past. So far as I know, no one has attempted such a survey.




I don't think TKD is losing its popularity. I heard that it is the most popular MA in the world, with estimates now at 70 million worldwide.

What they are losing is their credability as a MA, which I think is deserved, but sad.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 12:58 PM

Quote:

TKD bashing did not start "nowadays." I did TKD for 25 years and heard plenty of TKD bashing throughout all that time. The reason TKD gets bashed is simple: it is not a very good martial art. TKD deserves to get bashed, does get bashed, and not much can (or should) be done to prevent it.
How can we prevent TKD from going down the drain? TKD went down the drain years ago. As TKD turned changed from martial art to martial sport it went from bad to horrible--nowadays, most dojangs just teach a fancy, acrobatic form of foot tag.





Agreed. What can we do? Probably little. Korea exported countless instructors worldwide. They are now making money teaching a child activity, sport with an emphasis on false self esteem coaching. JMHO Today, colleges in Korea continue to pump out TKD instructors who travel abroad teaching fluff. Of course I know there are exceptions to the rule.
If you as an individual want to learn SD, get back to the military system that 1st developed TKD.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 01:03 PM

Quote:

Fileboy, so what is the difference between say, Kyokunshin or Shotokan and TKD? Why don't they get the bashing?




Simple!
IMHO 2 reasons:
#1 TKD is more popular & widespread, so bashing is easier as it is the target many set their eyes upon with little effort, as they (TKD nursery schools) are all over the place.

#2 much of the syllabus promoted by Korea & the colleges that graduate TKD master with a bachelor's degree emphasizes a sport, an Olympic sport at that & that is an accomplishment in & of itself, but that takes away from SD, it just plain common sense to me

I don't think it will change from the top much, as that (sport rules) was the way they distiguished themselves from the hated Japanese & their Karate.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 01:05 PM

Quote:

As long as there are 5 year olds and mothers with enough disposable income and frayed ends of sanity, it will NEVER lose its popularity. John




Right & in all fairness, the popularity indicates that it is filling a void. However, to the dismay of many MAists, that void is obviously not SD.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 01:16 PM

Quote:

Quote:

The reason TKD gets bashed is simple: it is not a very good martial art. TKD deserves to get bashed, does get bashed, and not much can (or should) be done to prevent it.



Sorry bud, I will agree that the way it is TAUGHT here in the US in many dojangs (WTF TKD), that it does not represent an effective art/style. I feel the art itself is sound.




Unfortunately the exception does not make the rule. Of course there may be some strong TKD schools that put forth a somewhat effective system of SD. That is not the point. The public's perception is based on what they see & experience. That for the most part is a watered down baby sitting service or a martial sport, that only a select handful in some nations have a shot at making an Olympic team.

So anyone that does TKD is harmed by is much deserved poor reputation. Compare it to cops. Most cops are decent & hard working. They care, but are embarrassed by the rotten apples that surface & do great harm to the overall reputation. With us, it is the opposite. The exception is an apple that shines & when you bite into it, actually tastes good. I personnally go through great lengths to explain to people why what we do is not what most TKD schools do. But you know what, most people don't understand, its all TKD to them. In fact it all MAs to them, simply kicking & punching. It would be a better marketing strategy IMHO to call what we do Chang Hon or Oh Do Kwan, as TKD name is mud in many people's minds.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 02:40 PM

TKD gets bashed more than other, similar styles because it has a higher profile. I doubt there is a major city on earth without one (or more) TKD schools, plus it is an Olympic sport.

BTW, TKD "bashing" is not limited to martial artists. Back in 1988, the year TKD first appeared in the Olympics, Chicago Tribune columnist MIke Ryko wrote, "Taekwon do is still just a demonstration sport. I guess that's why jumping kicks to the face don't hurt yet."
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 02:47 PM

Ironically, the first person who told me TKD was not a very good MA was a longtime Chicago cop. He was the friend of a friend's father, who was also a copper. When, at 13, I told him I was learning TKD, he said, "that s____ is garbage; take something else."
Posted by: RazorFoot

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 02:54 PM

Quote:

Ironically, the first person who told me TKD was not a very good MA was a longtime Chicago cop. He was the friend of a friend's father, who was also a copper. When, at 13, I told him I was learning TKD, he said, "that s____ is garbage; take something else."




That is ironic, lol. The person who introduced me to my first Moo Duk Kwan instructor was a Baltimore City Police Officer who was training with him. I was 16 working at a bar/resteraunt as a busboy where he was a bouncer on the weekends.
Posted by: TwizDead

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 04:06 PM

Quote:

Fileboy, so what is the difference between say, Kyokunshin or Shotokan and TKD? Why don't they get the bashing?



The old school Kyokunshin praticianers that I've met were just drilled in basic punching and kicking for hours and hours. Therefore they'd through awesome straight punches and kicks, and were exetremly well conditioned.
Alot of TKD schools seemed to be doing lots of fancy kicks which means that the people doing it know more kicks, alot of which would be poor to use in an SD situation, and therefore they're basic's may be lacking.
However I've met some TKD that were very good at basic kicks and punches, as people who do Kyokunshin or Muay Thai.
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 04:33 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Ironically, the first person who told me TKD was not a very good MA was a longtime Chicago cop. He was the friend of a friend's father, who was also a copper. When, at 13, I told him I was learning TKD, he said, "that s____ is garbage; take something else."




That is ironic, lol. The person who introduced me to my first Moo Duk Kwan instructor was a Baltimore City Police Officer who was training with him. I was 16 working at a bar/resteraunt as a busboy where he was a bouncer on the weekends.




Extremely ironic as my instructor is a former NYS Trooper that has numerous accounts of how TKD had been very instrumental in her years of service, both as a patroling officer AND a SD instructor at the academy !

VDJ
Posted by: Zach_Zinn

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 04:34 PM

I don't know a whole lot about TKD other than what i've seen, if you want a reason it gets bashed as SD though, #1 in my book is ANY emphasis on kicking to the head, a stupid, stupid thing to do in pretty much any "real life" SD encounter I'd think.

I realize that maybe some schools may teach a more rational curriculum, but fact is if you spend 80% of your time trying to tap eachother in the head with your feet then that's what you know how to do, right?

Also they really do seem to neglect teaching of basic punching mechanics in alot of the TKD i've seen.
Posted by: EarlWeiss

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 05:10 PM

>>>The Korean military and even our military (for a time) used TKD as a viable means of self defense for its troops. I would think with this being the case, there had to be some practical self defense use or it would not have been/continue to be used. I have never had a problem using TKD for real world self defense. Just like any other art, applying it properly makes the difference. <<<

FWIW I think this is a myth perpetuated by various arts whether it be TKD, Krav Maga, and others. The military teaches empty hand SD to build mental toughness, esprit De Corps and similar traits. Lets face it. If you are in any modern military you have a gun, pronably alo a knife and other goodies like grenades.

The likelyhood you will be involved in weaponless combat is extremely remote, and if it happens, something has already gone really wrong for both you and the enemy.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 05:12 PM

Well, good for him. Like I said in my original response, some TKD devotees are going to defend their art to the death. That is to be expected.

I think what happens with a lot of martial artists--and I this was certainly one of these--is that we invest so much of ourselves in our arts, so much of our time, effort and energy, that when we finally know enough to start questioning things, we freeze up. We become like the Christian fundamentalist who finally sees that Darwin was right and recoils in horror. His world is shattered--how can it be? From there, he has one of two options: either reject the new, disturbing truth or retreat deeper into denial. Either outcome is possible, but both require long periods of anxiety and mental struggle.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 05:13 PM

This isn't a myth as my own Instructor's South Korean master was a military trainer for the Korean and US Marines. Like ours originally, it was TKD blended with Hapkido; ours now has a strong BJJ blend.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 08:36 PM

Well I agree that now things are different and unarmed combat is unlikely. But for historical accuracy I will say that my current instrcutor did teach ITF style Tae Kwon Do to the Korean military in what is now South Korea directly under General Choi. It was taught for self defense in battle field combat. I would think it did aid in conditioning. It did include defense against weapons and it did include full contact sparring and judo.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 11:15 PM

Quote:

Well I agree that now things are different and unarmed combat is unlikely. But for historical accuracy I will say that my current instrcutor did teach ITF style Tae Kwon Do to the Korean military in what is now South Korea directly under General Choi. It was taught for self defense in battle field combat. I would think it did aid in conditioning. It did include defense against weapons and it did include full contact sparring and judo.




Yes this is true. It was a military Art of SD & was a modern MMA. In the beginning, it was called Tang Su Do. Then in 1954 it was called Oh Do Kwan & then TKD. Some call it Chang Hon style of TKD. It is a shame that many do not have experience with it & exposure to its syllabus, as outlined in the textbooks from 1965, 1972 & the 15 volume Encylopedia since 1983.
You are very lucky to train with such a GEM! That is real or original or traditional TKD. Keep it alive! JMHO
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/07/08 11:24 PM

Lord knows I have plenty of criticisms to make of TKD. However, believe it or not, kicking to the head is not as crazy as it sounds. The one time I ever used a TKD techniques to get out of a jam was when a nutjob approach me in a park and I whacked him in the head with a round kick. He went down and stayed down. Although it all happened too quick to analyze in complete detail, one thing stands out to this day: I could tell the guy never saw the kick coming. This sounds strange until you realize most people are not martial artist and do not expect to get kicked in the head.
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 12:40 AM

Quote:

...most people are not martial artist and do not expect to get kicked in the head.




Very true!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 01:16 AM

Quote:

Quote:

...most people are not martial artist and do not expect to get kicked in the head.



Very true!




Unfortunately the only ones I will be kicking in the head, are those lying on the floor! LOL
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 01:28 AM

You kick people in the head that are already down? Cool!!

Actually, he has a very good point. As martial artist we have the element of surprise. That's a big edge to have IMO.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 02:18 AM

As well as trained responses and reactions under pressure (though no pressure replicates an unsolicited street attack out the blue)..

Surprise remains one of our greatest allies though


Stuart
Posted by: Zach_Zinn

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 02:51 AM

Quote:

Lord knows I have plenty of criticisms to make of TKD. However, believe it or not, kicking to the head is not as crazy as it sounds. The one time I ever used a TKD techniques to get out of a jam was when a nutjob approach me in a park and I whacked him in the head with a round kick. He went down and stayed down. Although it all happened too quick to analyze in complete detail, one thing stands out to this day: I could tell the guy never saw the kick coming. This sounds strange until you realize most people are not martial artist and do not expect to get kicked in the head.




Martial artist or not once your foot goes above your waist you're much, much easier to knock down, in fact by kicking to the head you are pretty much doing the work for them.

So, while this may not be an issue against your average fool, it seems like a bad idea to me to put yourself at this kind of risk when there are lots of equally (if not more) effective targets to kick, that also leave you less vulnerable.

Obviously kicking to the head can be effective, so could a flying armbar i'm sure, neither would be my first choice to get out of a bad situation.

Back to the question of the thread, that's my main feeling as to why TKD gets some of the bad press (i'm sure some of is unjustified), at least outwardly it appears to train showy and risky techniques as it's bread and butter.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 04:50 AM

Yes, kicking to the head is probably a bad idea for most people unless they are just wicked fast--I would never try it again. But a few people really can get away with it.
Posted by: EarlWeiss

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 07:58 AM

Quote:

Yes, kicking to the head is probably a bad idea for most people unless they are just wicked fast--I would never try it again. But a few people really can get away with it.


<<<

Yep, just ask a couple of UFC fighters like Cro Cop and St. Pierre.
Posted by: RazorFoot

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 09:48 AM

Kicking to the head is a finishing technique. If you notice, even in the UFC where several knockouts have come from head kicks, it is only after they have pounded the guy with other techniques to soften him up for that unexpected head shot.

Would I kick to the head in the street? Maybe on a rare occasion but only after I had hurt him already with other techniques to the point where he was dazed or if I had worked my way behind him and set it up with a couple of strong kidney shots first.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 03:04 PM

Bruce Lee's JKD goes against kicking to the head, as they see it as impractical. But they also note that if theres a chance, they should.
TKD in my opinion has maintained its popularity throughout the decades. However, it is indeed losing its face, to the rising emergence of MMA.
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 03:51 PM

Quote:

Well, good for him. Like I said in my original response, some TKD devotees are going to defend their art to the death. That is to be expected.

I think what happens with a lot of martial artists--and I this was certainly one of these--is that we invest so much of ourselves in our arts, so much of our time, effort and energy, that when we finally know enough to start questioning things, we freeze up. We become like the Christian fundamentalist who finally sees that Darwin was right and recoils in horror. His world is shattered--how can it be? From there, he has one of two options: either reject the new, disturbing truth or retreat deeper into denial. Either outcome is possible, but both require long periods of anxiety and mental struggle.




"Good for her" not him. So because what I have and others have used successfully is living in denial because others say so ? A consensus is not fact. Darwin (and TKD bashers)may have a point of view and may convince others (maybe even a majority)to see it as thre "truth", but doesn't mean it is so. Just like Global Warming, it has been shown time and again that there are counter arguements to what the "Believers" say is true, yet it is not a scientific fact, only a consensus. One man's truth is another mans lie, if it gets repeated enough, people start to believe it as fact, and thats the shame !

VDJ
Posted by: AAMeeting

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 04:32 PM

TKD is an alright martial art, great art to start with and I don't think it deserves the bashing it gets but seeing the musical forms on youtube really makes you think sometimes if TKD does put a lot more enthasis on looking good rather than fighting good

As for who is right, well, in the end it wont matter who has convinced you of something, we are all going to grow old and die and think about how we have lived our lives and we all might get into a street fight, and no matter how much you argue your point on the forums, reality will be what it will be
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 04:53 PM

I have seen far more musical forms at karate tourney's than I have TKD. Though I know that Jhoon Rhee's style of TKD has added musical forms to their curriculum.

VDJ
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 07:08 PM

Quote:

Hey guys just wanted to know what you guys think about TKD loosing it's popularity.



Is it.. must have missed that as my schools booming along!

Quote:

Also why is TKD getting so much bashing from so many people nowadays and what can we do to prevent this.



People always like to snipe at things, they see a part of something and believe it to be the 'whole' (ie. competition TKD).. most 'bashers' dont know jack about full/proper TKD and simply spout from the hip or have been to a Mcdojang and are p##sed about it or are jealous of its popularity as their schools only have 2 students (but there hardcore right lol)!

Quote:

What can we do to help TKD from going down the drain in this new MMA world?



MMA is MMA.. it is what it is.. there are very few pure stylists left in there anymore.. its called MMA for a reason, emphasis on the first 'M'


Stuart
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 08:52 PM

Quote:

TKD in my opinion has maintained its popularity throughout the decades. However, it is indeed losing its face, to the rising emergence of MMA.




I would go further. I think the rise in MMAs is because of the watering down & babying of MAs in general, especially TKD, as it also suffers from that & has the added handicap of having so much emphasis on the Olympic sport aspect. JMHO
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 09:16 PM

Quote:

Quote:

TKD in my opinion has maintained its popularity throughout the decades. However, it is indeed losing its face, to the rising emergence of MMA.




I would go further. I think the rise in MMAs is because of the watering down & babying of MAs in general, especially TKD, as it also suffers from that & has the added handicap of having so much emphasis on the Olympic sport aspect. JMHO




Eaxctly. I joined martial arts because I wanted to learn how to fight and I think most people do.

Who believes that traditional martial arts teach you how to fight anymore? So,people turn to mma, where they not only learn to fight,but actually get to fight.
Posted by: EFRAIN

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 09:43 PM

I think the only way TKD can look good and make sense in real life application is by individualy making it affective and forget about the traditional training most TKD instructors see as effective cause it was taught that way to them. Times change and things change, that includes the martial arts and traditional arts trainers are so proud and ignorant that they dont want to accept that so they teach it without evolving. In the end all arts are the same in one way or another and thats what alot of instructor dont like just cause they want to be unique, I say forget that and wake the f up TO REALITY.


Bow out with respect from a TKD/BAGUA MARTIALIST
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 10:04 PM

I notice a widespread belief that in the past, TKD was a "real" martial art and the main trouble is that it has been corrupted by its conversion to martial sport. There is a grain of truth in this. The transition of TKD from martial art to martial sport has certainly has a negative effect on the art as a whole.

I don't think that is the whole story, however. TKD always had a heavy kicking emphasis, and that is fine as far as it goes. TKD's repertiore of kicks is as strong as any out there and good kicking skills are great to have. However, the gaps in TKD--especially with regards to wrestling--were always a problem. Even studnet lucky enough to have trained in great TKD schools eventually see they need to supplement their training.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/08/08 10:54 PM

Quote:

I notice a widespread belief that in the past, TKD was a "real" martial art and the main trouble is that it has been corrupted by its conversion to martial sport. There is a grain of truth in this. The transition of TKD from martial art to martial sport has certainly has a negative effect on the art as a whole.
I don't think that is the whole story, however. TKD always had a heavy kicking emphasis, and that is fine as far as it goes. TKD's repertiore of kicks is as strong as any out there and good kicking skills are great to have. However, the gaps in TKD--especially with regards to wrestling--were always a problem. Even studnet lucky enough to have trained in great TKD schools eventually see they need to supplement their training.




Sorry FileBoy, but Sir, the original style of the military TKD, which was responsible for developing it & spreading it, has a syllabus which the founder stated repeatedly that it has 2/3 hand techniques & 1/3 foot techinques. This is another common misconception that people have, due partly to the Olympic sport focus.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 12:56 AM

The syllabus may well have listed more hand techniques than foot techniques, but I would bet you dollars to donuts the day to day emphasis was always more on kicking.

Just for the record, I trained at a non-tournament oriented ITF dojang.
Posted by: Prizewriter

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 07:49 AM

The general consenus here seems to be that most of TKD that is taught today is impractical. From my experience, I would concur.

I know many on here have said how they use to train, or how TKD use to be. I have a lot of respect for people who want to improve TKD, and want to bring it back to the standard they perceive it to have been.

With all that said though, is it realistic to change TKD? Money makes the world go round, and as long as the people get what they want (which by and large is black belts and places for their children to get some excercise) that is what TKD (or any martial art, really) will be geared towards.

Those who do feel their TKD is lacking, or need to improve their skills, often go to other places to accomplish this (that is my experience anyway).

My question is this: If TKD, in general, is so lacking, and people who do TKD find that they must go elsewhere to further their skills, why bother doing TKD at all? I mean, if I felt Judo were better for improving my grappling, Boxing improving my hands, and Escrima to do some weapons work, why bother with TKD? For kicks? Are kicks THAT vital compared to hands/grappling/weapons? That is for an individual to decide I suppose.

Martial arts training takes time and money (apart from personal qualities required to learn MA's). If most TKD schools are not going to teach what the minority of its students want (there were about 3 children to every adult in my class) then why not go elsewhere? What is the point in trying to change TKD or pining for TKD to be something that, by and large, it isn't? Why not go elsewhere?

Sorry if I sound cynical, but am trying to thnk of the problems of changing TKD and how likely it would be.
Posted by: EarlWeiss

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 07:58 AM

>>My question is this: If TKD, in general, is so lacking, and people who do TKD find that they must go elsewhere to further their skills, why bother doing TKD at all? I mean, if I felt Judo were better for improving my grappling, Boxing improving my hands, and Escrima to do some weapons work, why bother with TKD? For kicks?<<

All arts have strengths and weaknesses. For years the Gracies touted their BJJ as the ultimate yet the recent BB Mag article about Royce says he takes Thai Boxing to improve his strikes. Their is also the "Know your Opponent..." component.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 10:51 AM

Taekwon-Do has gotten a bad rap over the years and in some cases rightfully so. Too many times we've seen a new black belt go off on his own to teach what little they have learned. Taekwon-do takes years to learn and many more years to master. To be certified as an instructor, you need to be a 4th Dan which takes 12+ years to achieve with diligent training. Master is 7th degree which takes an additional 18+ years of training. There are those who don't want to put in the time and just self promote. This is why we have 30 year old Masters.
Taekwon-Do has also earned a bad rap( but they're not alone) by becoming Day Cares. Instructors found out that there is more money in baby sitting so we have After School programs, Summer Camps, etc. to keep these kids busy for the parents. JMO

Mike
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 11:00 AM

Quote:

The syllabus may well have listed more hand techniques than foot techniques, but I would bet you dollars to donuts the day to day emphasis was always more on kicking.
Just for the record, I trained at a non-tournament oriented ITF dojang.




Yes I understand & agree somewhat. However that is not the problem of the Art, in this case, military or Chang Hon TKD, but the fault of the instructor &/or school for not implementing the Art they say they follow. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 11:09 AM

Quote:

The general consenus here seems to be that most of TKD that is taught today is impractical. From my experience, I would concur.
I know many on here have said how they use to train, or how TKD use to be. I have a lot of respect for people who want to improve TKD, and want to bring it back to the standard they perceive it to have been.
With all that said though, is it realistic to change TKD?




First I think you may mean that TKD is impractical for SD. Now TKD can help studetns better defend themselves, but the way it is taught in most places, leaves much to be desired in that area. Even the way I teach, a SD Art form, is lacking. If someone wants to learn pure SD, without the extras that Chang Hon offers, they are best suited to go to a combat school, or MMA that specializes in just that.

I am not trying to long for a TKD of yester-year. I for the most part, have it. I follow the entire syllabus, therefore it is a more complete method of SD, but still lacking to those schools that emphasize combat SD. I wish just to impress that TKD had this history & why it was changed by many. I agree that it may be impossible to bring it back to its original intent & focus.

Finally, I for one am not trying to change TKD. I am following the original version & find it very well suited for my liking & purpose. In my case, if we change, we might find ourselves in the same sinking boat that many are already in. I'll stay on dry land! LOL
JMHO
Posted by: RazorFoot

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 01:17 PM

I am trying to change it. I was fortunate enough to have trained in (be exposed to) the entire syllabus when I started my path in martial arts (my first 8 years). It has served me well over the years but now I find that I need to expand my training into areas that TKD doesn't normally address or have complete answers for.

Like all things, SD/fighting has evolved. People are more skilled and more knowledgeable about the arts and have a wider range of tools to use. The techniques designed for stand up confrontations as developed in the past need to be modified to adapt to every situation. That is why most of the schools I have trained in during the last 10 years have added groundwork to their portfolio. It only makes sense if you want to be a complete art.

Why don't I stop training TKD and train something else? Because I find a utility in TKD that benefits me and my style of fighting. I am not going to move because I see a house with a nicer deck. I will simply build a nicer deck on my home if that is what I want. I see this as the same thing.

In anything you do, you adapt to the changes that take place for the better. We used to walk, then we rode horses, then trains, then automobiles/planes/etc.

If I played basketball today like they did when the game was invented, I would not only be laughed off the court but there is no way I could be competitive with the speed and athleticism that the game requires today.

As times change, you adapt with them and grow. MA's is no different.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 02:17 PM

We tend to emphasie both equally (even spend time on hand only sparring) but I do think that more students focus on the kicking and use little hand techniques. Not really sure why. Could be because kicks look fancy, seem to require more skill so are more impressive. Kicking range feels safer for sparring than getting in there for hand techniques.

I remember a tournament a long time (yes general Choi was present) ago were one person got warned for using too many hand techniques and not enough foot techniques.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/09/08 02:52 PM

I too have heard lots of stories of the past. The hard trainning. The full contact. But with the pride in those stories I have heard the regret for people being severly injured in trainning. I have seen the surgery required to correct the effects of this trainning when one gets older. On the opposite end I am told of the new more scientific nature of trainning. The improved/modern trainning techniques. Safety equipment leading to less injuries.

I think in the older style it was definately harder to slide through. The best and the luckiest fighters came up through the ranks. In this new style if you are ture to it and work equally as hard you can progress with less chance of injury and a lower potiential for needing surgery in your old age. But it is definately easier for people to slide through. Jumping from org to org doing the minimum and continuing to advance (I think they are rank chasers).

While I can appreciate the old style and the results it produced. There is nothing wrong with this new style or with modern TKD. There will always be problems when people of poor character become involved in an activity or an orgainization. As they not only produce students with poor skill but also with poor character.

There will always be problems when somebody who just earned a black belt thinks they can go out and open their own school because now they now "know everything".
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 01/14/08 09:49 PM

Quote:

However that is not the problem of the Art, in this case, military or Chang Hon TKD, but the fault of the instructor &/or school for not implementing the Art they say they follow. JMHO




In agreement there!

Stuart
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 03:43 PM

oppion only- mma is popular because of the blood it draws, it is no more than a well promoted tough man contest with a small varity of marcial arts added. If you can take a punch you can be a mma fighter. I think to be considered a professional mma fighter one only needs to be a RED BELT not positive. mma fights have all the elements of the old gladiators, the colliseium,blood and guts rouring crowds ect. not to take away from mma it IS BRUTAL and the publc loves the beatings. Most of these fighters (from all arts) strike me as not being super at their core arts and left or gave up so they could become brawlers in a less technical but more punishing system.Just an observation, not saying I am right any coments?
Posted by: StormDOA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 04:08 PM

Thank you for the reply to the post. It was well thought out and systematic without being hostile. I do WTF but feel that we are a traditional school with little Olympic influence (thankfully). I have seen good and crappy schools in everything, heck I even saw a good savate school on "Human Weapon" the other day. Thanks Razorfoot
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 04:15 PM

Interestingly enough, this forum is the most populated(in the thousands) with TKD practitioners.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 04:41 PM

Quote:

oppion only- mma is popular because of the blood it draws, it is no more than a well promoted tough man contest with a small varity of marcial arts added. If you can take a punch you can be a mma fighter. I think to be considered a professional mma fighter one only needs to be a RED BELT not positive. mma fights have all the elements of the old gladiators, the colliseium,blood and guts rouring crowds ect. not to take away from mma it IS BRUTAL and the publc loves the beatings. Most of these fighters (from all arts) strike me as not being super at their core arts and left or gave up so they could become brawlers in a less technical but more punishing system.Just an observation, not saying I am right any coments?




Sorry, disagree with what you've said. For sure there are some brawlers that have had their day in the ring but now a days it is more technical and what I and people who know what is going on enjoy the most. Any combat sport has the possibility of blood, such as with boxing, however you are missing too much if that is all you see and what you think. Frank Mir beating Brock Lesnar was all technical proving technique beats strength. Look at Anderson "the Spider" Silva, pure technique when he fights. The list goes on and on but you have to watch them all and look beyond your nose. And to be considered a MMA fighter has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with belts so your Red Belt theory I think you are grasping at straws; not to mention many systems don't even have a red belt (i.e. BJJ = white, blue, purple, brown, black).

Not sure what this has to do with TKD loosing its fact/popularity either?
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 06:59 PM

Quote:

heck I even saw a good savate school on "Human Weapon" the other day.




I think you mean the show "Fight Quest". That was its most recent episode which aired this past Friday night.

VDJ
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 07:03 PM

Quote:

oppion only- mma is popular because of the blood it draws, it is no more than a well promoted tough man contest with a small varity of marcial arts added. If you can take a punch you can be a mma fighter. I think to be considered a professional mma fighter one only needs to be a RED BELT not positive. mma fights have all the elements of the old gladiators, the colliseium,blood and guts rouring crowds ect. not to take away from mma it IS BRUTAL and the publc loves the beatings. Most of these fighters (from all arts) strike me as not being super at their core arts and left or gave up so they could become brawlers in a less technical but more punishing system.Just an observation, not saying I am right any coments?




No it is much more technical than it comes across. It is also more exciting to watch than bounce,bounce,bounce round kick, kihap, round kick.

VDJ
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 07:59 PM

Quote:

I do WTF but feel that we are a traditional school with little Olympic influence (thankfully).




What does this mean - "I do WTF'?
Posted by: StormDOA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 09:09 PM

yeah thats definately what I meant VDJ, sorry. I remember the "Human Weapon" Savate, it was not so good. Although I do like both of the shows actually. Thanks
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/04/08 09:14 PM

Quote:

oppion only- mma is popular because of the blood it draws, it is no more than a well promoted tough man contest with a small varity of marcial arts added. If you can take a punch you can be a mma fighter. I think to be considered a professional mma fighter one only needs to be a RED BELT not positive. mma fights have all the elements of the old gladiators, the colliseium,blood and guts rouring crowds ect. not to take away from mma it IS BRUTAL and the publc loves the beatings. Most of these fighters (from all arts) strike me as not being super at their core arts and left or gave up so they could become brawlers in a less technical but more punishing system.Just an observation, not saying I am right any coments?




Hi Doofus!! You obviously aren't involved enough to give an opinion on what mma is or isn't.

Lol @ "only have to be a redbelt."
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 03:09 AM

I used to think that MMA was just that a brawl. But I took the time to read up on it and study it. You can tell that there is more to it than just a brawl. The fighters have specialties and some waite for the opportunity to capitalize on anothers mistakes. It began to remind me of the wrestling matches I had back as a kid, there are times when you are thinking about your next move and how your opponent will react.

I don't know which is better. In fact I can say that I don't actually like MMA or wresling or grappling but I can appreciate that it takes hard work and trainning to perfect what may look like a brawl.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 06:36 AM

I'd suggest that MMA looks crude for exactly the reason that it does not allow people to throw perfect traditional techniques. It appears messy because doing a refined striking technique isn't easy when there's a gorilla wanting to deflower you.

That doesn't mean either you or the gorilla are not highly trained in what you do.

From a TKD point, Mark Weir was a high ranking tKD man and former world champion before he turned to MMA. He certainly was pretty damn good at his core art. He presumably left to challenge himself and reach new levels. That meant having to quickly turn his hand to new techniques.

Perhaps the relevance of the MMA post to TKD allegedly losing its popularity is that many people might say "TKD is useless cos it has never won UFC" (rightly or wrongly).
Posted by: TKD-Skippi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 07:29 AM

brawling is a traditioal scottish fighting art. :-P
so don't bash it it ovolves striking on vital points , improvised weapon forms and grapling and ground

seriously though, I'm not a huge fan of UFC, i'm moraly oposed to using violence as a form of entertainment. They are however very acomplished in MMA on that show and to say that you don't even need to be proficient in an art to be sucsesful is ,well, incorect.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 11:00 AM

Speaking of MMA, I see Bruce Lee as the first "popular" mixed martial artist with his JKD. It was geared to the individual where they would use what is useful for them. He had students from all different MA backgrounds that crosstrained together. JMO
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 11:18 AM

Guess I came across as dissing mma did not mean to sound that way. Agree that mma is more enertaining to watch than probably all other competitions.I just wish the refs would stand the fighters up a little quicker if there is no action, that is my only beef with mma.The red belt comment I got from a UFC commontater wile watching a match, I only said I wasn:t sure if that was correct because I wasn:t sure if the anouncer was correct in stating that.My first post on this fourm was yesterday on the human weapon fourm please read it, it will give you an idea of the nature of my postings. I realy do respect every martial art and think they all have much to offer, but after reading fighting arts .com for over a yr.(only responded for first time yesterday) I can see that many people have little idea as to why some organizations do what they do my self included as witnessed by my comments reguarding the ground game for mma. I am sure there is a reason the refs let it go so long just can:t figure out why some bouts end up looking like a high school wresling match for half the bout.This sounded like a knock on mma just stating what I feel would make mma even better for myself, personaly am still a fan though and still like to watch.Now for the hard part, I must also agree that olyimpic sparing is extreemly boring. The reason I watch it is because I understand how good these competitors realy are. The same aspects that make them good is also what makes the event boring, they are forced by a point system and rules that make them have to give to much respect to their opponents. Less than 1 percent of WTF people will ever make it as far as the olympics. What way to many people believe is the myth that WTF instructors are only teaching olypic sparing techneques to their students. This myth whitch is mostly prepetuated by practicing taekwondo people is what is giving taekwondo an undeserved rep that it is inferior. To answer your question as to what my reply has to do with taekwondo losing its popularity, I think that the mma community is doing an excellent job of marketing and has cut into the popularity of many if not all the martial arts. Its marketing at its best combine any and all arts under 1 system and give it a name its brillant! the only down side is that every martial art is not being represented in its trur light and too many techneques from all the arts are missing this is why I am of the oppion that it is more of a brawl than an art that is not a knock it is what it is and we can still all enjoy MMA.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 11:34 AM

Quote:

Speaking of MMA, I see Bruce Lee as the first "popular" mixed martial artist with his JKD. It was geared to the individual where they would use what is useful for them. He had students from all different MA backgrounds that crosstrained together. JMO




Actually original Taekwon-Do was a modern MMA. It was devised by students of many different fighting arts for use as a military SD system. Now it didn't have too much grappling, but the emphasis on hard core SD has been lost over the years. There are many reasons for this. The Olympic movement, the founder's emphasis on patterns & the Do, money/income, insurance, lawsuits & a general watering down of the original system. I know many often blame the Olympics & that is a big part of it. But IMHO it was the Karate Kid & Ninja Turtle movies that opened the doors to countless children. Many commericial schools saw the potential that was there, so the rest is history.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 11:52 AM

Brian s, are we in a bad mood? The red belt comment came from a commontater on a UFC match don;t kill the messenger, I also stated that I wasn:t sure if that was accurate info. because I wasn:t sure if the commontater was correct.Do you need a hug you seem angry!
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 01:27 PM

It really is not a myth about TKD instructors capitalizing on the "Olympic" connection. Are there some good to excellent WTF, schools ? Absolutely, but with the amount of travel that I have done in the USA and the amount of schools that I had visited and allowed to train in, I have found the ITF schools both much more welcoming and with much more attention on the SD aspect of the art than WTF schools do.

In response to your MMA puzzlement as to why the refs don't stand them up faster is two fold, first off, the fighters are actually implementing techniques when on the ground, even when it looks like nothing is happening. Secondly, though they have added more rules to the matches than when they first started, they are trying to keep it as close as to a real fight as possible, and in a real fight on the street there is not going to be a ref there to make you stand up and start over if the fight goes to the ground !

VDJ
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 02:01 PM

If anybody grapples then you know that it can take time to set up a move to work especially if your opponent is equal or greater then yourself. I have grappled over 20 minutes non-stop with some people till we were extremely fatigued only to push on; better technique comes when you have little strength. The thing is the people want to see action and the people really don't understand the ground game and why in say Pride they stand people up faster then they do the UFC. Of course some of the ground game is stalling or weighing your opponent down (cooking them) so as to tire them but that is a part of the game too. For MMA the ground game is an important factor and therefore some of this has to be allowed and I personally think for the most part the UFC does a good job letting things go and restarting things; not to mention I have seen them stand people up when they were busy or just about to capitalize on a mistake by their opponent.

I think if people better understood the ground game then this wouldn't be an issue for MMA. If they understood it is about anticipating and setting up your opponent and that you can feel subtle movements and that you must play it like chess and set up several moves a head of what you are doing to get to the point you want, then again it wouldn't be an issue.

TKD is being used in the UFC and elsewhere with guys such as Ivan Salaverry, Stephan Bonnar and David Loiseau, plus others I'm sure. However like any fighting it won't look exactly the same as pure techniques are hard to come by and face it, when fighting it all looks the same; punching, kicking, etc.

I think we are getting more derailed; my apology for my part.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 04:21 PM

To ITFunity,VDJ, and Dereck, all good points not sure I agree entirely but worthy of consideration- thanks for your input.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 07:39 PM

Quote:


Perhaps the relevance of the MMA post to TKD allegedly losing its popularity is that many people might say "TKD is useless cos it has never won UFC" (rightly or wrongly).




Last time I checked I didn't enter Tae Kwon Do thinking I would win the UFC or that I would become a proficient grappler/wrestler.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/05/08 07:53 PM

The history of all martial arts is usually that the best techniques rises to the top because the best fighters adopt them because they want to win or stay alive. My instructor said they would go anywhere to learn new technique. If thye heard about somebody who had a gret technique they would go and see to learn. When they did the demo tours they would allow open challenges from the crowds. They trainned and taught karate, then Tae Kwon Do. They included judo and weapons and defense against weapons. They created new techniques like the spinning hooking heel kick. Remember that TKD is a very young art and was a merger of all that was avaliable at the time and some new techniques as well.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 12:41 AM

Quote:

The history of all martial arts is usually that the best techniques rises to the top because the best fighters adopt them because they want to win or stay alive. My instructor said they would go anywhere to learn new technique. If thye heard about somebody who had a gret technique they would go and see to learn. When they did the demo tours they would allow open challenges from the crowds. They trainned and taught karate, then Tae Kwon Do. They included judo and weapons and defense against weapons. They created new techniques like the spinning hooking heel kick. Remember that TKD is a very young art and was a merger of all that was avaliable at the time and some new techniques as well.



This is true, but limited to original TKD. Not the branch that veered towards the Olympic sparring style.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 08:53 AM

Quote:

Remember that TKD is a very young art and was a merger of all that was avaliable at the time and some new techniques as well.




Well, I doubt that this was in fact the case. Looking at the art, I cannot believe there were experts from many grappling arts involved in the creation of Taekwon-do. Perhaps there was some link with Japanese Jui-Jitsu but the art looks much more like a direct development of Shotokan karate, with perhaps some additions from an indigenous Taekyon, although even these influences may be disputed.

I think that every new MA on the block would like to claim that it is the sum of current knowledge, however these claims should always be taken with a pinch of salt. We must look to the creators' training histories, and in the case of TKD, Choi's main training was in shotokan, not in Judo or Aikido. He did do some form of Jui-jitsu I think(ITFUnity?), but not extensively.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 10:43 AM

Flynch,

But you are obviously one of those superior beings to whom it doesn't matter. However, to those who are easily led by fads and trends such things might be influential.

On the matter of becoming a grappler... don't forget, before UFC most people had never considered doing any grappling and thought striking was the be-all-and-end-all.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 01:09 PM

It would agreee to a certain extent. TKD was definately influenced more by the Karate and that is what has carried on and been passed on from teacher to student. I just wanted to let people know that at the beginning there was other components which included Judo. I can ask if there where actually judo experts involved in the trainning.

Now I was not personnaly there but I am relaying information that was told to me by somebody who was. So take that as you will.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 01:25 PM

I will let others determine my level of superiority and not comment on it myself.

I just don't think that the UFC is relevant to TKD's validity as a martial arts. It is not an apples to apples comparison

You may be correct that UFC is more popular so people flock to it just as WTF TKD is in the olympics so some are in awe of it (some of my relatives). The UFC has brought grappling some popularity.

When I was young boxers were cool, that was the trendy thing to study.

I don't think there is anything wrong with somebody who wants to learn any martial art TKD, judo, karate, kung fu, etc or if somebody wants to cross train or if somebody wants to do ultimate fighting. Its all good.

Certain arts will come in and out of popularity as time goes on. People like new/different things.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 01:27 PM

Quote:

Well, I doubt that this was in fact the case. Looking at the art, I cannot believe there were experts from many grappling arts involved in the creation of Taekwon-do. Perhaps there was some link with Japanese Jui-Jitsu but the art looks much more like a direct development of Shotokan karate, with perhaps some additions from an indigenous Taekyon, although even these influences may be disputed.
I think that every new MA on the block would like to claim that it is the sum of current knowledge, however these claims should always be taken with a pinch of salt. We must look to the creators' training histories, and in the case of TKD, Choi's main training was in shotokan, not in Judo or Aikido. He did do some form of Jui-jitsu I think(ITFUnity?), but not extensively.




You can rest assurred that this was the case! Remember our original TKD was developed in the military, asa fighting system for soldiers. The general had access to thousands of talented fighters, from boxing to wrestling from all types of MAs. Now his training was limited to Shotokan karate & some claims of TaeKyon, which have not been independently verified. I never seen info on other arts for him. I can not speak to what grappling forms or Arts there were then, maybe someone else can. However, your major mistake is to think that Gen Choi was the only founder. he was the principal founder & the leader.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 03:24 PM

I would guess for grappling much came from Hapkido. My own Instructor's Master was from South Korea and taught a blend of TKD and Hapkido that included groundwork and was the foundation for our system. His Master instructed both Korean and US Marine troops this format.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/06/08 04:50 PM

Flynch, I wasn't making any comment on rights or wrongs. Someone just asked what the MMA posting had to do with anything. For me, I find MMA is used by a lot of TKD-bashers (and any other art bashers).

Maybe like yourself, I never started MA (in my case TKD) thinking I was going to be a grand-champion. I've dabbled in other arts, like Jujitsu and Backhold Wrestling but the popularity of MMA has never been a deciding factor for me to embrace it (my dodgy back being another reason).
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 01:30 AM

Quote:

I would guess for grappling much came from Hapkido. My own Instructor's Master was from South Korea and taught a blend of TKD and Hapkido that included groundwork and was the foundation for our system. His Master instructed both Korean and US Marine troops this format.




I agree with you inprinciple, but am not sure about the term HapKiDo. I thought that was a term that came from Japanese AikiDo. But I won't go down that path. Dr. Kimm's book is being printed on the history of KMAs. Volume 1, deals with Hapkido & is currently being printed. So that might help inform me more.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 12:00 PM

VDJ

Of course WTF schools try to capitalize on their Olympic connection. What I am trying to communicate to non WTF practitioners is that is only part of our training and that most WTF people use Olympic sparing technique's for training to perfect our kicking, countering, foot work reflex, muscle memory, attack identification etc. The most challenging part of Taekwondo to master is kicking. The rules regarding no hand strikes to the head are so we can work on kicking with out a fist in our face to disrupt that part of the training. The hand strikes are much more natural and easier to deliver and master. We have training that puts it all together for realistic application, But for some reason many people do not understand this and think that our competitions are what we are about. 99.9% realize we won:t be competing for Olympic participation. There is a misconception that all we care about is Olympics and we don:t know the difference between sparing and fighting/self defence. It is quite amusing to listen to people talk about how people who spar under WTF rules would probably try to defend them selves the same way they spar in a competition. We as a group are much better with our hand techniques than many people want to believe, or admit. Now the one part I will concede is the ground aspect. We do train for this but it is lacking. I personally believe it is because, and you should agree with this I think, there are techniques that will keep one from going to the ground but you would probably go to prison if you are not careful.
Posted by: Prizewriter

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 12:20 PM

I think that it can be agreed upon that TKD is an art influenced by several martial sources.

What always seemed odd to me in class (this is only my experience with TAGB and some WTF classes) was that those systems didn't always seem to agree.

As I commented before on the forums, when doing SD stuff in TKD class, it felt as though I was doing two different arts i.e. one were SD was taught, the other that used sparring, patterns and line work. The two had different approaches and didn't really work well as a unit.

Compared to other arts where principles of SD movements are the same as the movements found in sparring/free play and kata/forms, I found TKD to be a bit peculiar in this way.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 01:37 PM

Von, you are correct. When we spar for TKD in class it is under WTF rules however our school isn't high on competing. We do have some interclub fighting a couple of times a year and our Juniors do have a fight team though that seems to be diminishing as they grow older and join the adults (who don't compete). Plus in class with self defense and with influences from BJJ as well as MMA, fighting is not just TKD sparring but sparring including everything from stand up to take down. I would even say that for those such as myself that who do compete in grappling tournaments exceeds those who compete in TKD sparring and the numbers are rising. Not to mention others who have competed in kickboxing and full contact fighting. If you have an interest in competing in other forms then our Instructor has no problem giving extra attention to those areas.

For those that try to fit all WTF in a tight little box thinking things are only one way, they are grossly uninformed.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 02:39 PM

Dereck
Nice to here from you. Your instructor sounds like a keeper. What I find ironic about the Olympic connection with Taekwondo is that many ITF schools have benefited from it too, though many will not even entertain that thought. Think about it, when you joined taekwondo did you know the politics or did you join because it was a popular martial art made possible because of the Olympic connection. many people joined their schools never knowing anything about ITF/WTF me included, I just happened to join a school with a WTF connection. My instructor does push competition not for trophy he constantly reminds us doest"t matter win or lose, he does it so we as students can learn to manage fear, manage pain, an occasionally be humbled when our heads get too big. He feels one needs a variety of opponents to truly see how your skills stack up. He even pushes older people to compete and many do and fare quite well.Not saying that competition is everything but you do learn to manage stress.
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 03:19 PM

Quote:

VDJ

Of course WTF schools try to capitalize on their Olympic connection. What I am trying to communicate to non WTF practitioners is that is only part of our training and that most WTF people use Olympic sparing technique's for training to perfect our kicking, countering, foot work reflex, muscle memory, attack identification etc. The most challenging part of Taekwondo to master is kicking. The rules regarding no hand strikes to the head are so we can work on kicking with out a fist in our face to disrupt that part of the training. The hand strikes are much more natural and easier to deliver and master. We have training that puts it all together for realistic application, But for some reason many people do not understand this and think that our competitions are what we are about. 99.9% realize we won:t be competing for Olympic participation. There is a misconception that all we care about is Olympics and we don:t know the difference between sparing and fighting/self defence. It is quite amusing to listen to people talk about how people who spar under WTF rules would probably try to defend them selves the same way they spar in a competition. We as a group are much better with our hand techniques than many people want to believe, or admit. Now the one part I will concede is the ground aspect. We do train for this but it is lacking. I personally believe it is because, and you should agree with this I think, there are techniques that will keep one from going to the ground but you would probably go to prison if you are not careful.





Von,

This is what I was trying to get at with my earlier post in your assumptions of what people here "Think" and say about WTF. Although you respond to me very politely, you are assuming that I am ignorant of what the WTF does for training and are projecting yourself as an authority regarding the WTF, if you are, then I apologize, but respectfully ask in what capacity do you work for the WTF or are your opinions just that, YOUR opinions of why the WTF trains the way they train? Alot of what you say is true, alot of what is said by others here about it is true as well. A little background, My instructor is a certified Kukkiwon/WTF 4th Dan and certified 6th Dan in the AAU (A sister organization to the former USTU now known as TKD USA). She is a 13 time national champion within the AAU, a 3 time international champion at WTF sanctioned events as a member of the USTU national team. She was also a competitor for a spot on the 1992 olympic team (the same team that Herb Perez was part of) until she had to withdraw due to injury. She is also a former NY State trooper with both patrol experience and a self defense tactics instructor.

The reason I share this with you is many of us here are well aware of why WTF competitors train the way they train. It is also a reality (though maybe not in your school as it is also not the case in mine)that a good majority of the WTF schools are "SPORT" only, and try to pass off the "SPORT" aspect as SD. I say this as I had mentioned to you prior as that has been my experience at numerous WTF schools due to my ability to travel and visit them. Now we were going back and forth on this before, and it may have been fileboy who I was debating this with but really can't remember, but someone made the comment that like 85% of these schools were not teaching SD. I don't think that it is that high of number, but I do believe that a MAJORITY do teach in this manner. Now I never said anything (nor have many who post on this subject) that the majority of people who train think they will go to the olympics, but many schools push it because they WANT the students to think it is a possibility. So those are the reasons you read what you read here. Many people are informed of what WTF is about, and as I mentioned earlier, if you are a figure to which you have personal dealings WITH the WTF, then please let us know in what way.

With respect,

VDJ
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 07:18 PM

Quote:

For those that try to fit all WTF in a tight little box thinking things are only one way, they are grossly uninformed.




Please see Badachagi's great post on another thread concerning same. Thanks
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 07:29 PM

Quote:

What I find ironic about the Olympic connection with Taekwondo is that many ITF schools have benefited from it too, though many will not even entertain that thought. Think about it, when you joined taekwondo did you know the politics or did you join because it was a popular martial art made possible because of the Olympic connection. many people joined their schools never knowing anything about ITF/WTF me included, I just happened to join a school with a WTF connection.



I started KMAs when there was only 1 org & that was the ITF. I didn't know who or what the ITF was when I joined my 1st formal school. It happened to be an ITF registered school. I did eventually learn about the WTF when their style fighting started to surface. I then really only became aware of the ITF/WTF political mess, as my Korean master was forced to drop out of the ITF by the KCIA interference invoked at the behest of the Korean military dictator Park Chung Hee & Dr. Kim Un Yong. My teacher refused to join the WTF, as they required his original Dan certificate to be turned in, before they issued his new upgraded rank. He refused & in doing so explained & demonstrated to me the value of a BB cert signed by the founder.

As far as ITF schools benefited from the Olympics, I can tell you this. I worked hard to help the ITF gain IOC approval, to no avail. I was bitterly dissapointed. I think in the long run it also helped, as it is showing what original TKD is. That is how my school is marketed, so we gain some rather small benefit from that. I follow the current merger talks closely & think it would be determental to how my Art is taught. I do think the Olympic status has helped the name TKD & the student population grow. However, that growth has a price & that growth does not really impact us, as we do original TKD. In fact, many, myself included, think the Olympic focus has hurt the SD image of TKD.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/07/08 11:57 PM

Quote:


The reason I share this with you is many of us here are well aware of why WTF competitors train the way they train. It is also a reality (though maybe not in your school as it is also not the case in mine)that a good majority of the WTF schools are "SPORT" only, and try to pass off the "SPORT" aspect as SD. I say this as I had mentioned to you prior as that has been my experience at numerous WTF schools due to my ability to travel and visit them. Now we were going back and forth on this before, and it may have been fileboy who I was debating this with but really can't remember, but someone made the comment that like 85% of these schools were not teaching SD. I don't think that it is that high of number, but I do believe that a MAJORITY do teach in this manner. Now I never said anything (nor have many who post on this subject) that the majority of people who train think they will go to the olympics, but many schools push it because they WANT the students to think it is a possibility. So those are the reasons you read what you read here. Many people are informed of what WTF is about, and as I mentioned earlier, if you are a figure to which you have personal dealings WITH the WTF, then please let us know in what way.

VDJ




I don't think your 85% figure is accurate. First, there are groups/teams out there (like Juan Moreno's group in Miami, or Team Jiro in CA) that are exclusively training groups for TKD athletes, and I'm pretty sure they don't purport to be anything more than that (i.e. teaching self-defense), so I think you can take those types of places out of your figure.

That leaves dojangs and schools that are operated as such, i.e. they have belt promotions, teach forms and other things besides sparring. I think you'd be surprised at the number of schools that have strong TKD competitive programs that also offer other types of training, incl. self-defense. While there are definitely schools out there that have a strong sport focus, I wouldn't say that they are more than half. I feel safe in saying this because a school that focuses too much on sport won't make money.

At any given school, a small percentage of the students will be interested in hardcore sport TKD and competition. If all you teach is sport, than the rest of the students will not stay with the program for long, and ultimately you're school will fail. So unless you're one of the aforementioned sport TKD teams (I have no idea how they pay bills), you have to offer other things besides sport to be a profitable business.

Unfortunately, for too many (at least, too many for my taste), those "other things" are baby sitting and aerobics (cardio kickboxing I think it's called?).
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 01:08 AM

Quote:

At any given school, a small percentage of the students will be interested in hardcore sport TKD and competition. If all you teach is sport, than the rest of the students will not stay with the program for long, and ultimately you're school will fail. So unless you're one of the aforementioned sport TKD teams (I have no idea how they pay bills), you have to offer other things besides sport to be a profitable business.
Unfortunately, for too many (at least, too many for my taste), those "other things" are baby sitting and aerobics (cardio kickboxing I think it's called?).




I couldn't agree more!
Posted by: Dedicated1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 08:51 AM

At our school we offer Krav Maga as well, and as for the self-defense part of our Tae Kwon Do, it is based on Krav Maga.
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 09:53 AM

Quote:

Quote:


The reason I share this with you is many of us here are well aware of why WTF competitors train the way they train. It is also a reality (though maybe not in your school as it is also not the case in mine)that a good majority of the WTF schools are "SPORT" only, and try to pass off the "SPORT" aspect as SD. I say this as I had mentioned to you prior as that has been my experience at numerous WTF schools due to my ability to travel and visit them. Now we were going back and forth on this before, and it may have been fileboy who I was debating this with but really can't remember, but someone made the comment that like 85% of these schools were not teaching SD. I don't think that it is that high of number, but I do believe that a MAJORITY do teach in this manner. Now I never said anything (nor have many who post on this subject) that the majority of people who train think they will go to the olympics, but many schools push it because they WANT the students to think it is a possibility. So those are the reasons you read what you read here. Many people are informed of what WTF is about, and as I mentioned earlier, if you are a figure to which you have personal dealings WITH the WTF, then please let us know in what way.

VDJ




I don't think your 85% figure is accurate. First, there are groups/teams out there (like Juan Moreno's group in Miami, or Team Jiro in CA) that are exclusively training groups for TKD athletes, and I'm pretty sure they don't purport to be anything more than that (i.e. teaching self-defense), so I think you can take those types of places out of your figure.

That leaves dojangs and schools that are operated as such, i.e. they have belt promotions, teach forms and other things besides sparring. I think you'd be surprised at the number of schools that have strong TKD competitive programs that also offer other types of training, incl. self-defense. While there are definitely schools out there that have a strong sport focus, I wouldn't say that they are more than half. I feel safe in saying this because a school that focuses too much on sport won't make money.

At any given school, a small percentage of the students will be interested in hardcore sport TKD and competition. If all you teach is sport, than the rest of the students will not stay with the program for long, and ultimately you're school will fail. So unless you're one of the aforementioned sport TKD teams (I have no idea how they pay bills), you have to offer other things besides sport to be a profitable business.

Unfortunately, for too many (at least, too many for my taste), those "other things" are baby sitting and aerobics (cardio kickboxing I think it's called?).




I agree. The 85% was not a number that I had quoted, it was a guesstimate from another poster to me which I disagreed with. The only thing that I had agreed with the other poster is that the majority of the schools were more sport oriented as to that was my personal experiences with them as I traveled and visited them. I found the ITF schools to be much more SD oriented.

VDJ
Posted by: paddyska

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 10:10 AM

I'm ITF style but I've been on a few seminars with Master Sang H Kim (WTF)that have been half kicking drills and half serious kick-@ss self defence, That guys SD knowledge is awsome!
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 11:10 AM

ITFUNITY
Respectfully, What do you consider to be original Tae kwon do, It seems to me that all of today's martial arts could be considered sport arts, this is why there is a knock on the striking arts for not having a ground game, or not enough ground game. Lets face it, if the arts that focus perdominatly on striking were taught to be what they once were(killing of the enemy with 1-3 strikes to vital spots) none of the striking arts would need much of a ground game, the last place these combatants wanted to be was on the battle field in the dirt striving for a dominant position to ground and pound the enemy. They strove to strike first, strike hard, strike with precision at vital points and end the encounter fast hopefully ending it in a death so as to move on to their next victim. In to days world these techniques will land you in prison, so all the striking arts have switched to a more competitive focus/sport! We are all being trained to compete with little emphases on killing(this is a good thing) we need now to fight and because we do not want to kill anyone there is now a need for a ground game aspect to our training, there lies the knock on most all the striking arts and the emergence of MMA! Just an observation that I will probably catch he-l for any thoughts anyone?

P.S. I am not implying that people who participate in any of the striking arts could not do great damage or kill an assailant I am only saying that striking arts today have a new goal, competition and entertainment, and they are all losing the battle to MMA. What people in the striking arts were originally meant to be (killing machines when necessary) these skill sets do not transfer over for entertainment because people will die. Many people now days consider MMA to be the real and ultimate form of martial art. The observers of competitions love it when people bleed, me included, however I do not consider MMA to be the real deal as a martial art form. I consider it to be a brutal form of entertainment and a bit of a brawl and have already been informed I am a duff-us for this opinion. To summarize, original striking arts were meant to cause death to an opposing enemy they did not want their warriors to fight, that was their deal and it was real. Not trying to come across as an authority just attempting to stimulate conversation. I can take it if you want to call me a duff-us.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 12:11 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY
Respectfully, What do you consider to be original Tae kwon do, It seems to me that all of today's martial arts could be considered sport arts,.......




Your post has too much for me to repond to. I agree with some of it & disagree with other points. There is some truth to your overall concept & still some concepts that are too broad.

But here is what I think is most important:
Original TKD is hard to state, as it is very controversal & many can not even define what TKD is. So here goes! TKD was nmaed in 1955, with the name submitted by General Choi & eventually accepted by President Rhee of SK. Now most did not even use the name, except Gen Choi & his followers, mostly military men in the Oh Do Kwan & Chung Do Kwan members. In fact, when Gen Choi left to go to Malyasia as Ambassador, the KTA was actually called Korean Tae Soo Do Association. It was not till he finished his diplomatic assignment & returned to SK, when he was elected the 3rd president of this KTA & he changed the name to K.TKD. Assoc. So for 10 years, few even used the name. Some did not accept it till 1972, when the Kukkiwon was formed & 1973, when the WTF was set up. Finally, many Kwans did not use the name or accept it till 1978, when they retired the Kwan system & officially numbered them.

Now here is the tricky part & controversial area! The only ones who were really using the name TKD was Gen Chois' followers. They also had somewhat of a standard syllabus, although not as comprehensive as today. They went abroad & started to make TKD popular. It appears that others jumped on the popular bandwagon, much later on, but remember, they were doing something different & the WTF centered on sport only.

So to me, it is rather clear, original TKD is a modern MMA, that was eveloped in the military of SK for SD, under the diection of Gen Choi & his followers, who then spread it abroad. I try to avoid the controversy by just referring to it as ITF or Chang Hon style of TKD. It doesn't make sense to claim others are not doing TKD, when they have many more members & have been very successful in spreading it & having it achieve Olympic status.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 12:13 PM

Agree
On the serf ace it would appear that the Olympic connection has hurt the self defence reputation of tae kwon do this is what inspired me to respond to this forum. To many practicing tae kwon do people are spewing out statements like, pity patter, competitors do not learn self defence, no hand skills, can not ground fight, bla bla bla, and it has been getting more prevalent on these threads. I was attempting to quill some of this WTF bashing because it simply is not deserved. It ultimately leads people to think that tae kwon do is an inferior art form. I have noticed more and more tae kwon do people buying in to this and felt it needed to be addressed. It isn"t really the olympic connection it is our own bickering and lack of respect for each other that is propelling this thinking which will eventually become a self full filling prophecy unless we tae kwon do practitioners pull together and try to understand each other, learn from one another, and show more respect for what each is doing. As I stated before we are our own worst enemy, I could give a hoot what a non Martial artist thinks about our art, they are not expected to know what we are about other that what the see on tv. I do think as a group we should understand each other and be more open minded.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 12:17 PM

Even those that JUST do Olympic sparring, are still in a better position to defend themselves if they did nothing. However, compared to other forms, if you want SD, one must train in that system which does SD & nothing else. Even ITF TKD would not fit this bill, as there are more efficient SD systems. However ITF TKD is an Art form of SD, that has other more important goals & other aspects, including a sports aspect that competes in 5 categories.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 12:35 PM

ITFUNITY:

I am at a loss on how to respond to this I am getting dizzy. Little help from some one more articulate would be nice.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 12:41 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY:

I am at a loss on how to respond to this I am getting dizzy. Little help from some one more articulate would be nice.




More articulate that ITFunity? What the hell are you talking about? He IS being articulate. You could learn something from him, dude.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 12:52 PM

Matt

I ment someone more articulate than myself.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 01:00 PM

My bad.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 01:20 PM

Matt"

No problem I realize that I am conversing with people that are of high regard on this forum I expect that when postings are not crystal clear the benefit of doubt will not be going my way.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 01:23 PM

Quote:

It doesn't make sense to claim others are not doing TKD, when they have many more members & have been very successful in spreading it & having it achieve Olympic status.




Of course it makes sense. But I won't go into the reason as I know you know them.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 01:50 PM

Von, you are doing fine and enjoy the discussions.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 01:51 PM

Flynch

It sounds like you have the inside dope but want to keep it to your self. This forum is about conversing why not share with the rest of us this secret knowledge. This is what its all about, putting things out there and having friendly debate it will just not be as one sided as it used to be. No disrespect intended just trying to get you to open up more with your reply to ITFUNITY
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 02:06 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY: I am at a loss on how to respond to this I am getting dizzy.




I agree that often things in debates that go back & forth, do get hard to follow at time. I respectfully suggest that you keep it short, with resepct to what is confusing you or making you "dizzy". I will try my best to respond & address that specific item, if I can. I will remain available to address as many areas as you want & I can, but doing them 1 at a time, will make it easier to follow.
Thanks
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 02:11 PM

Quote:

Flynch-It sounds like you have the inside dope but want to keep it to your self. This forum is about conversing why not share with the rest of us this secret knowledge. This is what its all about, putting things out there and having friendly debate it will just not be as one sided as it used to be. No disrespect intended just trying to get you to open up more with your reply to ITFUNITY





Von1, I do not think Mr. Flynch is trying to keep a secret, but rather the explanation is very controversal & has been previously thought to be ITF & Gen Choi propaganda. However, recent & ongoing independent research is starting to show there is more truth than propaganda to that side of the story. It all revolves around politics, real Korean govt politics, NK & SK politics, internal politics, politics from 1 group to another that don't like each other. It is & continues to be a turn off for many MAists, but it is something that both of us has posted about at great length.
Posted by: RazorFoot

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 02:18 PM

Because of the discussions here and because of how well they have benefitted ITFUnity, I have made the decision to purchase the 15 volume encyclopedia set on CD-Rom. It is available through this website if anyone else wants it too.

It gets so frustrating trying to keep up with his discussions and not having a reference point to work from. As much as I enjoy his perspectives, it will help me to be able to reference what he is discussing as the conversations progress.

http://www.comdo.com/15volume.html
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 02:35 PM

Quote:

I have made the decision to purchase the 15 volume encyclopedia set on CD-Rom. It gets so frustrating trying to keep up with his discussions and not having a reference point to work from. As much as I enjoy his perspectives, it will help me to be able to reference what he is discussing as the conversations progress.




I think the Encylopdia is a great tool, whether or not you are ITF. Just keep in mind, using it as only a reference tool, ie looking things up, has limited advantage, limited to whatever you are looking up. To get maximum benefit, I respectfully suggest reading it all, which may be or is hard to do on a CD Rom, which by the way is the 1983 edition.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 02:48 PM

ITFUNITY

The part of your reply from the very first sentence, made me dizzy! "Even those that just do Olympic sparing are still in a better position to defend themselves if they did nothing. This is what I am talking about, I do not know of a single school that only teaches Olympic sparing! I am sure if some one searched the globe long enough one may find one somewhere, this is what is driving me crazy on this forum, the insistence that these schools are everywhere. This is exactly the attitude I am trying to dispel because it simply is not so. Yes there are bad instructor always has been even in old day training. Next dizzying comment, If you want sd, one must train in that system that only does SD & nothing else. What the heck system would that be? I can not figure why ITF people insist that they have any better lock on training for SD than a WTF affiliated school, again not so! dizzy dizzy dizzy. I know you meant no harm with your reply this is the underlying attitude on this discussion forum.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 03:04 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY The part of your reply from the very first sentence, made me dizzy! "Even those that just do Olympic sparing are still in a better position to defend themselves if they did nothing. This is what I am talking about, I do not know of a single school that only teaches Olympic sparing! I am sure if some one searched the globe long enough one may find one somewhere, this is what is driving me crazy on this forum, the insistence that these schools are everywhere. This is exactly the attitude I am trying to dispel because it simply is not so. Yes there are bad instructor always has been even in old day training. Next dizzying comment, If you want sd, one must train in that system that only does SD & nothing else. What the heck system would that be? I can not figure why ITF people insist that they have any better lock on training for SD than a WTF affiliated school, again not so! dizzy dizzy dizzy. I know you meant no harm with your reply this is the underlying attitude on this discussion forum.




I see. Well let me try to elaborate. This was offered as it appeared on another post. I am actually supporting the notion that even if someone ONLY did Olympic sport fighting, they would be in a better position to defend themselves. For example, the sweat & hard work they put into the sport, would help them, as you have said as well, as they are atheletes who learn to kick & punch. So to me it is just silly to say WTF "style" rules fighters gain no SD skills. Add that to the fact that there may only be a select few schools, which I never saw either, but apparently do exist, that ONLY do Olympic sparring, most regular WTF aligned (maybe not a good term) do have a SD component of their training.

So I was trying support your arguement, not make you dizzy! Sorry
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 03:13 PM

Fair enough! It"s like arguing religion to some.
Posted by: shift

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 04:28 PM

Who is the top ITF team in the states right now?
Posted by: EFRAIN

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 05:17 PM

Hey guys this is starting to look like a Soccer fan debate lol it's getting religious lol I'M BUTTING IN.... Anyways I was thinking, why don't we just do a WTF, ITF AND GTF get together and settle our opinion on the mat? Show forms, sparring(point and non point sparring), Self defense(watever we know), philosophy ETC..... It's better to demonstrate a martial arts than to try and explain and really express our opinions.

Bow out with respect from a TKD/BAGUA MARTIALIST
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 05:46 PM

Only if we include full ground grappling to submission, my stand-up sucks unless I can take somebody down.
Posted by: EFRAIN

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 06:02 PM

Hell Yeah man...Bring everything u got to offer lol...That is exactly wat I want...lol Everyone should...

Peace
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 06:04 PM

EFRANE

I would love it!
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 11:18 PM

Why not just look to include it at the East Coast get together in August (posted on the martial arts talk forum).

VDJ
Posted by: EFRAIN

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/08/08 11:59 PM

Sure..I can bring some of my GTF TKD and Yin style Bagua zhang buddies...
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 12:22 AM

Quote:

Flynch

It sounds like you have the inside dope but want to keep it to your self. This forum is about conversing why not share with the rest of us this secret knowledge. This is what its all about, putting things out there and having friendly debate it will just not be as one sided as it used to be. No disrespect intended just trying to get you to open up more with your reply to ITFUNITY




No not trying to be secretive. I have been involved in these type of discussions to varying degrees for about four years and helping edit aricles and interviews and a book on Tae Kown Do history for the last three. I was just reminding ITFunity about some of them. There are no secrets. There is the truth which we will never really know and then there are the stories from the people that were there which allow us to form opinions based on those peoples character and some historical information which we can use to come to our own conclusions. the WTF has one story and the ITF has another story. The dificulty lies in teh fact that some of the people who where actually there in th 50's, 60's etc are still aroung and practicing Tae Kwon Do and they remember the events slightly different than others do. Since I am fairly knew to this board I know what it would sound like if I started to make statements like my instrcutor said this...
I too just want to discuss things. I did not mean to be secretive.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 12:47 AM

Quote:

ITFUNITY

The part of your reply from the very first sentence, made me dizzy! "Even those that just do Olympic sparing are still in a better position to defend themselves if they did nothing. This is what I am talking about, I do not know of a single school that only teaches Olympic sparing! I am sure if some one searched the globe long enough one may find one somewhere, this is what is driving me crazy on this forum, the insistence that these schools are everywhere. This is exactly the attitude I am trying to dispel because it simply is not so. Yes there are bad instructor always has been even in old day training. Next dizzying comment, If you want sd, one must train in that system that only does SD & nothing else. What the heck system would that be? I can not figure why ITF people insist that they have any better lock on training for SD than a WTF affiliated school, again not so! dizzy dizzy dizzy. I know you meant no harm with your reply this is the underlying attitude on this discussion forum.




It is unfortunate that the Olympic TKD is seen as sport only. I don't think anybody is saying that all schools are sport but there seems to be alot out there that focus on sport start the kids off at 4-5 years old and they are ready for their BB in two years. I am not sure about where you are so I can only comment on what I see. Around here or with in 10 minutes of my house there are 5 WTF schools (1 also teaches Kum Do), 1 ITF school (ITF-V), 6 karate schools (2 run by JC Kim's students teaching ITF patterns) 2 Kickboxing (one by former UFC guy) and 2 BJJ schools. I try to talk to the instructors, go visit the schools in my spare time and I wach the classes.

Me I still drive an hour across town to train. Although we teach ITF we have a fair number of WTF people come by because of our level of sparring. Some of these people are WTF black belts straight from korea (we are at a university). Some are good and others well...So that is where I get my opinions from.

Back to the point of this thread. Tae Kwon Do has gained populatiy over the years but because of this it has been watered down and now there is alot of TKD lite being taught because that is what sells and that is what the suburbia wants. But that does not mean that there can't be good schools out there. Martial arts is an individual journey it all depends on the instructor and the student (and the student should take more responsibility as they progress)not the martial art whether ITF, WTF, TSD, KSD, Karate, Kung Fu, MMS etc..
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 02:01 AM

Quote:

Back to the point of this thread. Tae Kwon Do has gained populatiy over the years but because of this it has been watered down and now there is alot of TKD lite being taught because that is what sells and that is what the suburbia wants. But that does not mean that there can't be good schools out there. Martial arts is an individual journey it all depends on the instructor and the student (and the student should take more responsibility as they progress)not the martial art whether ITF, WTF, TSD, KSD, Karate, Kung Fu, MMS etc..




Couldn't agree more, especially about the MAs being a personal journey!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 02:04 AM

Quote:

6 karate schools (2 run by JC Kim's students teaching ITF patterns)




JC Kim was one of the most important ITF instructors. How can his students be teaching Karate?
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 02:33 AM

Well one is a Martial Arts Academy the other is labeled Karate but he clearly teaches TKD patterns as I talked with him and watched a few classes. JC Kim lives here and he has a few students with schools I beleive his son also has a school.

I don't think he had a pleasant split with the General
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 03:31 AM

Quote:

I don't think he had a pleasant split with the General




That is a shame & something that sadly was repeated all too often. If you can, please PM me if you feel comfortable elaborating.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 10:58 AM

To all discussion participants"

I was hoping to generate more opinions, feed back, debate or even criticism from people regarding my reply to ITFUNITY on page 10 posting #15983565 COMENTS ABOUT striking arts, MMA, etc.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/09/08 02:13 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY
Respectfully, What do you consider to be original Tae kwon do, It seems to me that all of today's martial arts could be considered sport arts, this is why there is a knock on the striking arts for not having a ground game, or not enough ground game. Lets face it, if the arts that focus perdominatly on striking were taught to be what they once were(killing of the enemy with 1-3 strikes to vital spots) none of the striking arts would need much of a ground game, the last place these combatants wanted to be was on the battle field in the dirt striving for a dominant position to ground and pound the enemy. They strove to strike first, strike hard, strike with precision at vital points and end the encounter fast hopefully ending it in a death so as to move on to their next victim. In to days world these techniques will land you in prison, so all the striking arts have switched to a more competitive focus/sport! We are all being trained to compete with little emphases on killing(this is a good thing) we need now to fight and because we do not want to kill anyone there is now a need for a ground game aspect to our training, there lies the knock on most all the striking arts and the emergence of MMA! Just an observation that I will probably catch he-l for any thoughts anyone?

P.S. I am not implying that people who participate in any of the striking arts could not do great damage or kill an assailant I am only saying that striking arts today have a new goal, competition and entertainment, and they are all losing the battle to MMA. What people in the striking arts were originally meant to be (killing machines when necessary) these skill sets do not transfer over for entertainment because people will die. Many people now days consider MMA to be the real and ultimate form of martial art. The observers of competitions love it when people bleed, me included, however I do not consider MMA to be the real deal as a martial art form. I consider it to be a brutal form of entertainment and a bit of a brawl and have already been informed I am a duff-us for this opinion. To summarize, original striking arts were meant to cause death to an opposing enemy they did not want their warriors to fight, that was their deal and it was real. Not trying to come across as an authority just attempting to stimulate conversation. I can take it if you want to call me a duff-us.




This is the post, I think, right?
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 08:39 AM

ITFUNITY


Yes this is the one.

thanks
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 09:53 AM

VDJ

Would you agree that you are more of an authority on ITF training methods than I am? Of course you are. The only thing that makes me an authority regarding the WTF and their training is that this is what I live day in and day out. You will not here me commenting on ITF training methods unless I become a member of one of their schools and experience it from getting down and dirty for many years. Again your statement of a good majority of WTF schools are sport only(with respect) is false. This statement is almost always thrown about by ITF participants. This is a ridiculous statement. I have never found a single school that this applies to, not saying there is no such thing, but if it were true the majority of people would have experienced their existants not just you. You are not the only person that gets around or is worldly. Again respectfully disagree I do! In this rift between WTF/ITF I find ITF persons to be much more bitter and radical in regards to this matter. In your opinion, please do some sole searching before you answer this, but do you experience more ITF participants bashing WTF, or do you experience more WTF participants trashing ITF? much more trash talk from non WTF even though there are less members. We do not think your training is inferior but we do enjoy our own and are confident in its effectiveness.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 11:39 AM

Quote:

VDJ Would you agree that you are more of an authority on ITF training methods than I am? Of course you are. The only thing that makes me an authority regarding the WTF and their training is that this is what I live day in and day out. You will not here me commenting on ITF training methods unless I become a member of one of their schools and experience it from getting down and dirty for many years. Again your statement of a good majority of WTF schools are sport only(with respect) is false.




Your posts makes 2 good points that I wish to dea with seperately. First & please do not take this as an attack, but there is no standard WTF training method. If one insists there is, it will only weaken their arguement that the WTF is not just a sport. WTF is a sports governing body. It has no standard anything other than the tournament rules. Also a school can not be a member of the WTF, only nations can be members. They can only be members of the countrie's respective NGB.
The ITF is a bit different. A school can be a direct member, with a numbered plaque. A student can be an individual member with a personal membership card. In some instances the ITFs will also allow more than 1 GB in a country. I would also imagine that in some countries there may or can be only 1 school, especially with the splits.

Also the ITF can more properly be mis-labeled a style, as many do look at it as a style, due to the standardization of the syllabus. In reality it is not. It is a MA governing body, that also governs tournament rules, training, promotion & certificate. It produces numerous training materials in various media forms. However, to be an actual ITF member school, one must have an official numbered plaque, with individual members, wear the ITF DoBok, following the ITF syllabus & get ITF BB certs. Many people fudge on these requirements, do some requirements stronger or closer than others. Often the syllabus is not followed completely.

Lastly, since many have the popular misconception that the ITF is a style, they look at anyone who does the ChonJi Tuls or Chang Hon patterns as ITF. That is just plain wrong IMHO. Now many look at a school as being WTF is they were the V neck DoBoks, follow Olympic sparring rules & hang a WTF flag in the Dojang. This is wrong as well. It has been my experience that MOST TKD schools I have seen do a very watered down MA, with more emphasis on tournaments. However I would agree with you & disagree with VDJ. I think most TKD schools offer more than just tournaments & do almost always, from what I see, teach SD. The question I raise, is how effective is that SD, especially compared to MMAs, which seem to have grown to the fact that so many MA schools have failed in the SD area. This failure IMHO is not limited to ITF, WTF, KKW, TKD at all.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 12:05 PM

Quote:

In this rift between WTF/ITF I find ITF persons to be much more bitter and radical in regards to this matter. In your opinion, please do some sole searching before you answer this, but do you experience more ITF participants bashing WTF, or do you experience more WTF participants trashing ITF? much more trash talk from non WTF even though there are less members. We do not think your training is inferior but we do enjoy our own and are confident in its effectiveness.




I would agree with this statement fully! It has been my experience totally. I think it comes right from the top, the founder. Because of Korean geo-politics in the 50s, 60s & 70s, (80s) a big rift widened, resulting in the creation of a 2nd TKD world body, the WTF. The competition between the 2 further widened the rift. An embattled Gen Choi spoke & wrote of this often. The WTF looked to break the ITF, label it as a small private organization & even ignore it by writing out of history the very valuable contribution of the pioneers of TKD, who more often than not, were linked to the ITF. This further enraged the General & his followers. This of course had the impact of filtering down to the students & subsequent generations, which now have access to the internet. Thats us!

The strategy the WTF employed was effective in disabling the ITF. It probably only recovered with the help of NK, which furthered widened the rift. This move did not spill down to their followers, as they wrote the ITF out of history & effectively labeled them as small style that was looked at as Karate, which was run by a embittered communist symphathizer & then an outright traitor. Therefore many of their followers are not aware & frankly most students of TKD, regardless of their school just DON'T CARE! It doesn't really impact their training or the focus of why they joined a TKD DoJang.

The interent is helping to get the word out. There are several projects on the history of TKD in the works, which will help as well. However, strangely it appears that it is Korean geo-politics will or may help close the gap. More people in SK are being re-introduced & in more cases introduced to the military style of TKD for the 1st time because of the geo-political happenings.

The sad part is that many ITF students fail to adhrere to the tenets of TKD when they engage in debates centered around the facts of TKD's history & development. This is not right & has no place in the MAs. JMHO
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 12:11 PM

ITFUNITY

Good post agree with much of what you said. As far as the, how effective is that self defence regarding MMA, the point I have been trying to make all along is that our self defence will stand up to MMA as well as any ITF organization. All things equal meaning the best against the best. However, way to many people wrongly mistake MMA competition to represent self defence which it is not! It is competition/Fighting not self defence. Real self defence has techniques to deal with the ground aspect but rules and ethics do not permit effective techniques to be used. Competition Fighting is different than self defence! agree? People continue to confuse the issue of SD and fighting in an MMA competition including many martial artist.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 02:45 PM

oops!

I keep making the mistake of referring to myself and others as WTF just want to make it clear that I am referring to organizations that use WTF sparing as a tool for training. Sorry to anyone that I may have confused by these statements.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 03:41 PM

I dont think WTF sparring is a good training for learning to kick .Its a sport.It trains you to kick when the other person can not punch you in the face,try to take you down,try to tie you up or try to low kick you.
When a person can do all these things ,and more, kicking dynamics and tactics change especialy if the other person is good at being multi-dimensional and a violent loon.
So its right people have a go if WTF people try to make out the sparring is anything but sport.

Not all people who train MMA/NHB type sparring,training and drills do it for sport.Its the closest training you will get to reality besides going out and getting attacked or getting into fights for a few hours a week.
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 04:58 PM

Quote:


VDJ

Would you agree that you are more of an authority on ITF training methods than I am? Of course you are. The only thing that makes me an authority regarding the WTF and their training is that this is what I live day in and day out. You will not here me commenting on ITF training methods unless I become a member of one of their schools and experience it from getting down and dirty for many years. Again your statement of a good majority of WTF schools are sport only(with respect) is false. This statement is almost always thrown about by ITF participants. This is a ridiculous statement. I have never found a single school that this applies to, not saying there is no such thing, but if it were true the majority of people would have experienced their existants not just you. You are not the only person that gets around or is worldly. Again respectfully disagree I do! In this rift between WTF/ITF I find ITF persons to be much more bitter and radical in regards to this matter. In your opinion, please do some sole searching before you answer this, but do you experience more ITF participants bashing WTF, or do you experience more WTF participants trashing ITF? much more trash talk from non WTF even though there are less members. We do not think your training is inferior but we do enjoy our own and are confident in its effectiveness.




Von,

I don't know if you read my post thoroughly. First and foremost I AM NOT A MEMBER OF ANY ITF ORGANIZATION ! My instructor is a very accomplished WTF competitor as I had pointed out in my other post and is Kukkiwon certified. Yes, I have been to a couple of ITF seminars with Master Parm Rai and only because I have developed a friendship with an ITF member who invites me to these seminars, so no I do not consider myself an authority on ITF practices. I will leave that up to people like Master Earl Weis, ITFunity and VDan whom I know have a better knowledge of the inner workings of the ITF, as their posts have proven! Yes, we do practice a majority of the ITF patterns, but also implement WTF patterns at the Black Belt level. The organization to which I belong, the AAU, is a sister organization to the WTF's NGB, TKD USA, in the states. As far as my statements about the majority of WTF schools being sports oriented is false, again, read my post closer, that has been MY experiences, as it has also been MY experiences that the more hostile schools have definitely been WTF affiliates. I have been in dojangs that said things like "Oh, you do the communist patterns", I'm thinking, how can a pattern be communist ? And yes, I have been to ITF schools that are the same way giving me crap about wearing the V-neck dobok. These are the kinds of schools that I do not return to. (I know that we have been putting definitions to what the WTF and ITF actually are, but I am only referring to the schools this way as to keep a simple way of identifying them). So please understand, I am not claiming to be an authority on either the ITF or the WTF (though the AAU follows closer to the WTF infrastructure), I was only remarking to you as you had a tone in your posts as that you had some authorative knowledge about the WTF rather than just following their rule set.

VDJ
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 05:26 PM

VDJ


Fair enough, maybe I did come to some false conclusions regarding your post.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 05:41 PM

MATXTX

You obviously have not been keeping up, the sparing is a nice tool to work on kicking however it is not how we fight or respond to a SD situation. Sparing and fighting are two different things and self defence is yet another. Way to many people think of these three as being the same. Every martial artist worth their salt knows how to put things together at the appropriate time whether it be sparing, fighting, or defending oneself. I will not deny it is a sport you get no argument on that, all competitions are sport that includes MMA competitions which I have already admitted are much more entertaining. Do not fool your self into thinking that full contact WTF competitions are a walk in the park though, there are many knock outs and have even experienced death. Any aspect of your training that you work on repetitively will always improve those skills. The sparing is only one part of the training.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 11:25 PM

Quote:

1- I dont think WTF sparring is a good training for learning to kick .Its a sport.It trains you to kick when the other person can not punch you in the face,try to take you down,try to tie you up or try to low kick you.

2 - When a person can do all these things ,and more, kicking dynamics and tactics change especialy if the other person is good at being multi-dimensional and a violent loon.




When it comes to # 1 above, I think it is a great way to develop certain aspects of kicking. How the students progress & ability to utilize these in SD I would also think depends on the rest of their training.

Point #2 above is right. But it works both ways. Since they can't punch to the head or use any other hand attacks but a punch to the chest, they develop very nicely certain aspects of kicking. Of course it can lead to weak areas with regard to the use of the hands. But one must be fair, it works both ways. It may be a negative with the no use of hands, but that can also be a positive, as it helps develop the speed, footwork & power, as that is their primary method of scoring.

With the right guidance, anyone's strong areas can be beneficial in assisting with SD. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/10/08 11:30 PM

Quote:

[I have been in dojangs that said things like "Oh, you do the communist patterns", I'm thinking, how can a pattern be communist ?




Yes I have both experienced & heard of like instances. Its actually sad when you think about it. These patterns were the 1st Korean forms & they were developed in SK, by military heroes. These pioneers also not only spread TKD around the world, but also introduced countless numbers of people to Korean culture. They are owed a debt of gratitude & certainly don't deserve to be dishonored like this.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/12/08 02:40 PM

Does no one want to touch this?
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/12/08 04:07 PM

Quote:

Quote:

[I have been in dojangs that said things like "Oh, you do the communist patterns", I'm thinking, how can a pattern be communist ?




Yes I have both experienced & heard of like instances. Its actually sad when you think about it. These patterns were the 1st Korean forms & they were developed in SK, by military heroes. These pioneers also not only spread TKD around the world, but also introduced countless numbers of people to Korean culture. They are owed a debt of gratitude & certainly don't deserve to be dishonored like this.



To call them communist patterns is rediculous. TKD wasn't even introduced to NK until 25 years after it was named. How many communist countries practice Kukki TKD? Remember, ITF TKD is being taught in SK again and maybe someday Kukki TKD will be in NK. No country owns TKD.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/12/08 05:27 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

[I have been in dojangs that said things like "Oh, you do the communist patterns", I'm thinking, how can a pattern be communist ?




Yes I have both experienced & heard of like instances. Its actually sad when you think about it. These patterns were the 1st Korean forms & they were developed in SK, by military heroes. These pioneers also not only spread TKD around the world, but also introduced countless numbers of people to Korean culture. They are owed a debt of gratitude & certainly don't deserve to be dishonored like this.



To call them communist patterns is rediculous. TKD wasn't even introduced to NK until 25 years after it was named. How many communist countries practice Kukki TKD? Remember, ITF TKD is being taught in SK again and maybe someday Kukki TKD will be in NK. No country owns TKD.




Thats right & after the WTF & KKW introduced their TKD to communist countries, how come they were not labeled as such?
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 11:12 AM

The problem that alot of south Koreans have is that the two Countries are still at war. How hard is it to end a war? They are both Koreans devided by Ideology. This does not mean they have to continue fighting. Germany was divided after WW2 and now are back as one. So can Korea.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 11:38 AM

Quote:

The problem that alot of south Koreans have is that the two Countries are still at war. How hard is it to end a war? They are both Koreans devided by Ideology. This does not mean they have to continue fighting. Germany was divided after WW2 and now are back as one. So can Korea.




Well Germany is a much different story. There was much more exchanges between the 2 & E Germany was no where near as isolated as NK. EG economy, although much weaker is no than WG's, the disparity is no where near that of the Koreas, where SK is in the top dozen & NK does not even register on the world scale. The reunification of Germany came at a high price, one that is still being paid today. many have learned the lesson from that & are now taking careful steps to bridge the gap to minimize an even more difficult situation with respect to Korea. Vietnam was reunited by war. Ireland is still divided for 700+ years, with an end still decades away.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 12:35 PM

Wasn't there a form that used to be part of the ITF curriculum that was called Juche?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 12:59 PM

Quote:

Wasn't there a form that used to be part of the ITF curriculum that was called Juche?




Yes & there still is. It replaced pattern KoDang, who was named after a Cho Min Sik, who was a patriot born in what was the north, when Korea was 1. He was a main rival of Kim Il Sung & has been missing for decades, presumed killed by the Soviet Red Army.

This change was finalized by around 1983. Juche is a Tul designed mainly by master Park Jung Tae. It has a sanitized pattern defintion. However, anyone that is familiar with the term Juche realizes it is the philospohical idea that NK is self suffiecent. A policy that has led to severe hardship for the people in the north. It is everywhere in their society. It was suppossed to be the idea of Kim Il Sung, but ironically enough, the main architect, defected & I believe is now living comfortably in SK.

The ITF had a very plausible explanation why it was placed in the syllabus. Detractors say it was a sell out to NK to get them to support the ITF. To me, it was clearly something that the ITF & Ambassador Choi had to do to get the ITF the much needed support to survive against the machine of SK, KKW, KTA & WTF. To some the ends never justifies the means. To me it is clear is did accomplish its end. I make no claim as to whether it was justified.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 01:30 PM

I am keeping up I just dont agree about certain things thats all.
I take a different view.It is so simple.Train and spar exactly as you will fight or deal with the physical aspects of an assault and you dont have to have all these parts and aspects.

I dont agree its a nice tool for kicking.Its for kicking in those set rules.
I get the impression Your trying to say its a tool for kicking in a SD or NHB fight and I dont agree.Its why WTF people get jip for trying to give it more worth than it has.
If your not saying that Iv missunderstood and I agree its a sport and if people enjoy it and understand that,its great.

The repetitive aspects of training have got to have a specific purpose though.Repetitivly doing something for an olympic spar is no good for and assualt or NHB fight.You have to repetitivly do something you will use for an assualt or NHB fight.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 01:43 PM

Quote:

Quote:

1- I dont think WTF sparring is a good training for learning to kick .Its a sport.It trains you to kick when the other person can not punch you in the face,try to take you down,try to tie you up or try to low kick you.

2 - When a person can do all these things ,and more, kicking dynamics and tactics change especialy if the other person is good at being multi-dimensional and a violent loon.




When it comes to # 1 above, I think it is a great way to develop certain aspects of kicking. How the students progress & ability to utilize these in SD I would also think depends on the rest of their training.

Point #2 above is right. But it works both ways. Since they can't punch to the head or use any other hand attacks but a punch to the chest, they develop very nicely certain aspects of kicking. Of course it can lead to weak areas with regard to the use of the hands. But one must be fair, it works both ways. It may be a negative with the no use of hands, but that can also be a positive, as it helps develop the speed, footwork & power, as that is their primary method of scoring.

With the right guidance, anyone's strong areas can be beneficial in assisting with SD. JMHO




But it develops aspects that then have to be changed to fit into SD or and NHB situation.So why not just train for SD in the first place?
If The olympic sparrer knows its sport and fun.Great.
If he then is led to believe what he is doing can work outside of that its not great.

It helps develop speed,footwork and power in those rules and that enviroment.Take it outside of that and things change.
I know.I take my TKD in to NHB areas and you cant be expected to shoot,sprawl, low kick,tie up,clinch,punch and move AND defend all that and still do WTF sparring kicks in the same way and move the same and have the same stance and tactics.
Its just not going to work.It doesnt.Especialy when the other person is good.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 08:08 PM

Quote:

But it develops aspects that then have to be changed to fit into SD or and NHB situation.So why not just train for SD in the first place?


It helps develop speed,footwork and power in those rules and that enviroment.Take it outside of that and things change.




These points stand on their own merit. I only think that it is common sense to see that if a someone trained in this fashion, they will be in a position to better defend themselves than if they did nothing, as this training certainly develops certain skills & abilities.

Is it the best way to train for SD? No! But neither is ITF TKD either! But our style is an Art of SD. In other words, we train & learn areas outside of & in addition to down & dirty SD.

If someone wants just SD, they should train in a way that most effectively accomplishes the best SD for that individual. JMHO
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/13/08 10:08 PM

It is also important to remember that although there are other aspect to Tae Kwon Do trainning such as physical fitness and mental discipline. Trainning should never lose sight of the fact that self defense is the first objective. It may not be the ultimate objective for some but for everyone improvement in ones ablilty to defend oneself is first.

When schools and instrcutors lose sight of this first goal it all breaks down as you can't reach the higher goals.

That is why Tae Kwon Do has problems many schools have forgotten this intial step in training. The instructor has duty to train his/her student to defend themselves.

If we are trainning students to just do patterns, or just point spar or just do olymipic sparring then we are doing a diservice to them and to Tae Kwon Do. Competition was never the primary goal of Tae Kwon Do trainning.

You have to have standards and those standards have to include many things sometimes differing from school to school but they can never exclude increasing a students ability to defend themselves.

Unless you want to stop calling what you do Tae Kwon Do Call it kick boxercise, call it korea aerobics, call it martial fitness call it what ever you want.

Now I don't know any of you so I am not picking on anyone. If you dont agree fine say so but don't take it personnally because I am not talking about your school or your style of Tae Kwon Do.

My point is that Tae Kwon Do to me is the Korean Art of Self Defence. Although I think there are many other benefit to Tae Kwon Do they are ancilliary to this. If you are better able to defend yourself than you have accomplished this first goal. But if you can't because you have not been trained then you have your answer

I expect that I am better able to defend myself as a black belt than as a white belt.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 12:13 PM

Quote:

It is also important to remember that although there are other aspect to Tae Kwon Do trainning such as physical fitness and mental discipline. Trainning should never lose sight of the fact that self defense is the first objective. It may not be the ultimate objective for some but for everyone improvement in ones ablilty to defend oneself is first.





I agree that everyone does need to increase the ability to defend themselves. I think initially SD was the primary objective of original TKD. However, the founder moved that to be the primary physical goal, with the main objective to be the overall development of the person through the DO. Thus TKD written as Taekwon-Do to highlight that emphasis.


Quote:

The instructor has duty to train his/her student to defend themselves.




This goes without saying & it is a shame that many put money above this.

Quote:

Competition was never the primary goal of Tae Kwon Do trainning.





But it has become that for many & therefore it is hard to contract & compare, In SK today, TKD is looked at as a sport by many, including the general public. That in & of itself is not a bad thing, but it does change things.

Quote:

Unless you want to stop calling what you do Tae Kwon Do Call it kick boxercise, call it korea aerobics, call it martial fitness call it what ever you want.




Good point, but that will never happen.


Quote:

I expect that I am better able to defend myself as a black belt than as a white belt.




I think in most cases that will be the reality. However, the simple being better may not be enough, especially compared to other schools or other Arts, where down & dirty SD is the ONLY focus. JMHO
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 12:57 PM

MATXTX

I can see you disagree but I don"t think you fully understand what I was saying regarding WTF sparing and using it as a training tool for SD, You put it all together using hand techniques, hapkido, judo, or whatever other skill sets your school provides.

You also incorporate the kicking which should be greatly improved from all the sport fighting. Most of the arguments against wtf type sparing is centered around the fact that too many people wrongly assume that participants do not incorporate other skills into training for SD. This is no different than any other multidimensional training.

Example, one learns and works on take down, grappling, boxing/hand techniques, kicking, etc. At some point it all needs to come together and walla, you have a competitor that is more than capable of effective SD.

WTF participants are very good kickers in many situations but are also very good at other things too, however, there are many people who do not understand this. I feel by your comments that you are also not fully aware that most wtf participants are multidimensional fighters.

When I work on kicking it is no different than when I work on my ground game the goal is to improve both skills. The problem is that WTF only show cases the kicking so many people believe that is all we do. Now could I walk into an MMA competition and expect to dominate, probably not because I do not train to put certain aspects together as much as the average MMA fighter does for this type of competition. Nor does any other traditional striking art.

Let no one kid them selves, MMA is a competition sport, not the real thing as many believe. Do you know why I am not as concerned with some of the skills necessary to be a good MMA competitor? It is because there are many SD techniques that can be utilized to neutralize much of what MMA rules will or should allow during fights. Some average Joe shooting in for a take down would be in serious trouble but these techniques can and should only be used if your life is in danger.

Now lets say things went bad and one does go to ground, again many more options that are easier and quicker to apply than say attempting to secure an arm bar, however these other options can be deadly but remember this is the real deal not some competition and I have no desire to fight some stranger.

This is why I do not need to focus so hard on some of the skills that would help me be a better MMA fighter. This is true of many practicing martial artist and participants of the striking arts. Not every one has been duped into thinking this is the real deal. I am amazed at the amount of instructors that mistake fighting for SD. Not a knock on MMA I enjoy the fights but to me SD is not about fighting, The last thing I want to do is fight! If you want to fight be a well rounded fighter. I wish more people remembered that SD is not about fighting! the opposite is true.

One does not need to be an MMA champ to know if they are on track for defending themselves, you find your self in a fight on the street you are not applying SD you are fighting and the first one to tire will probably go to the hosp. or the morgue, there is no next round to redeem your self. Real SD avoids much trouble and if it does turn physical you do not screw around looking to ground and pound that would be fighting and not very safe. You end it quick and get the heck out of Dodge! I say again MMA is fighting not SD nor is it close to real SD. It is realistic fighting and/or sport.

(edited to add paragraph breaks - Scottie)
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 02:23 PM

Quote:



These points stand on their own merit. I only think that it is common sense to see that if a someone trained in this fashion, they will be in a position to better defend themselves than if they did nothing, as this training certainly develops certain skills & abilities.






My point was about the kicking.Its a good tool to learn kicking for olympic type sparring.Not for SD or NHB fighting.
I agree there are other benefits like fitness and evasion skills but im not talking about those.
Its a sport.If WTF olympic people go on to say/teach SD kicking is similar then the they deserve the aggrivation and to be argued with.
If a student never wants to compete its not a good kicking tool for them.Unless they find itfun and enjoyable of course.Just as long as they know.
Posted by: RazorFoot

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 02:46 PM

Ok, I need to jump in here. How is kicking not a good SD tool to learn? Cut kicks, leg kicks (knees, thighs, shins), and when timed properly, even kicking to higher targets can be effective. Talking MMA as we just were, how many knockouts have been recorded by a knee or kick to the head or face? I can recall several.

Matxtx, do not generalize, especially regarding something that almost every SD art has as part of its curriculum (sp).
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 03:28 PM

MATXTX

Quote:

I can see you disagree but I don"t think you fully understand what I was saying regarding WTF sparing and using it as a training tool for SD, You put it all together using hand techniques, hapkido, judo, or whatever other skill sets your school provides


.

Ok.I still disagree thats a good way to go about it.Its a way sure.But its a bit stick on and glue,a bit here and a bit there then hope it comes together.You will not be standing,moving or positioned for A WTF olympic spar the same as for a judo fight,for example.So the way you have learnt to apply power speed, footwork, tactics ,etc for the olympic spar means your totaly vunerable for a judo guy coming at you.
Now think if you dont even know what the guy will come at you like so you dont even know if your out of position untill its too late.So now you cant kick as well whilst ready for the judo guy.So that olympic kicking becomes less usefull.
So a better tool would be to kick in an NHB situation not WTF situation.
If you are talking about adapting the WTF olympic kicking for NHB then you got to do that type of sparring too.Though it doesnt make sense to spar olympic style if your training for NHB/SD.So I think its not a good kicking tool.

Quote:

You also incorporate the kicking which should be greatly improved from all the sport fighting. Most of the arguments against wtf type sparing is centered around the fact that too many people wrongly assume that participants do not incorporate other skills into training for SD. This is no different than any other multidimensional training




It will be impoved for the sports fighting.Now you have to go and adapt it.So why not adapt it in the first place if your training for SD/NHB? So I dissagree its a good tool.

Quote:

Example, one learns and works on take down, grappling, boxing/hand techniques, kicking, etc. At some point it all needs to come together and walla, you have a competitor that is more than capable of effective SD.




It doesnt happen magicaly though.A person cant be expected to kick in an olympic style then just slip it into the rest without sparring and drilling in that way.
So the guy who wants SD/NHB should be kicking for SD/NHB straight off the bat.

Quote:

WTF participants are very good kickers in many situations but are also very good at other things too, however, there are many people who do not understand this. I feel by your comments that you are also not fully aware that most wtf participants are multidimensional fighters


.

Im talking about kicking in olympic type sparring so I dont know how I give you this veiw.Im not talking about WTF as a whole.

Quote:

When I work on kicking it is no different than when I work on my ground game the goal is to improve both skills. The problem is that WTF only show cases the kicking so many people believe that is all we do. Now could I walk into an MMA competition and expect to dominate, probably not because I do not train to put certain aspects together as much as the average MMA fighter does for this type of competition. Nor does any other traditional striking art.




I think its better and it makes sense to train to be able to kick whilst you can still grapple and grapple while you can still kick.If you want to kick at all.

Quote:

Let no one kid them selves, MMA is a competition sport, not the real thing as many believe. Do you know why I am not as concerned with some of the skills necessary to be a good MMA competitor? It is because there are many SD techniques that can be utilized to neutralize much of what MMA rules will or should allow during fights. Some average Joe shooting in for a take down would be in serious trouble but these techniques can and should only be used if your life is in danger.




Im talking about NHB.Not MMA in a sport context.The drills and sparring and training for NHB/MMA do not limit themselves to sport training for a fight.Your making points about people not understanind WTF though your not understanding how you can train with NHB drills,sparring etc for SD or an NHB fight.And what is SD if its not an NHB fight for your life? Your not understanding how close to the line you can get with rules and how its easy it is to inch beyond the rules if needs be.
If I can beat you within rules just think what I will do to you without any.

Quote:

Now lets say things went bad and one does go to ground, again many more options that are easier and quicker to apply than say attempting to secure an arm bar, however these other options can be deadly but remember this is the real deal not some competition and I have no desire to fight some stranger.




Easy and quicker when you have not been able to train them at full speed,full intensity with the full feeling and stress and panic because they are 'too deadly'?
Dont agree at all.

Quote:

This is why I do not need to focus so hard on some of the skills that would help me be a better MMA fighter. This is true of many practicing martial artist and participants of the striking arts. Not every one has been duped into thinking this is the real deal. I am amazed at the amount of instructors that mistake fighting for SD. Not a knock on MMA I enjoy the fights but to me SD is not about fighting, The last thing I want to do is fight! If you want to fight be a well rounded fighter. I wish more people remembered that SD is not about fighting! the opposite is true.





SD IS fighting back.The pyhsical aspects are the same.It only differs mentaly as your intent is different and you didnt want it to happen.But three seconds into an assault and 3 seconds into a fight if the same sitution is happening its the same.Mentaly its different yea,how you behave is different yea.Those differences should be noted and taken into account in training somehow.

Quote:

One does not need to be an MMA champ to know if they are on track for defending themselves, you find your self in a fight on the street you are not applying SD you are fighting and the first one to tire will probably go to the hosp. or the morgue, there is no next round to redeem your self. Real SD avoids much trouble and if it does turn physical you do not screw around looking to ground and pound that would be fighting and not very safe. You end it quick and get the heck out of Dodge! I say again MMA is fighting not SD nor is it close to real SD. It is realistic fighting and/or sport.




Thats just a big clique again that all people doing NHB/MMA type drills and sparring are training for sport.
Personaly I try to end anything as a fast and as intensly as possible be it a fight or assualT.I think you will find that so do top MMA sports fighters,boxers,etc etc.It just happens that the other guy is trained also so its not easy.They are not deliberatly fanying about.
For example Ricky Hatton was trying to take Mayweathers head off and would of loved to have done it in ten seconds, its just that Mayweather is good.

Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 03:36 PM

Your misinterpreting me or im not coming across right.
Im disagreeing that WTF olympic sparring is a good kicking tool.
Not that kicks are not usefull in SD/NHB.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 03:58 PM

MATXTX


No I say again if you are learning to fight you are correct sir. But self defence in it"s purest physical, and most desperate form is much more to the point and that point has a deliberate and quick ending some times even fatal.

People are caught up in all the mixed martial arts hype that many now days consider fighting and SD to be the same and they are not. This is why the striking arts have been taking such a beating regarding SD and personally I feel it is undeserved as long as one remembers that it is not about fighting. Your comments about the physical aspects of fighting and SD being the same are only some what correct because the techniques for ending the confrontation will be different if one is serious and not willing to let things turn into a fight. I will not go into detail and describe some that are easy, effective, and probably deadly because not all who visit this forum are responsible and posting this info would be irresponsible.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 11:19 PM

I would really like to know...

Where are all these NHB street fights going on that people on martial arts boards are always going on and on about? Is there some kind of secret underground fight club where people are allowed to fight to the death using any techniques and weapons possible? Does the Kumite from Van Damme's _Bloodsport_ really exist, and everyone is in on it except me?

I would really like to know what world this happens in. Because in my world, most normal people do not go around getting in deathmatches. We go to our jobs, we hang out with our friends, spend time with family, watch movies, work out... and, oh yeah, we practice martial arts. If someone gets in my face and says something about my mother, I will laugh at them and walk away. If someone gets drunk and challenges me, I will say "no thanks". If someone says their martial art is better than mine, I'll just let them go on thinking that because I really could care less.

In the world I live in, I'm more likely to die from a traffic accident or the cheeseburger I ate last week than I am to get in a "street fight". I don't spend all my time living in fear of being in an inescapable situation where I have no choice but to fight or die. Don't get me wrong, if it happens, then I will kick/punch/elbow/knee/bite/scratch/gouge/pummel/run with every last ounce of my strength. But if it's my time to go, then it's my time to go and no amount of training can stop the inevitable.

Sorry for the rant, but I had to let that out. Stay healthy, work out, enjoy martial arts, love your family, be a good citizen, and stop worrying about getting in street fights.




JMHO
Posted by: BrianS

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/14/08 11:30 PM

Quote:

Brian s, are we in a bad mood? The red belt comment came from a commontater on a UFC match don;t kill the messenger, I also stated that I wasn:t sure if that was accurate info. because I wasn:t sure if the commontater was correct.Do you need a hug you seem angry!




Oh. You wrote that as YOUR words. I didn't see any quotes there. I wasn't in a bad mood, I just don't like superiority complexes over ignorance of facts, homeskillet.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 02:59 AM

Quote:


I agree that everyone does need to increase the ability to defend themselves. I think initially SD was the primary objective of original TKD. However, the founder moved that to be the primary physical goal, with the main objective to be the overall development of the person through the DO. Thus TKD written as Taekwon-Do to highlight that emphasis.





For me the process of reaching the physical goal is the tool Tae Kwon Do uses to help reach these other more lofty goals. Take away the physical standards and it falls on its face and is subject to abuses. JMHO
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 03:05 AM

Quote:

I would really like to know...

Where are all these NHB street fights going on that people on martial arts boards are always going on and on about? Is there some kind of secret underground fight club where people are allowed to fight to the death using any techniques and weapons possible? Does the Kumite from Van Damme's _Bloodsport_ really exist, and everyone is in on it except me?

JMHO




No No. People are continually being transported back to ancient military battlefields before gunpowder was invented. I though everyone knew that. LOL
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 04:35 AM

Well, I'd suggest there has always been some form of 'underground' fighting available for those who want it.

Bare-knuckle boxing at horse fairs in Ireland would be one example, as would unlicensed boxing matches of the kind Lenny MacLean was known for ("The Guvnor"). Then there's the arranged meetings between groups such as the football(hooligan) firms.

I don't imagine it would be impossible for a more lethal version to exist if you really wanted to find one.

However, I personally don't! Like you say, most normal people would never find such a thing (or honestly want to).

I think the media mentality keeps telling us that we are all going to get mugged and raped over breakfast and even MA itself uses this idea to promote SD. Even if we realise our MA practice is for other reasons, we might still feel reassured to think we can defend our family from the hordes of hoody ninjas lurking around the corner from Tescos.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 08:40 AM

Quote:

I would really like to know...

Where are all these NHB street fights going on that people on martial arts boards are always going on and on about? Is there some kind of secret underground fight club where people are allowed to fight to the death using any techniques and weapons possible? Does the Kumite from Van Damme's _Bloodsport_ really exist, and everyone is in on it except me?

I would really like to know what world this happens in. Because in my world, most normal people do not go around getting in deathmatches. We go to our jobs, we hang out with our friends, spend time with family, watch movies, work out... and, oh yeah, we practice martial arts. If someone gets in my face and says something about my mother, I will laugh at them and walk away. If someone gets drunk and challenges me, I will say "no thanks". If someone says their martial art is better than mine, I'll just let them go on thinking that because I really could care less.

In the world I live in, I'm more likely to die from a traffic accident or the cheeseburger I ate last week than I am to get in a "street fight". I don't spend all my time living in fear of being in an inescapable situation where I have no choice but to fight or die. Don't get me wrong, if it happens, then I will kick/punch/elbow/knee/bite/scratch/gouge/pummel/run with every last ounce of my strength. But if it's my time to go, then it's my time to go and no amount of training can stop the inevitable.

Sorry for the rant, but I had to let that out. Stay healthy, work out, enjoy martial arts, love your family, be a good citizen, and stop worrying about getting in street fights.





bandachagi

I to live as you do I was simply trying to explain to matxtx that a person does not need to be an MMA type practitioner to be effective at self defence.

Another point I was attempting to get across is that many people are confusing SD with fighting. I believe this can be attributed to the emergence and popularity of UFC, Pride etc. Too many people think one must be a wresler,boxer, judo, bla, bla or one is doomed and at the mercy of thugs. I was simply saying that one should not want to ground and pound an assailant because that would be fighting and not a very smart or safe self defence practice.


JMHO


Edited to fix quote.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 09:06 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Brian s, are we in a bad mood? The red belt comment came from a commentator on a UFC match don;t kill the messenger, I also stated that I wasn:t sure if that was accurate info. because I wasn:t sure if the commentator was correct.Do you need a hug you seem angry!




Oh. You wrote that as YOUR words. I didn't see any quotes there. I wasn't in a bad mood, I just don't like superiority complexes over ignorance of facts, homeskillet.







Brian S. From home skillet



What facts are you referring to? I do not recall anyone referring to anything as fact. If I am ignorant regarding MMA please fill me in and give me the facts. I will be the first to admit there is much I do not know about mma competition because I am really not interested in it other than it"s entertainment value.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 11:46 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I would really like to know...

Where are all these NHB street fights going on that people on martial arts boards are always going on and on about? Is there some kind of secret underground fight club where people are allowed to fight to the death using any techniques and weapons possible? Does the Kumite from Van Damme's _Bloodsport_ really exist, and everyone is in on it except me?

I would really like to know what world this happens in. Because in my world, most normal people do not go around getting in deathmatches. We go to our jobs, we hang out with our friends, spend time with family, watch movies, work out... and, oh yeah, we practice martial arts. If someone gets in my face and says something about my mother, I will laugh at them and walk away. If someone gets drunk and challenges me, I will say "no thanks". If someone says their martial art is better than mine, I'll just let them go on thinking that because I really could care less.

In the world I live in, I'm more likely to die from a traffic accident or the cheeseburger I ate last week than I am to get in a "street fight". I don't spend all my time living in fear of being in an inescapable situation where I have no choice but to fight or die. Don't get me wrong, if it happens, then I will kick/punch/elbow/knee/bite/scratch/gouge/pummel/run with every last ounce of my strength. But if it's my time to go, then it's my time to go and no amount of training can stop the inevitable.

Sorry for the rant, but I had to let that out. Stay healthy, work out, enjoy martial arts, love your family, be a good citizen, and stop worrying about getting in street fights.





bandachagi

I to live as you do I was simply trying to explain to matxtx that a person does not need to be an MMA type practitioner to be effective at self defence.

Another point I was attempting to get across is that many people are confusing SD with fighting. I believe this can be attributed to the emergence and popularity of UFC, Pride etc. Too many people think one must be a wresler,boxer, judo, bla, bla or one is doomed and at the mercy of thugs. I was simply saying that one should not want to ground and pound an assailant because that would be fighting and not a very smart or safe self defence practice.


JMHO


Edited to fix quote.




Agreed. IMHO, self-defense and "street fights" are two different situations. The aim of learning SD should be two-fold:

1) Do everything possible to avoid dangerous situations (walk away, run, call the cops, find a well-lit public place, stop going to seedy bars, etc).

2) If avoidance is impossible, personal safety (and the safety of those under your protection) is the first priority. Do everything possible to disable your attacker as quickly as possible and escape.

In contrast, from my observations street fighting has different aims. Usually it's to assert dominance, prove your manhood, prove your style is better than someone else's, or beat the crap out of someone who looked at your girl the wrong way. Or it's because you're involved in unsavory business (gangs, drug deals, etc). If you're in the habit of getting in street fights, than it seems to me that asking whether style X or move Y will work better on the streets is the least of your problems. You have other issues that you need to resolve before you even bring martial arts into the discussion.

Martial can help in SD, but you know what? Even if I was an expert fighter in Krav Maga, BJJ, Muay Thai, MCMAP, etc. I'd still do everything I can to avoid a fight. Training in something, anything will be better than nothing, but in this world, it's just too much of a crap shoot. Your attacker could be carrying a gun, or a knife. They might have buddies, or their buddies might have buddies. Anything could happen. There's just too many variables out of your control.

And let's no kid ourselves folks... MMA is a sport with rules just like anything else.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 01:37 PM

badachagi


Again very well said, I think that we are on the same page regarding this matter.

PS

I was also attempting to communicate that SD is an extremely serious issue and people can be seriously harmed if confrontation can not be avoided.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 05:01 PM

Quote:

MATXTX


No I say again if you are learning to fight you are correct sir. But self defence in it"s purest physical, and most desperate form is much more to the point and that point has a deliberate and quick ending some times even fatal.

People are caught up in all the mixed martial arts hype that many now days consider fighting and SD to be the same and they are not. This is why the striking arts have been taking such a beating regarding SD and personally I feel it is undeserved as long as one remembers that it is not about fighting. Your comments about the physical aspects of fighting and SD being the same are only some what correct because the techniques for ending the confrontation will be different if one is serious and not willing to let things turn into a fight. I will not go into detail and describe some that are easy, effective, and probably deadly because not all who visit this forum are responsible and posting this info would be irresponsible.




Too deadly.Yea right.

Yes I am so caught up in the hype.Thanks for making me see the light.


Under stress the techniques you do will be the ones you have trained, under similar stress.So the guy who has been in a situation a zillion times in drills at high intensitys and full contact will fair alot better.
So he will get out of the situation the same way as he has under rules with only a slight tweak if he needs to get more brutel.Its no big deal,no panic.
Yet you are going to pull of your deadly stuff when you have never been in a situation that resembles the violence and intensity of an assault because it is so deadly to train at those rates?

Yea, right.Goodnight
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 05:20 PM

Quote:

I would really like to know...

Where are all these NHB street fights going on that people on martial arts boards are always going on and on about?




What?
Who is always going about NHB fights happening?
No one has in this thread and I dont see it much except from

I said SD ,when it gets physical is now a fight.Its a no holds barred fight.A fight to survive.It has now become a fight.A fight where grappling and striking or anything can happen.
If a lion is on a gazelle ,the gazelle is not applying SD.Its fighting back for its life.

Its a fight now where anything goes.An NHB fight.
So how do you train against that?
Do NHB type drills and spars and training.

The points you then go onto make about what SD is are not pyhsical.If you read my thread I said that.SD is basicaly soft skills like awarenes,not being an idiot,not getting in situations.The moment it goes pyhsical its now a fight.
Plus you dont know how good they are untill that moment.So it makes sense to train against the best you can and other skilled NHB people.

And Von, you say your ignorant to MMA yourself.So you dont know whats going in an MMA gym to even comment about if or if not it can be applied to SD.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 10:23 PM

I gotta say the guy has a point. You tend to fight like you train and MMA trainning and fighting provides some additonal benefits to most TKD school's trainning. Now you'll probably never see me trainning in an MMA class but that's a personnal choice I'm not too diluted to realized the benefits of that form of trainning. I also believe that it is possible to get there with TKD trainning. It just takes alot longer because there are so many other things to learn and people tend to get distracted by these things. It has also been brought up by some that self defense is not the primary goal of some TKD trainning.

So I beleive there is more than one way to get to this self defense goal and I can't sit here and say which way is the best. I think that depends of on the idividual and the school not the martial art.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 10:25 PM

Quote:

Quote:

These points stand on their own merit. I only think that it is common sense to see that if a someone trained in this fashion, they will be in a position to better defend themselves than if they did nothing, as this training certainly develops certain skills & abilities.



My point was about the kicking.Its a good tool to learn kicking for olympic type sparring.Not for SD or NHB fighting.
I agree there are other benefits like fitness and evasion skills but im not talking about those.
Its a sport.If WTF olympic people go on to say/teach SD kicking is similar then the they deserve the aggrivation and to be argued with.
If a student never wants to compete its not a good kicking tool for them.Unless they find itfun and enjoyable of course.Just as long as they know.





OK, lets just say a person joins a school that ONLY does WTF Olympic sparring & nothing else. Now don't jump on me, I know schools like this are few & far between. But for arguements sake, lets just ASSUME it is a given. Now that same student prior to joining was only 15% capable of defending themselves, just based on how they were brought up. Now they learn some fancy footwork, with some fast & powerful kicks. Now another given that I will stipulate to is that these kicks were taught for the Olympic style tournaments.

I do not see how you can not concede that their ability to defend themselves has just raised from 15% to say 44%. To me that is so plain & simple. To ignore it or not see it is just not plausable.
Now that same person joins a school that concentrates solely on down & dirty street SD. There ability to defend themselves may rise from 15% to say 66 to 73%. This school has no DoBoks, no bowing, no tenets, no forms, no tournament rules etc. They only work real life SD situations. Now the person joining here would no doubt be better able to defend themselves. But they don't have all the other aspects that a traditional Art or sport can impart.
If that is what you want, cool, go for it. One should find a school that best suits what they seek.

But to say that someone does not improve SD skills in a WTF school is just intelectually missing something. JMHO

MATXTX:
Please respond to this narrow point only. Thanks
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/15/08 10:37 PM

The other thing that I always thought and maybe this is my own dilusion. That a proper Martial Art and a respectable Martial Arts instructor would not only teach you how to defend yourself but also provide you with the wisdom/mercy to guide your use of these skills.

And that takes longer than just learning the fighting skills
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 12:17 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I would really like to know...

Where are all these NHB street fights going on that people on martial arts boards are always going on and on about?




What?
Who is always going about NHB fights happening?
No one has in this thread and I dont see it much except from

I said SD ,when it gets physical is now a fight.Its a no holds barred fight.A fight to survive.It has now become a fight.A fight where grappling and striking or anything can happen.
If a lion is on a gazelle ,the gazelle is not applying SD.Its fighting back for its life.

Its a fight now where anything goes.An NHB fight.
So how do you train against that?
Do NHB type drills and spars and training.

The points you then go onto make about what SD is are not pyhsical.If you read my thread I said that.SD is basicaly soft skills like awarenes,not being an idiot,not getting in situations.The moment it goes pyhsical its now a fight.
Plus you dont know how good they are untill that moment.So it makes sense to train against the best you can and other skilled NHB people.

And Von, you say your ignorant to MMA yourself.So you dont know whats going in an MMA gym to even comment about if or if not it can be applied to SD.




In your posts, I read several instances where you appeared to be making a distinction between SD and NHB. Specifically, because you used the wording "SD or NHB". So it appeared to me that you were talking about SD scenarios and NHB scenarios. As I pointed out in my post, I think the aims of self-defense are different from a NHB street fight. The aim of SD (in my mind) should be to survive and escape. From my observation, the aim of street fights is to win.

I've been reading a few online martial arts forums for a while, and I see this discussion come up time and again. The old "but would this work in a street fight" debate. The funny thing about these discussions is that I always want to ask "What in the world are you people doing getting in street fights for?" I understand training to defend yourself, but as I mentioned, I see that as different from a street fight per se.

The reality is that unless you're a thug who goes out looking for trouble, the likelihood of most of us getting in a real street fight is not that high. People who engange in these tired discussions about street fights seem to forget that there are other reasons for training that are just as valid.

I think Olympic TKD is a fun sport that keeps me great shape. Would I use it for SD? Heck no. I think wushu forms require incredible artistry and athleticism, and I appreciate that. Do I think it prepares anyone for dealing with a mugger. No. I like watching MMA and watching good, technical grappling work. Does MMA help you dodge bullets? No. But there are other valid reasons for training in these arts. Why can't we just enjoy martial arts for what they have to offer and stop worrying about acting like thugs?
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 07:15 AM

I am not saying someone does not improve pyhsical skills, doing WTF training that could help in a SD situation.Even if its slightly.
I was saying I dont agree Olympic type sparring is a good kicking tool overall.Its a good kicking tool for olympic sparring.
And that people who teach or say it can be applied to kicking in an NHB/SD situation deserve to be argued against and get hassle.
Hence the reason WTF people get a raw deal.
If they say its fun and they enjoy it.No problem
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 07:39 AM

Quote:



In your posts, I read several instances where you appeared to be making a distinction between SD and NHB. Specifically, because you used the wording "SD or NHB". So it appeared to me that you were talking about SD scenarios and NHB scenarios. As I pointed out in my post, I think the aims of self-defense are different from a NHB street fight. The aim of SD (in my mind) should be to survive and escape. From my observation, the aim of street fights is to win.

I've been reading a few online martial arts forums for a while, and I see this discussion come up time and again. The old "but would this work in a street fight" debate. The funny thing about these discussions is that I always want to ask "What in the world are you people doing getting in street fights for?" I understand training to defend yourself, but as I mentioned, I see that as different from a street fight per se.

The reality is that unless you're a thug who goes out looking for trouble, the likelihood of most of us getting in a real street fight is not that high. People who engange in these tired discussions about street fights seem to forget that there are other reasons for training that are just as valid.

I think Olympic TKD is a fun sport that keeps me great shape. Would I use it for SD? Heck no. I think wushu forms require incredible artistry and athleticism, and I appreciate that. Do I think it prepares anyone for dealing with a mugger. No. I like watching MMA and watching good, technical grappling work. Does MMA help you dodge bullets? No. But there are other valid reasons for training in these arts. Why can't we just enjoy martial arts for what they have to offer and stop worrying about acting like thugs?




Well,like I said, a SD sitution once its pyhsical is now an NHB fight to survive.How hard is that to not understand.
How does an arm coming at you differ if its SD or fight?

The difference is in your head,like iv been saying and like youv been saying over and over.I dont know if you see that though.
What you do and how you behave and how it started and how you feel is not pyhsical.The changes take place upstairs in your bonce.Your head.

This is a forum to discuss these things though and this is the subject its about.WTF olympic sparring as a kicking tool then how NHB/MMA drills sparring can be applied to being assaulted or attacked.

How can you tell if I or anyone gets into street fights though or if I am a thug?You cant.
If you want to talk about the fun side of what you get then discuss it in a topic.Thats cool.I get fun too from training.
But so what if someone is getting into fights.I hate that attitute.Holya than thouh.(Cant spell).
All the top SD people out there are/were fighters at one time who know violence and have been around violence.They were those ''thugs''.Its better to learn from these people.Learn from the ones that can be as violent,if not more so,than the person who might assault you.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 09:28 AM

matxtx, badachagi, flynch, ITFUNITY, trevek

All very good perspectives and good discussion. Matxtx I still disagree with you regarding WTF sparing as a good kicking tool and here is why, hopefully I will be more clear and sound less confrontational in this explanation.
As you progress and work on the kicks for competing your kicks will obviously improve and no one should argue with that. Now combine the improved kicking with all the other acquired skills, SD, hands,ground, etc. and all the repetitive full contact competition one will have also learned to handle them selves under stress.

Now as far as your comments regarding the kicking in WTF as being good only for competition you are some what correct and most every WTF competitor knows this, however what we are left with is a tool chess of well trained kicks to choose from if an opportunity is presented and from all the practice you become quite good at identifying these opportunities.

Where most of the conflict regarding WTF people is concerned is that too many people do not understand that competition is not all we train for. We train like any one else does, some schools more thorough than others but most all schools train for SD. Again I say too many people do not understand this. WTF schools are judged by what people see in the Olympics and even most WTF participants are disappointed when we watch the Olympics. What I am trying to say is that WTF participating schools are just as complete or incomplete at SD as any other Tae kwon do organization. Your assumption that a competitor only trains to compete is wrong we also train to fight and more importantly to defend like anyone else does and we fight like we train. Competition is a very small part of our training. Many people never or seldom even do the competitions.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 10:40 AM

No problem.
We just disagree thats all.
I think its a crazy way to do it and I dont think you have faced a grappler and tried to spar the same way or you would in a WTF olympic spar or you would see how vunerable you are.
Are you talking theory or actual experience,because my background is TKD and I train in NHB/MMA and im bringing it over and dont find what you say as true.
Your tool chess of kicks is less usefull as you are not positioned tacticaly,stance wise or using suitable footwork to deal with a different situation other than another WTF kicker and you wont notice these oppurtunitys if you dont face them.
So I just think your better in the first place to address a person who can strike and grapple.
Yea,its better than nothing.I know that and have not said any different.

I am not discussing WTF as a whole or what else it trains.I know all schools different and do other things.
Im just addressing whether WTF olympic sparring is a good kicking tool .
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 10:47 AM

Quote:

I am not saying someone does not improve pyhsical skills, doing WTF training that could help in a SD situation.Even if its slightly.




Good, as I was getting the impression that you were. Thanks for clearing that point up.

Good, as I was getting the
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 10:48 AM

Quote:

I am not discussing WTF as a whole or what else it trains.I know all schools different and do other things.
Im just addressing whether WTF olympic sparring is a good kicking tool .




Just keep in mind, WTF is not a style. It is only a sports organization that governs the Olympic tournament rules.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 10:57 AM

MATXTX

To address the facing the grappler scenario this is addressed in our SD training. A kick will most likely not be an option so another tool will be utilized. Kicks will only be a weapon of choice when opportunity is present or from a set up of an opertunity. We do not fight like we spar just as a wrestler may not fight as they wrestle in a competition, but would you deny the wrestler gains experience from conpeting and perfects a lot of what they do from competing? of course they do and so do we.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 11:21 AM

Hey guys, why don't we stop using the term "WTF-sparring" and just use the term "Olympic sparring"?

For what its worth, I trained at a WTF club in Helsinki for a couple of months (a loooong time ago). Two sessions spring to mind. One was a wrestling session. When I asked if this was WTF syllabus the instructor said "No, but most of the street fighters in Finland do wrestling, so it is worth knowing how it works". This was before the UFC brought wrestling into the main frame.

Second session was multiple attackers, using only low-kicks. Why? "This is Finland, in the winter it isn't a good idea to use high kicks on an icy pavement" ("sidewalk" for our colonial cousins).
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/16/08 04:55 PM

Quote:

.......using only low-kicks. Why? "This is Finland, in the winter it isn't a good idea to use high kicks on an icy pavement" ("sidewalk" for our colonial cousins).




Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/17/08 03:00 PM

Quote:

MATXTX

To address the facing the grappler scenario this is addressed in our SD training. A kick will most likely not be an option so another tool will be utilized. Kicks will only be a weapon of choice when opportunity is present or from a set up of an opertunity. We do not fight like we spar just as a wrestler may not fight as they wrestle in a competition, but would you deny the wrestler gains experience from conpeting and perfects a lot of what they do from competing? of course they do and so do we.




I see your point and where your coming though it just does not work like that.Please go and try it.
Comparing it to grappling is a long shot as grappling is more realistic in the first place.They can do any kind of grappling but WTF spars can only do specific striking.
Plus a grappler still needs to grapple with the idea of striking so even grappling is better adapted to do so.
Are you now saying you adapt the sparring?
Youv not said that before and its what Iv been saying is bettter to do.The kicking needs adapting.
Now if someone does not ever want to olympic spar they should go straight to the adapted kicking and not do that type of sparring,unless of course its fun for them.
The reason WTF olympic sparrers do what they do is because they can get away with it.The new kicking style was specificaly changed to be able to olympic spar.Its about speed mainly.
I would compare it to learning to swim in a calm pool then chucking someone in the north sea and thinking they will survive.They wont.They should of replicated the north sea in the pool first.
The flaw in me saying that is you could say that you learn in the calm pool first then go onto the sea and so learning to kick olympic style is a start.Thats fair enough if you want to go that way but it would still need adapting and olympic sparring is not the only way to learn to kick.But a pool is the only way to learn to swim.
If you get me haha.

But if you overlook that,haha,you might get my point.

Anyhow if you are getting something out of it,great.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/18/08 10:44 AM

I'd say it is a major problem with both kinds of competitive sparring (Olympic and non-Olympic/Chang Hon) that you aren't allowed to grab or strike below the waist.

Don't forget, it isn't just Olympic clubs which train primarily for competition. Plenty of Chang Hon clubs do too.

How many times have we seen CH guys hopping along like a pogo stick with a wavy appendage, trying to get a good kick in?

What really bugs me is those clubs who teach competitors to slap themselves as they come in to strike and then run around waving their hands to make out they've scored. Now that IS something I'd like to see happen on the street...

"Ooops? He's still standing... but... but...!"
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/18/08 06:04 PM

It happens when people train only for competition.

Competition is supposed to be a fund way of comapring your skill level but it is not what martial arts trainning is primarily about.

Oh and those guys who run around with their hands in the air claiming to have gotten a point should get points deducted for show boating. That just makes me...well embarased.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/18/08 10:53 PM

Quote:

Oh and those guys who run around with their hands in the air claiming to have gotten a point should get points deducted for show boating. That just makes me...well embarased.




Tell me about it. It gets even more embarrassing when the person you were bragging about scoring on KOes you.

One of my instructors once said, "If you're in any dojang(or dojo for that matter) looking to train for the sole purpose of winning some trophy or plaque then shame on you."
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/18/08 11:19 PM

Quote:

Oh and those guys who run around with their hands in the air claiming to have gotten a point should get points deducted for show boating. That just makes me...well embarased.




The ITF rules allow for a warning in this instance. I would also verbally caution a player, then warn & even consider taking a point for insulting an opponent, or even disqualification for ignoring instructions.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 09:19 AM

Quote:

It happens when people train only for competition.

Competition is supposed to be a fund way of comapring your skill level but it is not what martial arts trainning is primarily about.

Oh and those guys who run around with their hands in the air claiming to have gotten a point should get points deducted for show boating. That just makes me...well embarased.




Has the Olympic Dream caused this to happen? I was reading on another forum how a father " fired" his daughter's master because his focus on competition was no longer there.
He is looking for a place that concentrates on competition training. TKD is lost when this happens. How many here remember the movie in which they cast Kurt Thomas as a Martial Artist. Teach a gymnist some kicks and bam, he's a MA. Teach them two or three kicks, no punching, no blocking, no forms, no moral culture.
These Olympic Stars are great atheletes but that does not equate to great MA's.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 11:13 AM

Quote:

Has the Olympic Dream caused this to happen?




No, I don't think we can or should blame the Olympics for everything. I am talking about stuff which was happening in non-Olympic TKD way before TKD got into the Olympics.

The whole culture of MA competition, points-sparring etc has done enough damage. Consider that you have had 'sports karate' clubs for years, focussed primarily on competition.

Why should Olympic TKD be shown as the chief villain?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 12:08 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Has the Olympic Dream caused this to happen?



No, I don't think we can or should blame the Olympics for everything. I am talking about stuff which was happening in non-Olympic TKD way before TKD got into the Olympics.

Why should Olympic TKD be shown as the chief villain?





The Olympics is only part of the problem. One must understand history to understand the development of TKD & why it has the reputation it has. Remember SK was a poor developing country whose 1st & very important export was the MAs. As it grew in popoularity many used the name TKD to show they were better than the rest, with their new high, flashy & flying kicks. What other countries can claim so many going abroad to teach a MA? None! It became so important to SK that many colleges & universities set up TKD programs with degrees in that discipline, another 1st. What other country can claim this? Again none! Nowd these are not diploma mills, but accredited academic institutions even offering doctoral degrees, much like a PhD in physical education science.

It was this making a MA into a business, instead of a way of life, that pushed TKD reputation down the toilet. The movies Karate kid & Ninja Turtles opened the door to kids whose parents didin't want blood & sweat, but good children saying yes sir! Once TKD schools became businesses, they had to be insured. With that, came rules that schools had to follow to be insured. These rules of course had another weakening effect on TKD.

As SK pushed its version of TKD as a fighting sport so different from Karate, to be different from the hated Japan, the emhasis moved to a sport, further weakening TKD. Once it gained Olympic status, this emphasis was locked in & helped to further distinguish TKD as a sport, rather than its origin as a military system of SD. JMHO
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 12:23 PM

"Self-cheering" is common in WTF competitions, but it usually doesn't go beyond pumping a fist or raising a hand when the player scores. This is probably because, since the players aren't stopped every time a point is awarded, they don't have time to showboat, otherwise their opponent will simply counter-score.

Besides being just an expression of excitement, one could make the argument that it serves a slight tactical/psychological purpose. Because the action in a WTF-rules match can be so fast, and because the scoring window is small (all the refs have to press the button within a couple of seconds of each other for it to register as a point), scoring can sometimes be just a matter of reacting to motions and sound. So sometimes if a referee hears a loud pop and sees one fighter making a motion that looks like it scored, than they will reflexively score the point.

Of course, in an ideal situation, this shouldn't happen, as the better referees generally try to be discerning instead of just reacting to a motion or sound. You could also make various arguments and counter-arguments over whether such behavior on the part of the player is manipulative (or even cheating), or simply playing smart and exploiting the nature of the game to your advantage (like ring management so the ref sees your points better than your opponents).

The WTF has no specific rule against self-cheering, although it does have a general rule that allows refs to issue penalties for "undesirable" acts or remarks. In the past, I've seen refs give warnings for excessive self-cheering. But nowadays, they pretty much let fighters do it as long as it's not over the top.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 12:29 PM

for a sport, maybe, but i really don't think so

for a MA, no way, no how

JMNSHO
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 12:48 PM

Quote:

for a sport, maybe, but i really don't think so

for a MA, no way, no how

JMNSHO




Hey, I'm not defending the behavior, just explaining it!

Personally, I'm not a big fan of it, and our master (who is very traditional frowns upon it. From a practical perspective, I think its one of those behaviors that can hurt your game because it breaks your focus and takes your attention away from your opponent, even for a second.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 03:41 PM

Quote:

So sometimes if a referee hears a loud pop and sees one fighter making a motion that looks like it scored, than they will reflexively score the point.




That's why the points fighter slaps their own shoulder as they go in, to make it sound like they've connected. The showboating then makes it seem more real.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/19/08 03:59 PM

Quote:

Quote:

So sometimes if a referee hears a loud pop and sees one fighter making a motion that looks like it scored, than they will reflexively score the point.




That's why the points fighter slaps their own shoulder as they go in, to make it sound like they've connected. The showboating then makes it seem more real.




While this is certainly conceivable, I have been to many, many WTF-rules competitions and have never seen this actually happen. I think the main reason why is because it would never work. I seriously doubt anyone could generate enough power with a hand slap on their own shoulder, thigh, etc. to make pop loud enough that would sound like a legitimate point on the hogu. Your time is better spent practicing actual scoring techniques instead of hand slaps to fake a judge out.

When WTF referees count bogus points because of a sound, it's usually from a player landing a kick on the opposing player's arm or hips. The kick would have been a legitimate point had it landed on a valid scoring area. A common occurance in WTF events is when one players holds his arms next to his/her hogu in fighting stance. The other player kicks, intending to score on the hogu, but the opponent's arms get in the way. If a judge is facing the backside of the player who is getting kicked, he/she will see a legitimate attempt at a point aimed at the chest, hear a loud pop (from the kicking player's leg hitting the receiving player's forearm pads), may possibly even see body displacement from the kick hitting the arms (and indirectly the body if the arms are close enough), and incorrectly deduce that a legitimate point was scored. Depending on the other corner judges, they too may register the point, and voila -- bogus points based on sound.

This, by the way, is one of the main reasons why Olympic-style fighters don't block unless they absolutely have to. It's better to simply evade the attack and counter when the opponent is off-balance from their missed attack, rather than block and introduce the possibility of bogus points being scored against you. Besides, top level fighters have powerful kicks. Hogus are arm pads notwithstanding, taking a kick will still hurt, so it's always better to evade unless you have nowhere else to go.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/20/08 03:41 PM

I doubt you could really do it in Olympic sparring as it is best done with a fast moving hand attack (the slapping hand is masked by the punching). It also is used mainly for head-shots, I think, so again, would be N/A with WTF.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/20/08 03:41 PM

Just for devilment and to stir the pot a little...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Iedxtg0N_KE&feature=related
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/20/08 03:55 PM

Stirring the pot eh? That TKD person, not very well conditioned or very skilled. Some good push kicks in the beginning but that is it. I have some juniors and some young adults; heck a few older guys that would have fair far better; much much better.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/20/08 03:56 PM

...and how many punches did the TKD guy throw? C'mon! Even WTF can do body punches in competition.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/20/08 04:10 PM

He started to bring his arms up but they would drop down again. Karate, especially Kyokushin , train the body to take hits. Train as you would fight.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/20/08 05:49 PM

Quote:

He started to bring his arms up but they would drop down again. Karate, especially Kyokushin , train the body to take hits. Train as you would fight.




I think Kyokushin is a great style, but that fight clip was painful to watch. It's obvious the TKD fighter was not in good shape, and not prepared for that kind of match. It's also clear from his motions that even in a WTF-rules match, he would've lost badly against a decent fighter.

Unfortunately, clips like these only further perpetuate the idea the Olympic style fighters can't use their hands. Every coach/master I've trained under has always told me to punch inside the clinch. Even if it doesn't score points, it's to your advandage to wear your opponent down and make them think twice about moving in close to stall/rest in the clinch.

Since presumably this was not a no-holds-barred deathmatch, it would be interesting to know what the rules of this particular engagement were. Since there don't appear to be any officials other than the center referee, I'd have to guess that this match was governed under Kyokushin rules, which basically means that your goal is to knock down your opponent rather than score points. Kyokushin is about attrition and survival (last man standing), whereas Olympic TKD is about scoring. Under Kyokushin rules, obviously the TKD fighter is disadvangated. Kyokushin and Olympic TKD have different aims (knock your opponent down vs. score points). As such, they train differently. TKD trains to evade and counter, so speed and foorwork are emphasized over toughening the body and absorbing as much punishment as you can. Not taking anything away from them, because I respect them a lot, but Kyokushin guys usually lumber forward and just keep hitting, ignoring whatever hits they take. That kind of fighting in a WTF match would lead to a loss, because it's about points, and the more hits you eat the more points your opponent scores.

I'd like to see this TKD fighter in Kyokushin match, since he's actually trained in the style, AND is a former US national team member:

http://www.highperformancetkd.com/main/master_suh.html

Check out his Pro-TKD match... much better example of what a good Olympic-style fighter. And yes, they even punch!
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/21/08 01:30 AM

Does anyone know which kind of Karate that guy was doing?
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/21/08 05:15 AM

Sorry to jump in again so much further down the line

Quote:

I think that it can be agreed upon that TKD is an art influenced by several martial sources.



Yes, but its primary base art was Shotokan. It also has influences from Judo & Hapkido & possibly other things depending on the exposure of the instructors at the time, though Id consider them the main 3

Quote:

What always seemed odd to me in class (this is only my experience with TAGB and some WTF classes) was that those systems didn't always seem to agree.
As I commented before on the forums, when doing SD stuff in TKD class, it felt as though I was doing two different arts i.e. one were SD was taught, the other that used sparring, patterns and line work. The two had different approaches and didn't really work well as a unit.



This is quite true and is something many are trying to recify on a number of levels:
1. By adding more appropriate applications to the patterns and patterns training.. which then translates well into..
2. Hosinsul (Self Defence) as the applications can be used in this area so the 2 training areas merge much better. (One of my students is excellant at this, last night we were filming some hosinsul for a DVD and virtually every defence he did was straight out the patterns.. I was mighty impressed that its so ingrained in him now)... anyway
3. Sparring is an area of concern, and has mainly gone the route of the only free sparring done is competition sparring (Im not including step type sparring in this).. again, this is something that is being recified by more and more schools introducing "Traditional Sparring" which has no winners/losers, allows varying contact levels and most of all allows many more techniques that you cannot use in competition (knees, sweeps, throws etc.) and this area also crosses over with 1 & 2 above, as the same applications can be used in Trad sparring if the students can pull them off.

None of the above takes away any of the "Arty" parts of TKD as curently practiced.. solo patterns can still be perfected, competition and the sparring assocaited with it can still be done.. they simply make TKD more combat orientated and thus practical for SD purposes.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/21/08 05:45 AM

Having just read through most of this thread, I'm gonna add my tuppence worth on a couple of areas discussed... hope thats okay!

First of all, the type of training a school does can often be directly contributed to its enviroment. For example, a school in a rough area of the Phillipines will concentrate more on SD than sport as its a required part of daily living, where as a school in upstate New York may concentrate more on sport as the SD part isnt required as much, and it will (maybe unintentionally) cater for what the area wants.

That said, most schools will probibly have some form of SD, again how good or poor this is is mostly related to the attitude of the instructor and how much relevance he places on it. At my school, I see it as a very, if not the most important part of training in a martial art, but it doesnt have to be the only part.. hence we also compete in competitions etc.

TKD as a whole has a large area of SD related training, though in its formulative years this wasnt pushed so much (a mistake I believe) and as such has been sitting on the back burner for years..sadly.. but its there are ready to be utilized by those that wish to. My personal belief is that in the main, TKD lost its focus (the reasons are varied) and that is where many of the arguments about the good/bad of it come from.. not the art itself, but the way the art is now focused and taught!

As someone pointed out.. very few people start a martial art for the reason of soley doing competition, most see it as some form of SD with added benefits of fitness etc. So a club should provide these things as they are the core of Martial arts after all.

On the MMA thing.. MMA is a relatively new method (not sure if its right to call it an actual system) and of course with it popularity on TV the call for it is growing, much like kick boxing did. However, again, much like kick boxing & TKD as it grows popular people start seeing the £££ or $$$ opportunity and water it down. Even near me there is an TKD school that now teaches MMA, even though the instructor has never trained with an MMA instructor.. when I asked him why he simply said its what the people want (in translation that means he can get more £££ off more people) he also added that they arnt looking to get in the ring with it or anything!!! Sounds like many of the watered down, health gym kick boxing clubs to me!!

Further still, with the MMA thing.. many of the top guys have a solid base in traditional arts. And anything new and exciting will take people away from things that have been around for a while, same was true when BJJ came to the forefront. MMA I dont belive is a fad, though I believe people wanting to do it in high numbers is and this will fade off to reasonable levels as with other arts as the MMA scene settles.

I actually hope the popularity of sport only based TKD is fading, but not for other arts, but simple for a more round form of TKD! Oh, and ITF schools are as much to blame for sport based TKD as WTF schools.. they may teach 1 step and hosinsul, but how well do they teach it compared to getting the patterns nice and compeition sparring.. the problem is that too many equate trophies with quality martial arts, rather than simply good competitors and when thats done on an association level, that problems becomes a thousand times bigger!

Stuart
Posted by: VDJ

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/21/08 08:19 AM

Excellent Post Mr. Anslow and Amen !

VDJ
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/21/08 01:45 PM

Quote:

Sparring is an area of concern, and has mainly gone the route of the only free sparring done is competition sparring (Im not including step type sparring in this).. again, this is something that is being recified by more and more schools introducing "Traditional Sparring" which has no winners/losers, allows varying contact levels and most of all allows many more techniques that you cannot use in competition (knees, sweeps, throws etc.) and this area also crosses over with 1 & 2 above, as the same applications can be used in Trad sparring if the students can pull them off. Stuart




Nice post & great point. I call it free sparring, as you are free to use any technique, then the tournament sparring is just that, preparing for a competition, depending on the rules of the upcoming event.

I think when one looks at the encylopedia, the progression of fighting becomes clear, with HooSinSul at the end & tournament sparring completely seperated.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/21/08 01:54 PM

Quote:

TKD as a whole has a large area of SD related training, though in its formulative years this wasnt pushed so much (a mistake I believe) and as such has been sitting on the back burner for years..sadly..





Yes but remember it was pushed as a SD. The focus changed when the primary world governing body changed. The JiDoKwan, who were very instrumental in the present day formation of the WTF sparring rules, was motivated strongly by its desire to be different from its Karate roots, look at their symbol/patch/crest. When this was adopted by the new governing body, the push eventually changed the focus as well.

Quote:

Oh, and ITF schools are as much to blame for sport based TKD as WTF schools.. they may teach 1 step and hosinsul, but how well do they teach it compared to getting the patterns nice and compeition sparring.. the problem is that too many equate trophies with quality martial arts, rather than simply good competitors and when thats done on an association level, that problems becomes a thousand times bigger! Stuart




Commercialsim, insurance & a basic lack of knowledge of the brillance of the syllabus & the effect of only picking what you like from the "menu" or by moving them out of they sequence or not giving them the stated importance they deserve AND require! JMHO
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/21/08 03:25 PM

Hello To all

Now that the comments are so much more balanced regarding the various tae kwan do organizations, ITF and WTF, I am really beginning to learn something and am not so defencive regarding criticism of WTF. This forum has definitely taken on a more positive and educational tone regarding our art. Thanks to all. I personally am learning a great deal from each discussion even from those I do not fully agree with.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/22/08 12:07 AM

Quote:

Does anyone know which kind of Karate that guy was doing?




Based on the way the Karate fighter was moving, it looked a lot like Kyokushin to me.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/22/08 11:46 AM

Definitely Kyokushin. Whenever I observe a kumite their movement tends to be very tense and alot less athletic than other martial artists. They, however, are walking lethal weapons. They're so well conditioned.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/22/08 12:14 PM

Quote:

Definitely Kyokushin. Whenever I observe a kumite their movement tends to be very tense and alot less athletic than other martial artists. They, however, are walking lethal weapons. They're so well conditioned.




Yes, I would agree. I think Kyokushin really is an interesting art, and aside from some superficial similarities in techniques, very different from TKD. I've noticed most Kyokushin fighters are very tough and strong. They don't really have much in the way of footwork and evasive maneuvers, but they make up for it in tenacity and ability to take punishment.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/22/08 01:31 PM

So does TKD have to move backwards to go forwards?
It seems that the people who stick up for TKD claim originaly it was good enough.It had face.Thats all been lost.
Or should it not just burts forward and take on board what it lacks?

I think anyone doing the latter has to do it out of site or risk being labelled anti-TKD.I dont think anyone with any power would do it.That seems to come down to pride.
Can TKD accept what it is and what is isnt?
Too often its made out to be more than what it is and I think those that do that loose face for TKD.
Yes,its got some grappling.But it wont cut it against another trained grappler.
Yea its got knees,elbows,low kicks.But it wont cut it against a Thai fighter as theres no tactical use or as much experience in using them.
Yea its got hands stuff but not on the level of a boxer to survive with one or know the tactics .
To me,it should either be accepted or go over to those places and improve them and bring them back.
On a low to average level TKD can hold its own although against other high skilled people I dont think it cuts it.And thats proven by there not being any TKD guys at the top.Of course you will get the odd one but they are unique and normaly using maybe about 10 percent TKD if that.

Im not being anti TKD.Its just my honest observations and what I find trying to take my TKD into to other places like NHB/MMA.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/22/08 03:36 PM

I believe the WTF/KKW fighters are much better then what you see. I watched a dozen fights on youtube of the WTF championships and 95% of the techniques used was a Roundhouse( turning) kick. The other 5% was a mix of Axe, spinning back, front, and hooking kicks. They are much more capable then what I saw. They train to the peak of physical prowess yet when the Championship comes the Taekwon-Do is limited. The fastest with the roundhouse wins the point and the one with the most points wins the championship.
Maybe the head of the KKW needs to reevaluate the scoring system where more techniques have to be implemented in the match. Minimum number of each kick per match or you are minused points. Just a thought.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/22/08 09:39 PM

Quote:

So does TKD have to move backwards to go forwards?
It seems that the people who stick up for TKD claim originaly it was good enough.It had face.Thats all been lost.
Or should it not just burts forward and take on board what it lacks?

I think anyone doing the latter has to do it out of site or risk being labelled anti-TKD.I dont think anyone with any power would do it.That seems to come down to pride.
Can TKD accept what it is and what is isnt?
Too often its made out to be more than what it is and I think those that do that loose face for TKD.
Yes,its got some grappling.But it wont cut it against another trained grappler.
Yea its got knees,elbows,low kicks.But it wont cut it against a Thai fighter as theres no tactical use or as much experience in using them.
Yea its got hands stuff but not on the level of a boxer to survive with one or know the tactics .
To me,it should either be accepted or go over to those places and improve them and bring them back.
On a low to average level TKD can hold its own although against other high skilled people I dont think it cuts it.And thats proven by there not being any TKD guys at the top.Of course you will get the odd one but they are unique and normaly using maybe about 10 percent TKD if that.

Im not being anti TKD.Its just my honest observations and what I find trying to take my TKD into to other places like NHB/MMA.




Are you saying TKD doesn't make the cut when it comes to MMA?

I don't think there's a single art that covers enough(with the exception of Jeet Kune Do, but thats not an art, its more of a philosophy) to ready yourself for a different playing field. Look at the beginning of UFC. All the stand up fighters were destroyed by the grapplers. Then later on they got wise and trained in groundfighting and takedowns, which gave them an advantage to pure grapplers(strike wise). I forgot, but wasn't there a ITFer competing in UFC or Pride? Zelg Galesic was his name. Now that guy has talent.

To put it in the way my TKD instructor does; train in all aspects of fighting as much as possible. You're not "replacing" your art, but rather supplementing it.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/22/08 10:25 PM

Quote:

I forgot, but wasn't there a ITFer competing in UFC or Pride? Zelg Galesic was his name. Now that guy has talent.





There are several MMA fighters with TKD backgrounds. The ones that immediately come to mind are Cung Le and David Loiseau. I'm pretty sure there are more.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/23/08 08:07 AM

Mark Weir is a Chang Hon practitioner and I believe holds/held the record for the fastest UFC knockout (11 seconds, I think).
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/23/08 08:10 AM

I was going to say that. And the man that took the Cage Rage middleweight title away from Weir was none other than... Zelg Galesic, another TKD fighter.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/23/08 03:09 PM

Ivan Salaverry as well as Stephen Bonnar are TKD.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/23/08 06:33 PM

The original point was, TKD is losing its face, but only because there was this "evolution" of thinking when it came to realistic fighting, most notably when stuff like MMA and UFC came into the spotlight. After MMA established itself, realistic fighting to them was all about knowledge of groundfighting, submissions and brutal striking skills.
People looked for the one of the most brutal and efficient striking arts available(which came in the form of Muay Thai), and they rejected anything that they thought were parlor tricks(flashy kicks, etc). Then people saw how vunerable TKD was on the ground. These things eventually picked at the rotting image of TKD.
So what do we do to prevent further damage to our art? Do we revise our syllabus? Technique? The answer, in my opinion(and I say this because it's open for debates) is no. Everything we needed to know to become sufficient fighters was already laid down for us. Gen. Choi had many talented fighters that contributed to the style of TKD. I'm pretty sure ITFunity said this once too.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/23/08 08:30 PM

Slow down there and back the bus up. People saw how vulnerable TKD was on the ground? So Karate or Muay Thai or any of the other arts didn't have the same problems? And do you really think that much attention was given to TKD?

Agreed, NOTHING has to be done to prevent further damage to TKD because of MMA and the UFC. What does need to happen is that people teaching need to teach ALL of TKD and not just bits and pieces. AND I don't think it has anything to do with General Choi; many were involved at that time and prior to his time.

TKD is what it is. Karate is what it is. BJJ is what it is. Judo is what it is. Every martial art is what it is and that is their identity; good or bad or indifferent. None of these have to change to save grace as long as they are being trained as they should be. They don't have to be compared to MMA because MMA is what it is. Not everybody wants to train MMA so they don't have to. Think of it like a car with MMA being a decked out power machine with all of the bells and whistles. Well guess what, not everybody wants to drive it. Some want something practical and gas efficient. Some want a smaller vehicle. Martial arts are the same way and we have options of what we want to purchase because that is what we are doing, purchasing a commodity and it is buyer beware.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/23/08 11:46 PM

Quote:

So what do we do to prevent further damage to our art? Do we revise our syllabus? Technique? The answer, in my opinion(and I say this because it's open for debates) is no. Everything we needed to know to become sufficient fighters was already laid down for us. Gen. Choi had many talented fighters that contributed to the style of TKD. I'm pretty sure ITFunity said this once too.




EvenRats:
From watching the video you provided earlier, it is clear that you are a student of the ITF. You, thru your training have little in common with what most people consider TKD. The largest number of students who train in TKD do some form of Korean Karate or independent TKD. The next biggest group is those who follow the WTF rules of sparring. The smallest group is the ITF. So just by the raw numbers, try not to mix yourself up with the broad name of TKD. Most use it as an umbrella name, with no real connection to many others practicing only something that shares a name.

TKD is NOT losing popularity. It is the largest MA with the most students, practiced in the most countries around the world. A lot of that credit goes to the WTF, the SK govt & the fact that it is an Olympic sport.

TKD has gained a rather well earned poor reputation among forums such as this & those students who seek a real tuff MA that is SD based. I think the commericalization of the MAs in general has caused this. The plain & simple reason that TKD shares a large part of the blame, is because of the raw numbers. More commericalism, the more TKD students fit the bill, because there are simply more TKD students than any other MA. The commericalism is also a reason the MMAs have grown in popularity. There always has been & probably always will be a segment that will seek real SD training. Commerical MA schools no longer provided it, so MMA schools started to fill the void. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/23/08 11:51 PM

Quote:

1) AND I don't think it has anything to do with General Choi; many were involved at that time and prior to his time.

2) TKD is what it is. Karate is what it is. BJJ is what it is. Judo is what it is.




1) Sorry, there really was no TKD prior to Gen Choi. He named it in 1955.

2) This usage implies that you are using TKD as an umbrella name. Am I understanding you correctly?
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 11:25 AM

Interesting conversation"

Is it possible that TKD is losing it's popularity mostly among it's own practitioners?
Is there really that many of us that feel we could not hold our own against an ave. MMA or grappler? because this is what it really is about for many on this forum. I personally feel that most persons with average TKD skill I train with would fair just fine against these persons in real SD, but probably not so well in one of their competitions using their rule sets, as they would not do so well in a WTF competition using our rules.
I am probably going to catch it for these comments from MMA enthusiasts but I really am sincere in this observation and train with very competent TKD people as do many of you.

This adds to my confusion when I here some of the negatives regarding TKD and its practicality. Is there room for improvement you bet, but as a training MA I see many MMA competitors and matches that are less than deserving just as with any other competition and I am only seeing there best competitors not some ave. MMA joe.
My gut tells me that many of us have been distracted by the remarkable job MMA has done in promoting it;s self and are comparing our skills to the efficiency of competing in the octagon. Yes MMA rules allow for more realistic fighting during competition but even many of these competitors would not react the same to a SD situation as they do in the ring,( this would be the smart thing) because they possess many more effective options and techniques, just as we do!
To summarize I just feel that many of my fellow TKD people are for getting the many skills, techniques, and situations that we train for and are reducing our selves to the octagon and calling that the real deal.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 12:06 PM

I actually wonder if it wouldn't be a good think for TKD to lose its popularity, shed its commercial image and to go back to basics with a small number of people training in a 'purer' way.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 01:48 PM

Quote:

I actually wonder if it wouldn't be a good think for TKD to lose its popularity, shed its commercial image and to go back to basics with a small number of people training in a 'purer' way.




Trevek:


In a funny way you just answered my stated question, Is it possible that TKD is losing it"s popularity among it"s own practitioners?
TKD continues to be the number 1 MA and continues to grow but is constantly being picked apart mostly by us, the people that train in it. We on some unconscious level have begun to question our skills based on octagon competition. Not that one should not look inward but we seem to be the main ones questing our skills not others. The only way many of us will feel adequate is if we end up with some raining champ in the UFC! Personaly in my younger years would ground and pound in a fight, most people do it is almost or is instinctual. I joined MA to become more than a ground and pound kind of guy and have accomplished this and much more from TKD.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 02:06 PM

von, it's not so much a matter of TKD losing popularity amongst its (sincere) practitioners, it is more a worry that the over commercialisation of our beloved art leads to both a general watering down and also to a dismissal of it as a practical MA.

I don't think as many of us are in crisis due to the Octagon. As I mentioned once, in Finland I found TKD guys training in wrestling before UFC had taken a hold (I think the first one had just happened) because of the reality of the need.

Likewise, somewhere like Eastern Europe would also be a place where wrestling was more likely to be found on the street before UFC. It's interesting that one of the biggest stars of Polish MMA is an ITF fighter who sometimes wears his dobok in the ring.

By and large, I don't think the over-commercialised McDojang has taken such a hold in Europe as it has in USA (YET!!!!) and my experiences training across Europe have always been positive. But I would hate to one day find that my training (which has never been exactly 'extreme') is one day replaced by politically-correct, Tae-Kwon-Robics, where money and spandex replaces martial spirit.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 02:18 PM

Trevek

Fair enough, just want you to know that I was not referring to you personally regarding MMA, I was responding to many posts on fighting arts forum. I see what you are talking about regarding commercialization but personally have not witnessed it to the degree as you have.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 02:21 PM

Quote:

Are you saying TKD doesn't make the cut when it comes to MMA?





Against another skilled person who is combining grappling and striking tacticaly it does not do well.Thats what Im saying.
MMA/NHB, UFC, forgett all those phrases as they bring up sport things.These just happen to be where you can safely test your stuff against the best.
There are sly digs at this all the time.''I dont want to fight in the octogan''.
''I wont meet an MMA person on 'da street''.
''Not everyone wants to ground and pound'' bla bla.

How do you know who you will meet or how good they are?You dont.Or whats going to happen in a chaotic,violent assault.So does it not make sense,and is more challenging and fun,to train with the best in mind?
So the ultimate test for a martial artist,unarmed is to face someone who tacicaly combines striking and grappling is it not?
What else is there.

My point is that TKD looses face when people make out it can hold its own in that enviroment.When people say TKD cant be done within rules because its for killing or something.Things like that.Its plain embarrasing.If you want to risk it thats fine.Want to just do TKD thats fine.But the truth has got to be there and in perspective though or TKD loses face.
Yes,technique wise they can powerfull.But you need to get position to do them and use them tacticaly,set them up,still be defensive etc etc.Theres non of this which takes into account facing a grappler who can strike.

People have been mentioned who have TKD backgrounds.Good.Lets get some footage up and see what they are doing.How are they using it?What are they using?What level of opponents are they facing?What styles are they doing good against or bad against?
Are they using TKD grappling?
Not as a negative thing,as a study.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 02:26 PM

Quote:

Quote:

1) AND I don't think it has anything to do with General Choi; many were involved at that time and prior to his time.

2) TKD is what it is. Karate is what it is. BJJ is what it is. Judo is what it is.




1) Sorry, there really was no TKD prior to Gen Choi. He named it in 1955.

2) This usage implies that you are using TKD as an umbrella name. Am I understanding you correctly?





1. There is no confusion; General Choi was involved in the naming of Taekwondo but we are not foolish enough to believe that what much of what Taekwondo is his creation; far from it. The Koreans both North and South were practicing martial arts both from their culture as well as from Japan far before Choi was even born. That Choi decided to put it in a little box and label doesn't take from these facts.

People date the origins of Taekwondo from a long time ago and though there may be some confusion and national pride, Choi is in my opinion "new" to this.

Forgive me if I offend you but I have found many ITF people treat Choi like some patron saint. They stick him high on some grand pedestal and believe his writings to be much like the bible; thus making him their god of a sort. I don't see him as anything but a man, one that I owe nothing to nor acknowledge any more then a person in history; one of many who were involved in martial arts. Perhaps if I was ITF, perhaps if I cared about history instead of application then he may mean more to me but he doesn't and so when people throw his name out like it is suppose to mean something, it means nothing to me then throwing out any other random name. I suspect many ITF people will take offense to that but so be it; they must understand that he is not all important to everybody.

2. I personal get sick and tired of people trying to divisionalize TKD holding one faction at a greater advantage then the other; I think each has equal merit and one is not better then the other if taught correctly. I can guarantee that there are many forms of Karate following different practices and I would dare say that other martial arts are the same. However yes, I am using the name Taekwondo as an umbrella because after all we are a kicking art; or seen more as a kicking art.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 02:54 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Are you saying TKD doesn't make the cut when it comes to MMA?





Against another skilled person who is combining grappling and striking tacticaly it does not do well.Thats what Im saying.
MMA/NHB, UFC, forgett all those phrases as they bring up sport things.These just happen to be where you can safely test your stuff against the best.
There are sly digs at this all the time.''I dont want to fight in the octogan''.
''I wont meet an MMA person on 'da street''.
''Not everyone wants to ground and pound'' bla bla.

How do you know who you will meet or how good they are?You dont.Or whats going to happen in a chaotic,violent assault.So does it not make sense,and is more challenging and fun,to train with the best in mind?
So the ultimate test for a martial artist,unarmed is to face someone who tacicaly combines striking and grappling is it not?
What else is there.

My point is that TKD looses face when people make out it can hold its own in that enviroment.When people say TKD cant be done within rules because its for killing or something.Things like that.Its plain embarrasing.If you want to risk it thats fine.Want to just do TKD thats fine.But the truth has got to be there and in perspective though or TKD loses face.
Yes,technique wise they can powerfull.But you need to get position to do them and use them tacticaly,set them up,still be defensive etc etc.Theres non of this which takes into account facing a grappler who can strike.

People have been mentioned who have TKD backgrounds.Good.Lets get some footage up and see what they are doing.How are they using it?What are they using?What level of opponents are they facing?What styles are they doing good against or bad against?
Are they using TKD grappling?
Not as a negative thing,as a study.




matxtx

On some level I agree with you but I must ask the question, does your TKD school not train for grapple type situations and did you have to seek this training outside of TKD? This is where I have bumped heads with you before because we train for grappling and against it too. So is it all of TKD or is it just certain schools that you refer to when you say TKD does not match up.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 04:15 PM

von, it's cool. I think what the MMA 'craze' has done is made TKD people reassess how they should practice their art (which I think is what you also suggest). If nothing else, with all the people who are now embracing MMA, BJJ etc we are more likely (in theory if not actuality)to encounter wrestling than before. More to the point, more likely to encounter people who have trained to take down strikers.

If that, as you suggest, makes a TKDist reconsider how they train then it is good.
Posted by: Fruitloopy

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 04:51 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

1) AND I don't think it has anything to do with General Choi; many were involved at that time and prior to his time.

2) TKD is what it is. Karate is what it is. BJJ is what it is. Judo is what it is.




1) Sorry, there really was no TKD prior to Gen Choi. He named it in 1955.

2) This usage implies that you are using TKD as an umbrella name. Am I understanding you correctly?





1. There is no confusion; General Choi was involved in the naming of Taekwondo but we are not foolish enough to believe that what much of what Taekwondo is his creation; far from it. The Koreans both North and South were practicing martial arts both from their culture as well as from Japan far before Choi was even born. That Choi decided to put it in a little box and label doesn't take from these facts.

People date the origins of Taekwondo from a long time ago and though there may be some confusion and national pride, Choi is in my opinion "new" to this.

Forgive me if I offend you but I have found many ITF people treat Choi like some patron saint. They stick him high on some grand pedestal and believe his writings to be much like the bible; thus making him their god of a sort. I don't see him as anything but a man, one that I owe nothing to nor acknowledge any more then a person in history; one of many who were involved in martial arts. Perhaps if I was ITF, perhaps if I cared about history instead of application then he may mean more to me but he doesn't and so when people throw his name out like it is suppose to mean something, it means nothing to me then throwing out any other random name. I suspect many ITF people will take offense to that but so be it; they must understand that he is not all important to everybody.

2. I personal get sick and tired of people trying to divisionalize TKD holding one faction at a greater advantage then the other; I think each has equal merit and one is not better then the other if taught correctly. I can guarantee that there are many forms of Karate following different practices and I would dare say that other martial arts are the same. However yes, I am using the name Taekwondo as an umbrella because after all we are a kicking art; or seen more as a kicking art.



Nice post.


Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 06:42 PM

Quote:

von, it's cool. I think what the MMA 'craze' has done is made TKD people reassess how they should practice their art (which I think is what you also suggest). If nothing else, with all the people who are now embracing MMA, BJJ etc we are more likely (in theory if not actuality)to encounter wrestling than before. More to the point, more likely to encounter people who have trained to take down strikers.

If that, as you suggest, makes a TKDist reconsider how they train then it is good.




Agree, and second.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 08:24 PM

IMHO when it comes to fighters from different disciplines facing each other, the winner will simply be the tougher fighter. Now the only scientific way to measure which Art is better is to control for all the variables which has never been done.

There are many reasons why TKD has the poor reputation it does, namely the the ignoring history of why it was developed, the fact that it was a big & early export of a poor developing country, its later emphasis as a sport, the commercialism, insurance regulations, emphasis on child development/babysitting & a host country that has numerous colleges offering degree programs up to & including a PhD. very little will change. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 08:28 PM

Quote:

2. I personal get sick and tired of people trying to divisionalize TKD holding one faction at a greater advantage then the other; I think each has equal merit and one is not better then the other if taught correctly. I can guarantee that there are many forms of Karate following different practices and I would dare say that other martial arts are the same. However yes, I am using the name Taekwondo as an umbrella because after all we are a kicking art; or seen more as a kicking art.




Umbrella name, thats cool. FYI, the ITF is not considered a kicking art, as approxiamtely 2/3rds of each's techniques are related to the hands. Do you have a guess or estimate on what % of feet you emphasize?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 08:31 PM

Quote:

2. I personal get sick and tired of people trying to divisionalize TKD holding one faction at a greater advantage then the other;




Just to set the record straight, my comment was not meant in a way to divide TKD & in fact I am on record in this forum never stating such & furthermore have repeatedly posted that I make no claims that any one way is better than another, nor is one Art or school better than the next.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 08:38 PM

Quote:

Perhaps if I was ITF, perhaps if I cared about history instead of application then he may mean more to me but he doesn't and so when people throw his name out like it is suppose to mean something, it means nothing to me then throwing out any other random name.




Well if you cared about history, maybe you would have a little more insight to how & why TKD is felt by some to be losing its face/popularity, which is the subject of this thread. Some may have some information to see where TKD was & compare it to where it is today. Understanding that road provides some answers to how we got here & how it may be sorted out. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 09:08 PM

Quote:

1. There is no confusion; General Choi was involved in the naming of Taekwondo but we are not foolish enough to believe that what much of what Taekwondo is his creation; far from it. The Koreans both North and South were practicing martial arts both from their culture as well as from Japan far before Choi was even born. That Choi decided to put it in a little box and label doesn't take from these facts.





You are most correct in your claim that Korea had fighting arts well before Ambassador Choi was born. That goes without saying, as all countries can & many do make similiar claims. However I challenge you or anyone else to demonstrate a link, direct or otherwise, to what is now being done in Korea from 1945 to present, backed up by academic research. None exists.



Quote:

People date the origins of Taekwondo from a long time ago and though there may be some confusion and national pride, Choi is in my opinion "new" to this.





People, what people? Can you name them? Can you cite their research that supports this claim?
Now lets clear something up, you use TKD as an umbrella term. Others use it as an Art whose principal founder was Ambassador Choi, others look at it as a Martial Sport, even an Olympic sport. I find no problem with any usage of the name.

What is beyond refute is that the he named it. He was not just simply "involved" in it, as he came up with the name. It is also clear that few if any, even used the name, till 1965, the 1972, 1973 & finally 1978. The only ones using it from the start, were Choi & his followers, namely the Oh Do Kwan & those from the Chung Do Kwan that followed him. Now he did, along with many talented students of various MAs, did systemize a style of MA, that was spread to countless Koreans & then countless others around the world, due to their efforts, long before any others were even using the name.


Quote:

Forgive me if I offend you but I have found many ITF people treat Choi like some patron saint. They stick him high on some grand pedestal and believe his writings to be much like the bible; thus making him their god of a sort. I don't see him as anything but a man, one that I owe nothing to nor acknowledge any more then a person in history; one of many who were involved in martial arts. Perhaps if I was ITF, perhaps if I cared about history instead of application then he may mean more to me but he doesn't and so when people throw his name out like it is suppose to mean something, it means nothing to me then throwing out any other random name. I suspect many ITF people will take offense to that but so be it; they must understand that he is not all important to everybody.




Sir, you do not offend me. It would really take a lot more than an opposing view point on an internet discussion forum. Especially from someone who admits to not caring about history. Don't be silly!

I also do not look to him as a saint, nor put him on a pedestal, nor do I equate his writings to any bible or holybook, nor do I consider him some sort of a g-d. He is just a man. One who because of Korean geo-politics, was written out of history. One who, along with Dr. Kim Un Yong, did more to develop, promote & spread a wonderful & popular KMA around the world. I can think of no 2 other people who were more instrumental than they were. Am I missing someone else?
Please do share with me.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 09:24 PM

Quote:

Against another skilled person who is combining grappling and striking tacticaly it does not do well.Thats what Im saying.
MMA/NHB, UFC, forgett all those phrases as they bring up sport things.These just happen to be where you can safely test your stuff against the best.
There are sly digs at this all the time.''I dont want to fight in the octogan''.
''I wont meet an MMA person on 'da street''.
''Not everyone wants to ground and pound'' bla bla.

How do you know who you will meet or how good they are?You dont.Or whats going to happen in a chaotic,violent assault.So does it not make sense,and is more challenging and fun,to train with the best in mind?
So the ultimate test for a martial artist,unarmed is to face someone who tacicaly combines striking and grappling is it not?
What else is there.

My point is that TKD looses face when people make out it can hold its own in that enviroment.When people say TKD cant be done within rules because its for killing or something.Things like that.Its plain embarrasing.If you want to risk it thats fine.Want to just do TKD thats fine.But the truth has got to be there and in perspective though or TKD loses face.
Yes,technique wise they can powerfull.But you need to get position to do them and use them tacticaly,set them up,still be defensive etc etc.Theres non of this which takes into account facing a grappler who can strike.

People have been mentioned who have TKD backgrounds.Good.Lets get some footage up and see what they are doing.How are they using it?What are they using?What level of opponents are they facing?What styles are they doing good against or bad against?
Are they using TKD grappling?
Not as a negative thing,as a study.




If you want to do MMA, thats cool, it's your own thing. But you have to keep in mind that TKD(I'll use it sparingly because of what ITFunity told me) was created in a time where the concept of MMA wasn't mainstream or rarely heard of.
Can the same not be said about any other art? Muay Thai, Karate, etc? How does that differ from the concept of TKD anyway? What if you train in either of those arts and misfortunately meet an MMA sportsman on the streets? Would the outcome be any different?
What if you train MMA too? But somehow the other guy beats you at your own game(on the streets)? It all boils down to the fighter and his/her training. I'm merely summarizing what I've said earlier. Supplement your training. Acknowledge your flaws. No art is ever complete.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 09:38 PM

Quote:

But you have to keep in mind that TKD(I'll use it sparingly because of what ITFunity told me) was created in a time where the concept of MMA wasn't mainstream or rarely heard of.




Actually EvenRats, I said TK-D can be considered a modern MMA, that was developed in the Korean military by fighters from all kinds of systems for SD. Of course back then, 1950 & 60s, there was no UFC or the many cage matches that are popular today.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 10:02 PM

Quote:


Forgive me if I offend you but I have found many ITF people treat Choi like some patron saint. They stick him high on some grand pedestal and believe his writings to be much like the bible; thus making him their god of a sort. I don't see him as anything but a man, one that I owe nothing to nor acknowledge any more then a person in history; one of many who were involved in martial arts. Perhaps if I was ITF, perhaps if I cared about history instead of application then he may mean more to me but he doesn't and so when people throw his name out like it is suppose to mean something, it means nothing to me then throwing out any other random name. I suspect many ITF people will take offense to that but so be it; they must understand that he is not all important to everybody.




Definitely not offended. People can only take offense to words devoid of logic, common sense and articulation.

I wouldn't say many ITF practitioners place Gen. Choi on some grand pedestal. I'd say it go on the lines of acknowledging that he contributed much to the development and establishment of the ITF whilst respecting him. I've never met a person who threw his name out and expected people to pay respect to him.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/24/08 10:16 PM

Quote:

Actually EvenRats, I said TK-D can be considered a modern MMA, that was developed in the Korean military by fighters from all kinds of systems for SD. Of course back then, 1950 & 60s, there was no UFC or the many cage matches that are popular today.




ITFunity, I meant "TKD" being used as an umbrella term. And you're right, "Taekwon-do" can be considered modern MMA. But theres a general lack of instructors who actually go through the entire cirriculum and in-depth nature of fighting systems such as groundfighting and submissions.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 01:32 AM

Quote:

Quote:

2. I personal get sick and tired of people trying to divisionalize TKD holding one faction at a greater advantage then the other; I think each has equal merit and one is not better then the other if taught correctly. I can guarantee that there are many forms of Karate following different practices and I would dare say that other martial arts are the same. However yes, I am using the name Taekwondo as an umbrella because after all we are a kicking art; or seen more as a kicking art.




Umbrella name, thats cool. FYI, the ITF is not considered a kicking art, as approxiamtely 2/3rds of each's techniques are related to the hands. Do you have a guess or estimate on what % of feet you emphasize?




Good questions and one I've not really given much thought to so will now in this post. To be honest, we have kicking days and we have punching days not to mention days we focus on grappling, throwing, falling, self defense techniques, patterns, one-steps, breaking, etc. I cannot say that we emphasize any more on feet then hands and perhaps do more with our hands as well.

Remember, it is mostly the outsiders that see TKD as a kicking art and rightly or wrongly so due to what they see from the Olympics and such. And unfortunately there are schools that emphasize this; probably more then we'd like to admit. What it is though is that TKD's kicking stands out regardless of how much hands are used. The kicking of TKD (umbrella again) is fast and can be very flashy and what is remembered and expected; hence a kicking art.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 01:36 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Perhaps if I was ITF, perhaps if I cared about history instead of application then he may mean more to me but he doesn't and so when people throw his name out like it is suppose to mean something, it means nothing to me then throwing out any other random name.




Well if you cared about history, maybe you would have a little more insight to how & why TKD is felt by some to be losing its face/popularity, which is the subject of this thread. Some may have some information to see where TKD was & compare it to where it is today. Understanding that road provides some answers to how we got here & how it may be sorted out. JMHO




Unfortunately ITF I think if you put the people that knew the history on one side and those that new very little to none on the other side; the side with the knowledge would be greatly out numbered. And I don't think knowing the history changes or makes me better understand the context of this thread.

I don't need to know history to use the application. Knowing the history doesn't make the application better. Repeatedly training the application makes the application better and that is what I train for. I don't need to know the history of the kick/punch I just want to know how to kick/punch; and people were kicking and punching since the dawn of time and they did not need to know the history of it they just had to make sure it worked.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 01:45 AM

I'm glad that nobody takes offense to my comments as that is just my personal opinion and each is entitled to it. For the records, if I received the training from my same Instructor who taught the exact same curriculum, I couldn't care a less if it was called TKD or called joe's martial arts; remember, my training doesn't seem to fit the majority of TKD schools. Yes we are influenced heavily by TKD and I like a lot of what it can teach however I've seen more and more it actually comes down to "who" is teaching it that makes the difference.

I also agree with an earlier comment of ITF, TKD is not losing its popularity as it is probably the most taught martial art there is. Is it losing face, to some maybe but to the majority that doesn't know better, I highly doubt it. And if it is then that will be for the better as then perhaps those teaching will look at what they are teaching and start teaching all of it; that can only be a positive.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 02:56 AM

Quote:

I've never met a person who threw his name out and expected people to pay respect to him.




Stick around... you will!
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 03:24 AM

Quote:

Against another skilled person who is combining grappling and striking tacticaly it does not do well.Thats what Im saying.



One of the things people forget is that TKD & its parent art Karate were really designed to defend against non-trained people. That said, TKD, like other arts has to evolve to deal with the situations you present here, as well as other modern things. The problem is, many dont want TKD to evolve and if it does, theres suddenly shouting that its no longer TKD!!

Quote:

MMA/NHB, UFC, forgett all those phrases as they bring up sport things.These just happen to be where you can safely test your stuff against the best.



Actually, I think TKD missed out a bit there, as like the Gracies did to make their system famous - going round and fighting people - TKD done this also, but it was more formalised and after the demo and video wasnt big then to capture it all. For those who dont know, to gain greater popularity TKD toured the world doing demo's (50's/60's), after the demo, any member of the demo squad was open to be challenged and they often were, from what Ive heard they rarely lost. Whats more impressive is that it was just a couple of fighters trained up for this, but ANY of the demo squad members and when you consider they were in countries like Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia etc. it shows TKD was a decent art and could stand toe to toe with any other arts of the time.


Quote:

How do you know who you will meet or how good they are?You dont.



Thats exactly why all clubs should be teaching an suitable self-protection system. However, like I said above and others have pointed out, TKD needs to cover any short comings and evolve with the times. BJJ had to do this for the octagon, as have wrestlers and everyone else, the same is required for fighting outside of it.


Quote:

Are they using TKD grappling?



Id guess as much as a BJJ guy uses BJJ punching & kicking

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 03:24 AM

Quote:

If that, as you suggest, makes a TKDist reconsider how they train then it is good.




Quite agree


Stuart
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 12:13 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Actually EvenRats, I said TK-D can be considered a modern MMA, that was developed in the Korean military by fighters from all kinds of systems for SD. Of course back then, 1950 & 60s, there was no UFC or the many cage matches that are popular today.



ITFunity, I meant "TKD" being used as an umbrella term. And you're right, "Taekwon-do" can be considered modern MMA. But theres a general lack of instructors who actually go through the entire cirriculum and in-depth nature of fighting systems such as groundfighting and submissions.




Sorry, no problem!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 12:18 PM

Quote:

Good questions and one I've not really given much thought to so will now in this post. I cannot say that we emphasize any more on feet then hands and perhaps do more with our hands as well.

Remember, it is mostly the outsiders that see TKD as a kicking art and rightly or wrongly so due to what they see from the Olympics and such. And unfortunately there are schools that emphasize this; probably more then we'd like to admit. What it is though is that TKD's kicking stands out regardless of how much hands are used. The kicking of TKD (umbrella again) is fast and can be very flashy and what is remembered and expected; hence a kicking art.




Fair enuf! Now if you knew history more or were interested in how history got us to where we are & why, then you may have more info on this. It was primarily the JiDo Kwan who were responsible for much of what eventually became the present day Olympic rules. Note the JiDo Kwan, not the Oh Do Kwan.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 12:27 PM

Quote:

Unfortunately ITF I think if you put the people that knew the history on one side and those that new very little to none on the other side; the side with the knowledge would be greatly out numbered. And I don't think knowing the history changes or makes me better understand the context of this thread.




Sorry you don't see it. I can only try to explain it, I can't comprehend it for you. Sorry I can't do a better job of communicating it.
However having knowledge in my book, is not a bad thing, even if others don't have it or they are far outweighed those that don't.

Quote:

I don't need to know history to use the application. Knowing the history doesn't make the application better. Repeatedly training the application makes the application better and that is what I train for. I don't need to know the history of the kick/punch I just want to know how to kick/punch; and people were kicking and punching since the dawn of time and they did not need to know the history of it they just had to make sure it worked.




You are 100% right. However, I never said it did, not did I ever relay anything that could be remotely thought of as to do same.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 12:35 PM

Quote:

I'm glad that nobody takes offense to my comments as that is just my personal opinion and each is entitled to it. For the records, if I received the training from my same Instructor who taught the exact same curriculum, I couldn't care a less if it was called TKD or called joe's martial arts; remember, my training doesn't seem to fit the majority of TKD schools. Yes we are influenced heavily by TKD and I like a lot of what it can teach however I've seen more and more it actually comes down to "who" is teaching it that makes the difference.




It sounds like you have a great instructor & are very happy. It also seems like your school emphasizes, among other things, SD. Unfortuantely that is not the same with many schools calling themselves TKD. I have trained with the founder directly, many of his top students, read his books so many times, that some of it is created to memory. In my longtime pursuit to learn my Art, I have been to many parts of the world. I can tell you that TKD does deserve its poor reputation, from my limited experiences. Also there are many ITF schools & those calling themselves ITF schools that have contributed to this as well.

Quote:

I also agree with an earlier comment of ITF, TKD is not losing its popularity as it is probably the most taught martial art there is. Is it losing face, to some maybe but to the majority that doesn't know better, I highly doubt it. And if it is then that will be for the better as then perhaps those teaching will look at what they are teaching and start teaching all of it; that can only be a positive.


Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 12:39 PM

Quote:

One of the things people forget is that TKD & its parent art Karate were really designed to defend against non-trained people. Stuart




It was designed as a military SD system, obviously to be used against other trained militaries, I would assume.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 12:44 PM

Quote:

For those who dont know, to gain greater popularity TKD toured the world doing demo's (50's/60's), after the demo, any member of the demo squad was open to be challenged and they often were, from what Ive heard they rarely lost. Whats more impressive is that it was just a couple of fighters trained up for this, but ANY of the demo squad members and when you consider they were in countries like Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia etc. it shows TKD was a decent art and could stand toe to toe with any other arts of the time. Stuart




This did occur, but it was the 60s & 70s, not the 50s. In the 50s, 1959 to be exact, they toured Vietnam & Taiwan, the 1st time ever TKD was exhibited abroad.

The challenge matches were often done by now GM kong Yong Il, who is reported to have gone 127-0. I challenged him to the 128th fight, but he refused! He probably knew he would destroy me! I quickly claimed the win by default!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 12:47 PM

Quote:

Quote:

If that, as you suggest, makes a TKDist reconsider how they train then it is good.



Quite agree Stuart




Of course. Realism in your training can only open your eyes
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 01:23 PM

Quote:

matxtx

On some level I agree with you but I must ask the question, does your TKD school not train for grapple type situations and did you have to seek this training outside of TKD? This is where I have bumped heads with you before because we train for grappling and against it too. So is it all of TKD or is it just certain schools that you refer to when you say TKD does not match up.




There is some grappling I have been shown In TKD though its mainly throws and sweeps,some locks.Its not stuff which will bother another good grappler.
If you are doing good grappling then Im certain its been incorporated from outside.Tkd does not contain groundwork,pummeling,hand fighting etc etc or tactics and strategy against a grappler or a grappler that can strike.

Tickling chins not bumping heads haha.Im being straight down the line,trying to be unbiased to either side to give a veiw why TKD looses face and what Iv found.
Its my thing my journey on how to incorporate TKD well to face a skilled grappler that can strike.Or stiker that can grapple.
If anyone else is doing it ,finding different things Id like to know.Clips,tactics.Whatever.Im open to being to being wrong or not getting it right.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 01:30 PM

GM Park Jong Soo has a video set available and on one DVD he demonstrates how a TKD person would handle a grapler,kickboxer, etc. I haven't gotten it yet and was wondering if anyone here has and what do they think of it?
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 01:43 PM

Quote:

In my longtime pursuit to learn my Art, I have been to many parts of the world. I can tell you that TKD does deserve its poor reputation, from my limited experiences. Also there are many ITF schools & those calling themselves ITF schools that have contributed to this as well.




I would totally agree with you. The ITF school I recently visited from an invite also relayed such thing and also spoke of a school in my city that was affiliated with them however they cut their ties due to not following the set out program and therefore did not want their name to be smudged.

I know of both ITF, WTF and independent schools that would fall into the poor category. It is unfortunate however this is not only Taekwondo and other martial arts have the same problems. But as you pointed out earlier, because of the popularity of TKD it is more readily seen.

Good for you that you've been to a lot of places to train. This is a positive that I always see and am trying to do more of.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 02:19 PM

Quote:

GM Park Jong Soo has a video set available and on one DVD he demonstrates how a TKD person would handle a grapler,kickboxer, etc. I haven't gotten it yet and was wondering if anyone here has and what do they think of it?




I have it. It contains 10 DVDs. Do you know which one it is on?
I have only watched a couple so far, thise related to history & interviews.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 03:00 PM

Quote:

Quote:

1. There is no confusion; General Choi was involved in the naming of Taekwondo but we are not foolish enough to believe that what much of what Taekwondo is his creation; far from it. The Koreans both North and South were practicing martial arts both from their culture as well as from Japan far before Choi was even born. That Choi decided to put it in a little box and label doesn't take from these facts.



You are most correct in your claim that Korea had fighting arts well before Ambassador Choi was born. That goes without saying, as all countries can & many do make similiar claims. However I challenge you or anyone else to demonstrate a link, direct or otherwise, to what is now being done in Korea from 1945 to present, backed up by academic research. None exists.
Quote:

People date the origins of Taekwondo from a long time ago and though there may be some confusion and national pride, Choi is in my opinion "new" to this.



People, what people? Can you name them? Can you cite their research that supports this claim?
Now lets clear something up, you use TKD as an umbrella term. Others use it as an Art whose principal founder was Ambassador Choi, others look at it as a Martial Sport, even an Olympic sport. I find no problem with any usage of the name.
What is beyond refute is that the he named it. He was not just simply "involved" in it, as he came up with the name. It is also clear that few if any, even used the name, till 1965, the 1972, 1973 & finally 1978. The only ones using it from the start, were Choi & his followers, namely the Oh Do Kwan & those from the Chung Do Kwan that followed him. Now he did, along with many talented students of various MAs, did systemize a style of MA, that was spread to countless Koreans & then countless others around the world, due to their efforts, long before any others were even using the name.
Quote:

Forgive me if I offend you but I have found many ITF people treat Choi like some patron saint. They stick him high on some grand pedestal and believe his writings to be much like the bible; thus making him their god of a sort. I don't see him as anything but a man, one that I owe nothing to nor acknowledge any more then a person in history; one of many who were involved in martial arts. Perhaps if I was ITF, perhaps if I cared about history instead of application then he may mean more to me but he doesn't and so when people throw his name out like it is suppose to mean something, it means nothing to me then throwing out any other random name. I suspect many ITF people will take offense to that but so be it; they must understand that he is not all important to everybody.



Sir, you do not offend me. It would really take a lot more than an opposing view point on an internet discussion forum. Especially from someone who admits to not caring about history. Don't be silly!
I also do not look to him as a saint, nor put him on a pedestal, nor do I equate his writings to any bible or holybook, nor do I consider him some sort of a g-d. He is just a man. One who because of Korean geo-politics, was written out of history. One who, along with Dr. Kim Un Yong, did more to develop, promote & spread a wonderful & popular KMA around the world. I can think of no 2 other people who were more instrumental than they were. Am I missing someone else?
Please do share with me.




Dereck:
Sir, with all due respect I repeat this post in its entirety, as I see you did not answer any of my questions. It may have gotten lost in the back & forth. My questions remain & others are free to answer, as I constantly do look for new information.
Any takers?
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 03:08 PM

Arrrrrgh! No wonder this thread has got so long. There's probably only two letters to each page along with a zillion quoted quotation quotes!

Guys, can we PLEASE stop using whole posts in their entirity in quotes?
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 03:49 PM

Quote:

GM Park Jong Soo has a video set available and on one DVD he demonstrates how a TKD person would handle a grapler,kickboxer, etc. I haven't gotten it yet and was wondering if anyone here has and what do they think of it?




Michaelboik

I looked up GM Park Jong Soo and came across a video from 1973 that appeared to be him demonstrating one step sparing at some event. He was awesome even back in 1973.

What I found to be so fascinating watching this is we do one steps also but we utilize many, more hand techniques and take downs in this sparing. Not normally a big deal but the school I train at is WTF affiliated. I can honestly say that GM Park Soo used at least three times as many kicks as we do for this type sparing and I didn"t see one take down.

Please do not take this as my school is better than that ITF school I am only interested in the fact that WTF schools are always being criticized for not using the hands enough and kicking too much. As I watched this I couldn"t help to notice that ITF kicks way more often than I thought and we use our hands way more than others want to believe, so what the heck is all this debate that go:s on between WTF and ITF all about? it does not make since to me. I am rambling now. I was just mesmerized watching this that's all.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 03:50 PM

Sorry & you are right. Probably part of the reason why it went unanswered, lost in the mess. That is why I repeated the whole thing, as it was complicated & had specific points & counters that I am trying to get Dereck & others to respond to. I usually try to cut it down & thanks to Mr. Anslow, I have learned how to do it better or more concise.
Sorry again, but still waiting for an exchange.......
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 03:53 PM

von1:
Please keep in mind that the GM Park was doing them, was more like model sparring & not 1 step sparring that is currently in the syllabus. It looks like traditional or old style 1 steps, which was the way I 1st learned them as well.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 04:03 PM

Dam you Trevek, now I will have to paraphrase instead of using quotes.

ITFunity:

1. Good, we agree martial arts were being practices far before Taekwondo; that is a given. As for your request I can provide no proof of what was practice prior to 1945 to what is practiced now. However I will go on the record for say that kicking and punching and sweeping and all of that good stuff in Taekwondo was not created by Taekwondo. All of that stuff has been practiced for centuries however the patterns and sparring practices especially Olympic sparring are new; no question.

Many people who create something take something already being done and package it all up nice and fancy, name it something new and then throw in something to make it their own. The basics are not theirs, just what they've had and their little twist. That is what Taekwondo did, took a lot of good basics and then added their twist to make it what it is today HOWEVER it is my opinion that the basics of what Taekwondo used is the best part and that the sparring and patterns though can be beneficial are what has taken away from much of the good that was intended.

2. It is my opinion that anything good comes from a group of people working together as a team; in this case a committee appointed by the government. While Choi was credited for naming Taekwondo it is my opinion that this committee also helped and it could have been as little as giving ideas that eventually derived to the name Taekwondo that Choi submitted. That he is given sole credit is nothing knew as this happens in many areas of the world including industry and I see this all of the time. I have even been a part of committees both designing and naming with one person taking credit however that person could not have done it without the help of others. Plus naming Taekwondo does not make it Taekwondo. A committee decided what Taekwondo should be and it is still evolving today; some for the good some for the bad.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 04:24 PM

Thanks guys.

Dereck, as an EFL teacher I encourage paraphrasing as a useful educational tool. I'll give you an A this time.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 07:47 PM

Quote:

This did occur, but it was the 60s & 70s, not the 50s. In the 50s, 1959 to be exact, they toured Vietnam & Taiwan, the 1st time ever TKD was exhibited abroad.



yes sorry about the years, was just thinking off the cuff1

Quote:

The challenge matches were often done by now GM kong Yong Il, who is reported to have gone 127-0.



Hence my point!

Quote:

I challenged him to the 128th fight, but he refused! He probably knew he would destroy me! I quickly claimed the win by default!



LOL

Stuart
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 08:50 PM

Quote:

This did occur, but it was the 60s & 70s, not the 50s. In the 50s, 1959 to be exact, they toured Vietnam & Taiwan, the 1st time ever TKD was exhibited abroad.

The challenge matches were often done by now GM kong Yong Il, who is reported to have gone 127-0. I challenged him to the 128th fight, but he refused! He probably knew he would destroy me! I quickly claimed the win by default!




ITFunity, I've heard of the first demos and exhibitions, but do you know where I can read additional information on GM Kong Yong IL's challenge fights?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 10:24 PM

EvenRats:
google him, the ICTF had something at 1x on their website, as does the WTA, the TKD hall of fame & maybe Mr. Anslow's book, along with gen choi's memoirs
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/25/08 11:47 PM

Quote:

2. It is my opinion that anything good comes from a group of people working together as a team; in this case a committee appointed by the government. While Choi was credited for naming Taekwondo it is my opinion that this committee also helped and it could have been as little as giving ideas that eventually derived to the name Taekwondo have done it without the help of others. Plus naming Taekwondo does not make it Taekwondo. A committee decided what Taekwondo should be and it is still evolving today; some for the good some for the bad.




1st you must remember, he summoned the committee. He was a 2 Star Major-General. As you may be aware, it is common for the military to play important roles in developing countries, even running them. This certainly was the case there. So he was in effect acting in a quasi-govt capacity. The name was thought before hand. It was not like there was brainstorming or a focus team that was looking for a name. Others had other ideas, but he came up with that name. It was probably because of his education & his ability with caligraphy & Chinese characters, that he even came up with it.
So your admitted lack of interest in history is okay. However, one can always have an opinion, but that shouldn't be confused with history.

Now you are correct that naming TKD does not make it TKD. What made it TKD was what he & his committee did in the military. This was different from those that where there when he named it. This committee was his team of military men, who were also martial artists. They were led by him & Col. Nam Tae Hi. They were assisted by Han Cha Kyo & Sgt Major Kim Bok Man, Gen Woo & numerous others. It was this committee or team that devised TKD. What they did was spread throughout Korea, via the military & police, where GM Lee Byung Moo was the chief instructor for the police. As these men went overseas, starting in 1959, this was the TKD they took with them. It was them & their efforts that made TKD popular. So much so, that later many others simply adopted the name, even though they were doing something else. By next year I think we will see SK give more proper credit to these Pioneers, who not only spread TKD, but introduced countless numbers of people to Korean culture as well, even having them bow to the national flag. Something not even Korean Ambassadors were able to accomplish.

Now again, you are right, committees continue to evolve TKD, but they are different committees belonging to various TKD groups. However none of them can claim to be the original ones, as TKD was not even being used as a name till 1965, 1972, 1973 & finally by some in 1978. The only ones for the most part who were using it, were the original TKD Pioneers, the ITF guys.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 12:33 AM

No one knows who invented kicking and punching all agree with this.

The system of trainning that is ITF style TKD was create by somebody. The pioneers that I know want you to know that it was not just General Choi alone. He played a large role but so did other people.

They want you to know that they were practicing TKD well before the WTF existed and those that founded the WTF were doing Karate at the time and did not like the people who were doing TKD. They want you to know that ITF style TKD was a mixed martial art and was modern. They do not consider it to be derived from some ancient Korea foot game.

These are some of the things they just want people to know
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 12:38 AM

If you ahve specific questions i can ask somebody who was there. I have been told a few stories about these challenges. It was just a regular part of the demo.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 08:23 AM

Quote:

Quote:

GM Park Jong Soo has a video set available and on one DVD he demonstrates how a TKD person would handle a grapler,kickboxer, etc. I haven't gotten it yet and was wondering if anyone here has and what do they think of it?




Michaelboik

I looked up GM Park Jong Soo and came across a video from 1973 that appeared to be him demonstrating one step sparing at some event. He was awesome even back in 1973.

What I found to be so fascinating watching this is we do one steps also but we utilize many, more hand techniques and take downs in this sparing. Not normally a big deal but the school I train at is WTF affiliated. I can honestly say that GM Park Soo used at least three times as many kicks as we do for this type sparing and I didn"t see one take down.

Please do not take this as my school is better than that ITF school I am only interested in the fact that WTF schools are always being criticized for not using the hands enough and kicking too much. As I watched this I couldn"t help to notice that ITF kicks way more often than I thought and we use our hands way more than others want to believe, so what the heck is all this debate that go:s on between WTF and ITF all about? it does not make since to me. I am rambling now. I was just mesmerized watching this that's all.




That was part of the ITF world tour and this part was filmed in Germany. As Unity said, he was performing Model sparring where the technique is performed at full speed then in slow motion to show what techniques were used. He started with basic techniques and moved to advanced technoques. Gen. Choi wanted to show the average person what seperates TKD from Karate which many people where more familiar with, and the kicks did that.
I think the debate between ITF and WTF/KKW is more the Sparring then anything. The WTF/KKW has the Hanmadung which has the same competition as the ITF, patterns, breaking, and sparring. I think the classroom teaches the same although Idon't know if WTF teaches three and two step sparring, but basicly the same.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 11:43 AM

michael boik"

Thanks for info. on GM Park Jong Soo video. I can only speak for my wtf affiliated school but we train three, two, one step sparing. For (adult only) black belts there are what is considered advanced one steps which is the real nasty stuff, lots of bone and joint breaks, take downs along with potentially lethal finishing techniques. I train Tae Kwan Do Han Mu Kwan GM Sang Sup Kil.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 12:42 PM

GM Kil is quite skilled in Hapkido. You are very lucky to have an instructor of his skill level.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 12:42 PM

Dereck:

Sir, you still have not responed to major points I posted refuting that is IMHO essential to understanding the "evolution" as you stated of TKD.

Will you?

Thanks
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 01:06 PM

Come again ITF? I thought I responded to everything to the best of my ability to all of your posts.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 01:11 PM

No Sir, you didn't respond to #15986449, posted on 02/25/08 at 11:47pm, which appears about 7-8 posts above. I am afraid to get in trouble for re-quoting it again!

LOL

Thanks
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 01:14 PM

Quote:

GM Kil is quite skilled in Hapkido. You are very lucky to have an instructor of his skill level.




michaelboik"


Just curious, how are you familiar with GM Kil? I have tried to ask questions of Master Kil regarding the politics of Tae Kwon Do and GM Kil acknowledges that they exist but I really can not seem to get specifics from his point of view because of the language barrier. I kind of rely on this forum to learn that aspect and contribute what little I know but just as everyone else I can only contribute from my own perspective which is from wtf point of view. GM Kil has been around for a very long time and I wish I could communicate better with him because he has so much knowledge.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 01:21 PM

Quote:

No Sir, you didn't respond to #15986449, posted on 02/25/08 at 11:47pm, which appears about 7-8 posts above. I am afraid to get in trouble for re-quoting it again!

LOL

Thanks


Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 03:16 PM

Quote:

Quote:

GM Kil is quite skilled in Hapkido. You are very lucky to have an instructor of his skill level.




michaelboik"


Just curious, how are you familiar with GM Kil? I have tried to ask questions of Master Kil regarding the politics of Tae Kwon Do and GM Kil acknowledges that they exist but I really can not seem to get specifics from his point of view because of the language barrier. I kind of rely on this forum to learn that aspect and contribute what little I know but just as everyone else I can only contribute from my own perspective which is from wtf point of view. GM Kil has been around for a very long time and I wish I could communicate better with him because he has so much knowledge.




GM Kil came to the states just before I left the Han Moo Kwan school. I had no face time with him but watched him demonstrate his techniques. This one time he used Master Ahmeds assistent( can't remember his name) who was about 250+ pounds and just threw him all over the place. To see GM Kil, who is small throw this larger man was incredible. I remember after that the assistent was icing his wrists and was in a bit of pain.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 04:53 PM

Quote:

No Sir, you didn't respond to #15986449, posted on 02/25/08 at 11:47pm, which appears about 7-8 posts above. I am afraid to get in trouble for re-quoting it again!

LOL
Thanks




I reread it for the 3rd time and I see now questions to answer. I got your history lesson from it though.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 05:44 PM

No Sir, there were no questions posed. Just comments refuting/responding to yours. I was just wondering why there was no further response from you. I think I see now.
Thanks
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 05:57 PM

The thing with the challenge fights,127-0, is that it was then,there is going to be hardly any evidence I bet,we wont know the calibre of opponents or if it was standing,grappling or standing and grappling.We wont know the rules.There will be no footage.There never is.
Its fair enough if he did that or any of them challenged,but knowing that does not make it effective
today.We cant read that and say ''well it proves im capable''.A person learning is told that and thinks he can now survive.Hes got to know what TKD offers and what it does not.Hes got to have it proven to him and know it.Its got to be put into perspective.When its not it looses face and that 15 year old looses his face in a violent assault.

TKD,early days,seems to have resembled Thai boxing in its no nonsense,powerfull,well conditioned approach so im I would not be surprised if it held its own with other strikers.We know when trained well it can holds its own in a strikers realm.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/26/08 09:52 PM

Quote:

TKD,early days,seems to have resembled Thai boxing in its no nonsense,powerfull,well conditioned approach so im I would not be surprised if it held its own with other strikers.We know when trained well it can holds its own in a strikers realm.




One of my instructors once told me that TKD-fighters back then were very stiff and lacked the athleticism that today's high flying kickers and punchers possessed. But they were well conditioned to the point where every kick and punch was brutal. Afterall, it was developed for use in the military.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 11:47 AM

Quote:

The thing with the challenge fights.......




Reminds me of the boxer Larry Holmes. He beat everyone they threw at him & the complaint was they were bums. It was not his fault. He took them all on & beat them. .


Quote:

TKD,early days,seems to have resembled Thai boxing in its no nonsense,powerfull,well conditioned approach so im I would not be surprised if it held its own with other strikers.We know when trained well it can holds its own in a strikers realm.




This is a good point. I would like to add that in order to remain a viable method of SD, it must train with a base in realism. This IMHO is 1 of the major reasons why TKD has suffered much with losing face & its often well deserved reputation of being a poor vehicle for real SD skills.

Now here is why history is so important to helping to understand why we are where we are today. But 1st, B 4 we get 2 that, lets define TKD.

For many, TKD is just an umbrella name for KMA (striking), who for the most part are still doing Korean karate. So any critique of them, must be taken to include a critique of Karate, as that is what they 1st learned & for the most part are still teaching.

Another major way to look at TKD is a martial sport that has gained Olympic status. This group, shaped to a great extent by the JiDo kwan, were Shotokan karate, see their logo, crest or patch for reference. They used new tournament rules to be distinguished from the hated japanese. Since this is an emphasis any critique should take that into consideration.

The other way that some look at what TKD is & they are the minority, is a Korean Art of SD, devised by military men, led by a 2 Star Major-General in the ROK Army. These pioneers later became instrumental in the ITF. However, for the most part, these are the ones that gave TKD its early reputation as a brutal SD method. Now some of them are also guilty of watering down what they do, due to the same influences of those in the other 2 groups, namely insurance, income & child rearing.

So to sum up, TKD really can't be lumped into 1 group, so both critques & praises have to be sensitive to this.

In addition, even though the ITF is the smallest group, they are the ones that not only 1st used the name, but it was their system that was devised as a modern MMA, whose results were not only praised & sought after, but feared by the enemy. JMNSHO shaped by mountains of research.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 12:00 PM

Yes & no EvenRats. Your instructor may be right, as they were in great shape, but were also great atheletes. But just like other physical activities, they were pioneers, so many things were not yet more fully developed & as such, were not being pushed to new limits.
For example, Han Cha Kyo was a great flying kicker. It is him that is doing many of the flying kicks in the early photos. Park Jong Soo was also strong in this area & he is credited with developing the reverse hooking kick. He is still in great shape for his matured age, as is CK Choi, still a perfect split & Choi Kwang Jo with his awesome high twisting kick to the rear!

Remember basketball players like George Mikan & Bob Cousy. Compare them to Wilt Chamberlain & Oscar Robertson & then to Mike Jordan & the Shack. Even gymnasists were doing what, 2 twists in the air. Now what are they doing, 4, 4 &1/2, same as platform divers & runners. Whats the time for a mile race now?
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 01:24 PM

Interesting read; thanks. I do have one question regarding this statement in context with your post.

Quote:

In addition, even though the ITF is the smallest group, they are the ones that not only 1st used the name, but it was their system that was devised as a modern MMA, whose results were not only praised & sought after, but feared by the enemy. JMNSHO shaped by mountains of research.




Do you personally think that the ITF "now" follows this hard core system? Or in your travels have you found that the ITF much like the WTF and other factions follow similar endurance and physicalness?
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 01:59 PM

Quote:



One of my instructors once told me that TKD-fighters back then were very stiff and lacked the athleticism that today's high flying kickers and punchers possessed. But they were well conditioned to the point where every kick and punch was brutal. Afterall, it was developed for use in the military.




This is partially correct. Everyone was kind of stiff comapred to today but the ones who were more stiff were not the ITF style practitioners but rather the TSD and KSD practitioners who were karate like. The ITF style people were using many different techniques and trying to push the envelope.

The the people who became the eventual WTF founders used two techniques when sparring a front snap kick and a reverse punch that was it. It was easy for the ITF sparring with side kicks and revesre heel kicks and turning kicks etc.

Just a note;

These comments and others are not meant as comments about todays martial artists. This is simply historical information that I have been informed about and its has nothing really to do with the abilities (positive or negative) of today's Tae Kwon Doists
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 02:12 PM

GM CK Choi does those splits cold and he can do the high twisting kick cold as well.

Its pretty cool to watch
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 02:16 PM

Yes its interesting.I would like to know does anyone practice this way?As hardcore as is made out.If TKD people are to claim its got it all or enough, why dont they just get training footage or enter something and then it would be done and dusted.No discussion.
Every one would shut up.We could all go and train like that and not have to look elsewhere.

Also,if they were training in a good,solid.way,like I said, it would resemble how Thai boxers train and if they had good grappling it would resemble good MMA/NHB training,and again,there would be no discussion because MMA and TKD would of be the same thing.And any footage or training not resembling that would not be TKD.And anyone dissmissing MMA/NHB training would be dismissing good TKD training.

Im interested in the modern MMA statement that comes up alot.
What is the breakdown of this and were can they be seen,please?
Its a korean take on Karate and korean arts.Thats a given.Referencing modern science.
Iv seen people say it took from Judo.Where is this because iv not seen TKD resembling Judo or its training methods..Of course there are locks,throws and sweeps.Is this that influence?If so that influence has definitly lost its way.
We can say that yes,if it does not resemble Judo in those Judo influenced moments?
Iv heard it took from boxing (?),though again,Iv not seen much that resembled quality boxing or the training boxers they do.
What else?

I see your point about Larry Holmes ITFUNITY.Though ,IMO,its different in many ways.
For a start I can watch Larry holmes or see if what he does works and prove it or have it proven many times over.And in the context of this thread boxing,or Larry Holmes makes no claims beyond being great for fist fighting.
I will fold on that as it has no refence on me today or my training if I cant see it and be influenced by his tactics or techniques.
Fair enough he must of been a good fighter and effective.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 02:17 PM

Quote:



Do you personally think that the ITF "now" follows this hard core system? Or in your travels have you found that the ITF much like the WTF and other factions follow similar endurance and physicalness?




I think it will always depend on the school. I personnaly do not think that there are many schools that follow the hard core trainning system. It seems every time I ask why not the comment I get is that the new trainning system is scientifically more advanced and they don't have to train hard like the old masters used to.

I am still not totally clear on what that means.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 04:02 PM

Agreed Flynch. I would say the majority of schools in just about every martial art today train for the people of today that includes children to juniors to adults to seniors. It is readily accessible and perhaps watered down to allow everybody to train. I think we would all be hard pressed to find a school to the likes of what we've read or are led to believe by many. Don't get me wrong, this does not discount the extra effort that people put into their training nor challenging themselves to get better which is all positive.

I read from ITFunity about his extensive 30 of training and travels and I wanted to know what he's found as I'm only 5.5 years into this and don't have as extensive knowledge to this fact as he may be able to shed light. I suspect he has found the same but it is nice to hear from others on this matter.

I also agree that we don't need to train like those in the past did as we are not warriors or in the military and to be honest I don't think that many would last. I know my TKD is easier then the TKD that my Instructor took under a South Korean Master that was from the military. The failure rate was high and the training was very demanding. However with that said my Instructor has pointed out that today's training has allowed many to obtain high levels due to the better understanding of the techniques as well as how it is taught as well as not having to deal with the language barrier. We can ask questions and it made to understand what is being taught and expected then when he trained and was told "no, wrong" and then having to figure it out on his own until he heard "correct".
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 04:52 PM

I always thought it was just different now. If I am to beleive what I have been told then Tae Kwon Do trainning was a part of one's military service. It was a full time job. I have the specifics but basically it involved Tae Kwon Do trainning several hours in the morning and several hours in the evening six to seven days a week. Combine this with a lot of jogging and you have people who were just at a different level than most of us.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 08:30 PM

Quote:


Do you personally think that the ITF "now" follows this hard core system? Or in your travels have you found that the ITF much like the WTF and other factions follow similar endurance and physicalness?




No they dont!
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 08:33 PM

Quote:

I think it will always depend on the school.



I agree.. but in the main, its still a no!

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 08:39 PM

Quote:

Yes its interesting.I would like to know does anyone practice this way?



Yes, some do


Quote:

If TKD people are to claim its got it all or enough,



we/I dont claim that, we recognise its short comings and take measures to correct them

Quote:

why dont they just get training footage or enter something and then it would be done and dusted.No discussion.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB9K6ljoy..._Active_01.html

Quote:

Also,if they were training in a good,solid.way,like I said, it would resemble how Thai boxers train



No it wouldnt

Quote:

and if they had good grappling it would resemble good MMA/NHB training,and again,there would be no discussion because MMA and TKD would of be the same thing.



Hmm... as long as someone acknowledged we were doing "all in" traditional sparring before the term "MMA" was even heard of!

Quote:

Iv seen people say it took from Judo.Where is this because iv not seen TKD resembling Judo or its training methods..



Many of the pioneers were judo (Yudo) black belts. Throws are outlined in the TKD manuals by Gen Choi.

Quote:

Of course there are locks,throws and sweeps.Is this that influence?



yes, that and hapkido

Quote:

If so that influence has definitly lost its way.



Agreed

Quote:

We can say that yes,if it does not resemble Judo in those Judo influenced moments?



It does when taught properly.


Stuart
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 08:46 PM

Nice video, Stuart. I always enjoy seeing those. Looks like good training at your school.
Posted by: EFRAIN

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 08:48 PM

Where I come from GTF TKD, Master Manuel Quiles 7th DAN... He has develop great TKD practitioners in the last 10 -15 years. The training is nothing like any school i've seen or been to. Everything he does and the way he teaches it is effective scientifically speaking and it's very obvious when we attend other tournaments...Yes there are other schools out there that also teach legit and are hardcore but so far from what i've seen around everything is watered down. The hardcore training I get is really something...So yea there are few good TKD schools out there where the instructor/Master teach properly for tournaments and real life self defense.

Bow out with respect from a TKD/BAGUA MARTIALIST
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 11:40 PM

There are a lot of things that people are asking me to respond to & I will. First, I looked over the 10 pages of threads. There appears to be 25 topics per page, so thats 250 topics. None come close to the amount of pages this one has so far, 31 pages. Only 2 have double digits above 10, 14 & 12, but they appear dead now. So this topic has generated more than 3x the amount of pages of replies & is still going strong.
Why?
It is a topic that is talking about the negative aspects of the world's most popular MA, while asking is that MA, TKD, "loosing it's face/popularity".

I think it is & offer concrete reasons why. Basically, it was a major export of SK, became a money maker, academic college degrees in SK, insurance, sport & child rearing/babysitting emphasis have all contributed. The softening of MAs in general has I think led to an uptick, surge & development of MMAs.

I think TKD is tough to examine, as it is not really all together. Many look at it as an umbrella name, a martial sport or a specific Art devised by Gen Choi.

I make no claim that any way to look at it is more correct than another, or that any style school, system is better than the next. I find weaknesses everywhere. I look even more closely & critically at the ITF, as that is what my bread & butter is & have been very disappointed by many there, hanging my ITF flag on a wall. So there is enuf critisism to go around.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 11:50 PM

Quote:

In addition, even though the ITF is the smallest group, they are the ones that not only 1st used the name, but it was their system that was devised as a modern MMA, whose results were not only praised & sought after, but feared by the enemy. JMNSHO shaped by mountains of research.




Quote:

Do you personally think that the ITF "now" follows this hard core system? Or in your travels have you found that the ITF much like the WTF and other factions follow similar endurance and physicalness?




No, like others, they leave much to be desired. My complaint with them, is they do not know the syllabus or do not follow it They have little or no excuse because they are given the most complete documentation of any style that I know of.
Now my above quoted comments refer to Vietnam asking for TKD instructors to go there lng before SK sent soldiers to fight. The US sent military advisors before battle troops. I am not aware that they asked for fighting (boxing) instructors or the French for Savate instructors & Vietnam was a colony of France for years. The north Vietnamese communists had actual written orders to avoid hand to hand combat with the ROK soldiers. Soon other countries started to ask for SK to send TKD instructors & they did. Still to this day, countries ask, but they are for Olympic style coaches that have graduated from academic colleges with physical education degrees in TKD.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 11:53 PM

Quote:

[This is partially correct. Everyone was kind of stiff comapred to today but the ones who were more stiff were not the ITF style practitioners but rather the TSD and KSD practitioners who were karate like. The ITF style people were using many different techniques and trying to push the envelope.
The the people who became the eventual WTF founders used two techniques when sparring a front snap kick and a reverse punch that was it. It was easy for the ITF sparring with side kicks and revesre heel kicks and turning kicks etc. Just a note; These comments and others are not meant as comments about todays martial artists. This is simply historical information that I have been informed about and its has nothing really to do with the abilities (positive or negative) of today's Tae Kwon Doists




Agreed.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/27/08 11:57 PM

Quote:

GM CK Choi does those splits cold and he can do the high twisting kick cold as well. Its pretty cool to watch




Yes it is & I knew that, but was trying to give everyone something. These were super talented people in their prime. Hence the reason why they were snapped up by the general. Which BTW is not only unique to original TKD, but also one of the reasons why it developed so well & so far. No other MA or style of TKD can make this claim. Imagine being a military general & having access to numerous soldiers to pick & choose from. AWESOME & UNIQUE!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 12:27 AM

Quote:

Yes its interesting.I would like to know does anyone practice this way?As hardcore as is made out.If TKD people are to claim its got it all or enough, why dont they just get training footage or enter something and then it would be done and dusted.No discussion.
Every one would shut up.We could all go and train like that and not have to look elsewhere.[/QUOTE]

No. I am sure you can try & find some that attmpt to. I think a couple in my school try. But you can not emulate what was done decades ago. Times have changed. Both advancements & restrictions, which we have eloborated on before, have made this a thing of the past. It is probably a big part of the reason for the MMAs now being on center stage. When I started the fighting arts in the early 70s, there was little need for MMAs, as MAs were new. I would not say the training was hardcore, like the military setting of the 50s & 60s, but it was spartan compared to today. JMHO
Quote:

Im interested in the modern MMA statement that comes up alot. What is the breakdown of this and were can they be seen,please? Its a korean take on Karate and korean arts.Thats a given. Referencing modern science. Iv seen people say it took from Judo.Where is this because iv not seen TKD resembling Judo or its training methods..Of course there are locks,throws and sweeps.Is this that influence?If so that influence has definitly lost its way. We can say that yes,if it does not resemble Judo in those Judo influenced moments?
Iv heard it took from boxing (?),though again,Iv not seen much that resembled quality boxing or the training boxers they do. What else?




Again, this original TKD was developed in the military for SD. It was headed up by a general who studied Karate in Japan & suppossedly TaeKyon as a teen (not verified). He was assisted by a Chung Do kwan senior member, who would rise to the rank of colonel, who by the way was the head of the 1st group of TKD instructors to Vietnam (1962) & another senior member of the CDK Han Cha Kyo & Gen. Woo Jong Lim, GM CK Choi's teacher & the only other Oh Do Kwan member to make the rank of general. Now what these men & others did, was to assemble & train countless soldiers. They drew upon all available fighting methods at the time, with the biggest influence being Karate. I guess every new MA can claim they are a modern MMA. However, I far as I know, what we considered MMA today, did not exist in that form then.
Now I think that it definately has lost its way, which is one of the reasons for this thread. I offer the history, so we can see the one time emphasis, why it was founded & offering that insight to help bring students back to it.



Quote:

I see your point about Larry Holmes ITFUNITY. Though,IMO,its different in many ways. For a start I can watch Larry holmes or see if what he does works and prove it or have it proven many times over.And in the context of this thread boxing,or Larry Holmes makes no claims beyond being great for fist fighting.
I will fold on that as it has no refence on me today or my training if I cant see it and be influenced by his tactics or techniques. Fair enough he must of been a good fighter and effective.




No doubt about it. You make all valid points. I only brought it up, as he got critiqued as GM Kong. Of course there was none of these things to document this, which is sad. That is why Dr. Kimm's book will help capture these early days for all generations to follow, as well as a documentary on TKD's development.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 12:33 AM

Quote:

I read from ITFunity about his extensive 30 of training and travels and I wanted to know what he's found as I'm only 5.5 years into this and don't have as extensive knowledge to this fact as he may be able to shed light. I suspect he has found the same but it is nice to hear from others on this matter.




Yes sadly this is what my experience has shown me. The only good things is like you have said, TKD is now for everyone. I never had the physical talents that others are blessed with, but do know that TKD has saved my life & made my life so much more fullfilling & rewarding. That is a good thing. So, as you say, find a good school. A school that will best bring you what you need & want. If it is strict street SD, skip the traditional MAs & go for a get down & dirty, minus the pajamas, bowing, history, rules, regs etc.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 12:37 AM

Quote:

Quote:

I think it will always depend on the school.



I agree.. but in the main, its still a no! Stuart




Absolutely! Hence the reason we are having this topic discussion. Its pretty obvious to me, that good TKD schools of SD are the exception & in many cases the rare exception. This doesn't mean you won't find a good one here & there. But if you want only real SD, look for that school that puts that to the top of their agenda.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 01:10 AM

Stuart, nice video. I think you and I could easily train at each other's school. I seen many drills we do as well. You are one person I would love to get together and sit down to compare our training and exchange ideas. Very nice.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 02:29 PM

Iv got no problem and neither has anyone else I think outside of TKD when its shortcomings are accepted .
Its when they are not that it looses face.Thats was my main point,though the threads gone off kilter.Its an interesting discussion though.

Your training is some of the best iv seen in TKD.
Though its still not as harcore as is made out Military TKD was IMO.From the claims about it.
I dont mean hardcore as just in beating the crap either.
And in terms of the MMA/NHB or all in type training in moments,it looks ok,but not to the level of a good MMA/NHB or all in place.IMHO.
I would say thats a big influence on that training yet it will be claimed TKD was always like that.
That will loose its face too.

Is that how its claimed they trained,like that footage?

I only use the term MMA/NHB because its easyier.I would prefer grappling with the idea of striking or striking with the idea of grappling.

In my opinion the best reference we have for a human being training to strike,for full contact,punches,kicks,elbows,knees,standing clinch just happens to be labelled Muay thai so I think any human doing that would train like that and it would resemble that bearing slight difference in technique.EG the difference in kicking.
Those methods are totaly proven.
So if TKD in the military was as effective they must of trained similar ,even if they did not know it.

Personaly I think Im just dissapointed TKD is not all its made out to be or works as well as is made out outside of its perimiters.Being told over and over again it does and that I must not be doing it right or training it right has made it loose face to me.I feel like saying 'No its not all my fault''.
If Stuarts footage is how they trained then in training in an MMA/NHB way the full hog im doing real better original TKD than most.
Mmm the discussion could never end.
Posted by: EFRAIN

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 03:12 PM

Honestly guys I never expected this post I posted to go on for so long and get where it is with all sorts of discusions lol Shyt some of these discussion could be made into a new post lol...it's crazy and it's still going lol
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 03:43 PM

Quote:

Your training is some of the best iv seen in TKD.
Though its still not as harcore as is made out Military TKD was IMO.From the claims about it.
I dont mean hardcore as just in beating the crap either.



What do you mean by hardcore then?

Quote:

I would say thats a big influence on that training yet it will be claimed TKD was always like that.



Actually, face losing or not.. we were training similar to how you see in the video way before the term MMA had even been heard of.. yes, i guess we can pick up a few good pointers from current MMA, but it doesnt chnage the fact we trained like that before.. anything that can make it better is just a good thing IMO.

Quote:

Is that how its claimed they trained,like that footage?



How who claimed what?

Quote:

I would prefer grappling with the idea of striking or striking with the idea of grappling.



that would be more accurate yes.

Quote:

Being told over and over again it does and that I must not be doing it right or training it right has made it loose face to me.I feel like saying 'No its not all my fault''.



Its not, I feel the same, the only difference is I ry to prove that wrong.. but can only do so in my school as I dont control the rest of the TKD world!

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 03:44 PM

Quote:

Stuart, nice video. I think you and I could easily train at each other's school. I seen many drills we do as well. You are one person I would love to get together and sit down to compare our training and exchange ideas. Very nice.




That would be cool, for sure. Still, for now, theres alway email!

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 03:45 PM

Quote:

Nice video, Stuart. I always enjoy seeing those. Looks like good training at your school.




Cheers Matt. Trainings fun yes and we like to think its decent (well, at least I hope it is).

Stuart
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 05:45 PM

Stuart and I have similar training at our schools. I have the luxury that my Instructor also trains MMA outside of our school and fights in the MFC and trains at Pro Camp with the likes of UFC's Jason MacDonald; many of these skills are worked into our curriculum. No matter how complete our training gets with everything from stand up to takedown to ground and pound, I can say 100% we do not train MMA, at least not in the terms that MMA fighters do.

We've gone pretty hard but not as hard as they do. A lot of fancier techniques are put aside when becoming a MMA fighter and basics are used, especially when it comes to jujitsu as you are punching more. The training is tougher and more demanding and I honestly believe only certain people have this mentality to do it. We also have a MMA fighting team that my Instructor trains others in addition to his training with about 4 other fighters that also compete for the MFC and King of the Cage. I'm welcome to join these sessions but this training is during the day while I work though earlier in its creation I did attend a Saturday class but again wasn't as extreme as being done now.

TKD is not MMA; I don't think we should confuse the two. TKD however can and for myself and Stuart, have all of the aspects required in a fighting system.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 06:45 PM

Quote:

Your training is some of the best iv seen in TKD.
Though its still not as harcore as is made out Military TKD was IMO.From the claims about it.
I dont mean hardcore as just in beating the crap either.
And in terms of the MMA/NHB or all in type training in moments,it looks ok,but not to the level of a good MMA/NHB or all in place.IMHO.
I would say thats a big influence on that training yet it will be claimed TKD was always like that.
That will loose its face too.




You do realize MMA is more of a sport right? As in with a set of rules and high level of competition. The purpose of training Taekwon-Do is to learn how to defend yourself against aggression. If you really want to bring your Tk-D to "MMA/NHB level" then I suggest you find a school that specializes in that. As in, less historical cirriculum, more fighting.
Nobody who trains "Martial art X" crossed over with "Martial Y" magically wakes up and fights MMA. You have to train in that specific environment.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 07:24 PM

Agreed.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/28/08 07:49 PM

Quote:

TKD is not MMA; I don't think we should confuse the two. TKD however can and for myself and Stuart, have all of the aspects required in a fighting system.




Dereck:
Sir, please understand that TKD was originally developed as a modern MMA. It did in fact takes aspects of various MAs & fighting systems of the time & combine them into a system of SD that was to be for military SD.
Now of course, that is not to be confused with what many today conceive MMA as being. Now the term modern is used to then describe a period being the 50s & 6os, ending for the most part by the early 70s.
Kindly also include me in with you & Mr. Anslow, as it has served the same purpose for me.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 12:38 PM

Quote:

Quote:

TKD is not MMA; I don't think we should confuse the two. TKD however can and for myself and Stuart, have all of the aspects required in a fighting system.




Dereck:
Sir, please understand that TKD was originally developed as a modern MMA. It did in fact takes aspects of various MAs & fighting systems of the time & combine them into a system of SD that was to be for military SD.
Now of course, that is not to be confused with what many today conceive MMA as being. Now the term modern is used to then describe a period being the 50s & 6os, ending for the most part by the early 70s.
Kindly also include me in with you & Mr. Anslow, as it has served the same purpose for me.




I'm going to nit-pick here.

ITFUnity, I have seen you make this point a number of times, but I'd like to suggest that your insistence on calling TKD a "mixed martial art" is misleading. Not deliberately or maliciously misleading, but misleading nonetheless.

I agree with your points regarding TKD having incorporated various aspects of other systems to create a form of SD for the military, thus making it "mixed" in that sense. I also take note that you concede that when you use that term, you do not mean it as people today who use that term (i.e. the sport exemplified by UFC, Pride, etc).

The fact is that the vast majority of people today use the term "MMA" to mean "the combative sport usually fought in a cage or octagon that involves elements of grappling, wrestling, submissions, kicks, punches, and takedowns that originated with the Ultimte Fighting Championships". In fact, I believe it was Dana White and the organizers of the UFC who first started using the term "mixed martial arts". So to label TKD as "MMA" conflicts with the de facto accepted meaning that 99% of the rest of the people who use that term take it to mean. In fact, they would say the very notion of TKD being an MMA is a contradiction.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 01:22 PM

More aggression.
Going on for longer.I noticed a five second ground rule They look too compliant.
Well, I cant answer without sounding critical of that training or those students and I dont want it to go like that so I dont know how to say what I mean if im honest.It did not look hardcore enough for me to go with the claims of how TKD was trained in the military.
Who claimed?
Iv heard lots claim the military style was this or that.By ''they'' I mean people who realy stick up for TKD and wont have a bad word against it.

Do you mean your group or TKD in general have always trained like that?
Im sceptical TKD was originaly trained like that.
If your group,Fair enough.

The thing that does not make sense is that if the word MMA comes up,like IT haS,that method of training is degraded as sport,like it has.Agreed yes.
Yet that footage is MMA type training yet its said thats good and its how its supposed to be trained or how it was trained.
So it does not make sense.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 01:33 PM

Quote:

Sir, please understand that TKD was originally developed as a modern MMA. It did in fact takes aspects of various MAs & fighting systems of the time & combine them into a system of SD that was to be for military SD.
Now of course, that is not to be confused with what many today conceive MMA as being. Now the term modern is used to then describe a period being the 50s & 6os, ending for the most part by the early 70s.




ITFUnity, I have seen you make this point a number of times, but I'd like to suggest that your insistence on calling TKD a "mixed martial art" is misleading. Not deliberately or maliciously misleading, but misleading nonetheless.




It is only misleading if one does not understand what I wrote. I don't call TKD a MMA. I simply say that it was "originally developed as a modern MMA".

This again needs the following emphasis. It was the TKD of the Oh Do kwan that did this first for the military, 10 years before virtually anyone else was even using the name TKD. Of course we know that some were just doing Karate & calling it TKD & others, primarily led by the JiDo kwan that developed their version of TKD around new tournament rules that eventually became the Olympic TKD sport.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 01:35 PM

Quote:

You do realize MMA is more of a sport right? As in with a set of rules and high level of competition. The purpose of training Taekwon-Do is to learn how to defend yourself against aggression. If you really want to bring your Tk-D to "MMA/NHB level" then I suggest you find a school that specializes in that. As in, less historical cirriculum, more fighting.
Nobody who trains "Martial art X" crossed over with "Martial Y" magically wakes up and fights MMA. You have to train in that specific environment.




Im talking about the training.MMA/NHB,waheterver you want to call it can be applied where you like.So yes,it can be applied for sport.I get that.

Any good martial art is learning against aggression.Someone trying to knock you out is agression.It does not matter where it is.
I found a place.Like I said,its my thing to put TKD in that enviroment and see how it goes.

Your right about the rest exaclty what iv been saying.

I think my posts and my part in this discussion is becoming too negative or like I am tearing TKD apart(I suppose I am but just to get where I want).I dont mean to do that just provide honesty and perspective so if I have to be too negative to respond or make a point I dont think I will.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 01:52 PM

Quote:

The thing that does not make sense is that if the word MMA comes up,like IT haS,that method of training is degraded as sport,like it has.Agreed yes.
So it does not make sense.




First & this may sound like nit picking, but MMA is not a word. It is I think described as the abbreviation of 3 words strung together. The 3 words being:
mixed martial art

Now it doesn't mean a full or compete mix or even a balanced mix, with a specific recipe or formula.

The term modern as I use it is to denote a period of primarily the 50s & 60s. We all can agree that MAs goes back to the early days of when man started to fight. Somewhere along the way, people decided to think it through & came up with a way to systemize fighting in order to gain some advantage over opponents. Now I am not an expert on other MAs, but I would render a guess there may be some things in common today with those of the early days. It also makes sense that things have changed & evolved from those early days.

In SK in the 1950s, the Oh Do Kwan was responsible for mixing things up in those modern times, as compared to yesteryear & the early days. They did. It was respected & even feared by some. TKD in general has evolved into more of a business, sport & child rearing service. That in & of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. But it is apparent that it has changed. The same can be said for other MAs. I think this is a reason why today's MODERN MMA has evolved. Now todays MMA has taken a different shape than earlier mixes.

I make no claim that TKD is like today's MMA. I think from my limited knowledge of today's MMAs, it can be an effective method of SD. Much more so then TKD. However, if TKD went back to it's roots & was practiced with realism, the result will be a better system of SD. NOT better than MMA, but better than much of what many TKD schools presently offer.

But remember, there is nothing wrong with TKD schools offering child rearing services, if they can be effective & that is what the parent is paying for. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 01:57 PM

Quote:

I think my posts and my part in this discussion is becoming too negative or like I am tearing TKD apart(I suppose I am but just to get where I want).I dont mean to do that just provide honesty and perspective so if I have to be too negative to respond or make a point I dont think I will.




No I apprecaite your thought out responses & input. They are valid criticisms. Negative information is good for people to be exposed too. It may help their thought process & concepts.
I just don't think you give much credit or highlight that there is more things that TKD can offer, besides an often weak SD.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 03:12 PM

In this thread, I've noticed there seems to be a recurring theme that basically seems to state that TKD was a better system for fighting/SD in the "old days", before it became a sport (insert criticism of WTF here) or children's activity (insert criticism of suburban McDojang's here). I will agree that there is truth to this, but I am forced to wonder if all the so-called "watering down" of the brutal, hardcore ancestor to modern TKD is necessarily a bad thing.

The reality is that almost all of the traditional martial arts were designed to be brutal fighting systems. Traditional training was tough, painful, and required the highest dedication. Thus by design, martial arts training precluded the majority of people from participating.

I think the real question that needs to be asked is whether MA has something to offer for everyone -- man, woman, child, adult, senior citizen, etc. If the desire is to make MA an activity that everyone can enjoy and benefit from, then the traditional hardcore training is really an outdated concept that probably only applies to soldiers and law enforcement. On the other hand, if MA should remain a fighting system that only those physically capable of enduring such training can participate in, then criticisms regarding "watering down" are indeed valid.

For my part, I don't necessarily think it's so bad that TKD, or any MA, has been "watered down" to a certain degree. I don't even think calling it a sport is bad per se. "Martial art" to many people implies that what is offered is merely for the purposes of fighting or defending yourself, whereas as "sport" connotes that the activity that is recreational and can be enjoyed by those who don't particularly want to fight.

If TKD was taught as it had been in the old days, I doubt most of us reading this board would be training in it.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 03:34 PM

Outstanding Post!
Agreed
I would also add in that the ITF schools are just as guilty with watering down.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 07:40 PM

Quote:

ITFUnity, I have seen you make this point a number of times, but I'd like to suggest that your insistence on calling TKD a "mixed martial art" is misleading. Not deliberately or maliciously misleading, but misleading nonetheless.



I dont think its misleading, simple that those that are perhaps of a more modern error can only equate it with UFC type stuff, but it is still a valid expression of what TKd did and of course, what Bruce Lee did alos.. MMA doesnt only have to include boxing, BJJ and Thai!

anyway...

Quote:

More aggression.



It varies between light to heavy contact sessions. that stuff was simply filmed in class, not as a "show" or anything and I believe that night we had all the grades up doing it.. hence control was kept reasonable & safe.

Quote:

Going on for longer.I noticed a five second ground rule They look too compliant.



Again, its simply what happened that night, we use 5 second (to allow take downs and quick follow ups), 30 seconds, 2 minutes + depending on what we are doing that night.

Quote:

Well, I cant answer without sounding critical of that training or those students and I dont want it to go like that so I dont know how to say what I mean if im honest.It did not look hardcore enough for me to go with the claims of how TKD was trained in the military.



Its the mindset & discipline thats of military value.. all my students have to work the next day after all.

Quote:

Iv heard lots claim the military style was this or that.By ''they'' I mean people who realy stick up for TKD and wont have a bad word against it.



Ok.. Ive always seen it in the vein I mention above, no martial art destroys its students every training session, otherwise there would be no students left to train.. that said, those (like Kong Young Il) Ive spoke to always mentioned how arduous it was, how strict it was and how the sparring hurt!

Quote:

Do you mean your group or TKD in general have always trained like that?
Im sceptical TKD was originaly trained like that.
If your group,Fair enough.



Not my group.. me & the people I trained with and thats how my school developed into it. It was however based on what we learnt about TKD and its formulation.. hence why we did it.

Quote:

The thing that does not make sense is that if the word MMA comes up,like IT haS,that method of training is degraded as sport,like it has.Agreed yes.



No.. but it is equated with things like UFC etc., but when people like ITFunity equate it with mixing of other arts.. you say he is wrong!!

Quote:

Yet that footage is MMA type training yet its said thats good and its how its supposed to be trained or how it was trained.



No its not.. its of TKD training, which obviously you equate to MMA.. which maybe goes to prove ITFunitys point after all!!!

Quote:

So it does not make sense.



Does to me , Derick & ITFunity.. as we try to train TKD how it was meant to be!

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 07:44 PM

Quote:

First & this may sound like nit picking, but MMA is not a word. It is I think described as the abbreviation of 3 words strung together. The 3 words being:
mixed martial art



Not only that, but its also not a system, as many like to relay it as such or see it as such.

Quote:

But remember, there is nothing wrong with TKD schools offering child rearing services, if they can be effective & that is what the parent is paying for. JMHO



Sorry, dissagree.. Child Rearing & Martial Arts do not equate.. one means "War Arts"..

Stuart
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 02/29/08 08:50 PM

Quote:

Quote:

But remember, there is nothing wrong with TKD schools offering child rearing services, if they can be effective & that is what the parent is paying for. JMHO



Sorry, dissagree.. Child Rearing & Martial Arts do not equate.. one means "War Arts".. Stuart




Come on & we were in sinc up to this!
Well it could just be semantics. But schools that call themselves MAs, are concentrating more on child rearing, especially in areas of discipline, self control, respect & weight control. Now that is not MAs, but a component, but that is what many parents want their children signed up for. If that what parents are paying for, so be it. However it does do harm to the reputation as a MA training center.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 10:48 AM

Quote:

But schools that call themselves MAs, are concentrating more on child rearing, especially in areas of discipline, self control, respect & weight control. Now that is not MAs, but a component,



Except the child rearing bit! Thats a parents job!

Quote:

However it does do harm to the reputation as a MA training center.



Perhaps they should call it MARA.. Martial Arts Related Activity

Stuart
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 12:19 PM

When seeing the term MMA I think mixed martial art. That is an art which is a combination of more than one martial art. I don't generral read the term as M M A (almost a seperate word) meaing UFC style fighting. I think it is useful to clarify what people mean when they use that term.

For me Tae Kwon Do started off as a collection of different techniques from various martial arts avaliable at the time and with some additional bits thrown in. Now it is different than it was but there is nothing wrong with that.

I too am confused by the positives and negatives of the current system. I read maybe in an interview on this site that the money earn by providing the access of the some of the trainning to suburbia allows the Arts to continue on and the serious practioners to run a school and train full time.

It all makes sense. The only thing that doesn't is telling people they are learning self defense when they are clearly are only learning to exercise and have some mental dicipline. This is an issue.

In addition if school owners keep giving out black belts and higher ranks to anyone who pays then you will have this continued loss of respect for the degree.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 01:19 PM

FWIW, I tend to define MMA as training with resistance to fight in all ranges, simultaneously. It is not limited to any particular sytem or style. It is more of a philosophy (like JKD), IMHO.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 02:34 PM

Quote:


No I apprecaite your thought out responses & input. They are valid criticisms. Negative information is good for people to be exposed too. It may help their thought process & concepts.
I just don't think you give much credit or highlight that there is more things that TKD can offer, besides an often weak SD.




I think I can see what TKD has to offer.My point at first was that TKD looses face when people make out it has more to offer than it does.
Its SD that works well against another person who does not do TKD or who can fight well at all ranges IMO.
Its a standing striking art with some basic throws and sweeps and locks.
As long as that is understood I dont think it would ever lose face.
Its brings people together,its fun,its sociable.Its tenents and philosophy can go into others areas of life and people can get alot from it.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 03:40 PM

I dont know if Iv said 'he is wrong'.I think lots just have a different veiw of what MMA is.It could be the wrong word to use.NHB.Vale Tudo,anything goes.Which to use?

In my view and how we train and the way that MMA has evolved it is the tactical combination of grappling and striking.
It is not putting one art to this or that.So its not doing karate then doing a Judo,for example,in my eyes.
Now I see that if someone sees MMA is adding an art to another then wires can get crossed and points can be missed.

So TKD is a modern art MMA in those terms.I see that.
Though its not tacticaly combining striking and grappling.
If they were aiming at that they didnt get it right.

So ,Stuart,you are saying that TKD trained like originaly?
I dont buy.It doesnt fit with lots which could take up a whole thread and would bring in what others big in the martial arts world were doing.No whole style was doing it,just individuals who broke off on there own,ie Don Bluming combining Judo with Karate,Mas Oyama combining Karate with MT.So lots were looking yet they all mised TKD which was training like that?
They toured yet never showed this to promote it?
MMm I dont know.

The point is is that the combination of grappling and striking ,if they did it is not to that high of a level anyway.So that must be stated for TKD to not lose face.The clinching,for example, on that video was not to a high level,grabbing the shoulders is a big no no.Unless its a nobody.Which if thats said to the students is fine.
So Tkd looses face if,and I get the impression some are,TKD is put on a pedestal beyond what it is.

Dereck admits his is mixed with MMA training though.And he has not got anything against that.Im sure he can see how the drills and sparring crosses over,if he does similar to what I do, in to fighting off an assault.
ITFUNITY trains as the encyclopedia says and has never claimed anything beyond that.Does it mention all training,on the ground?If so my instructor has it and im dissapointed he is not following it,and everyone in TKD in Britain except very very few.That would be HUGE failure.

It does not make sense for some to dismiss MMA training as sport,then say your footage,which you claim is how it was trained and meant to be trained,is great when it resembles it in ways.That point does not matter if you did it before or after it became commercial.It means you would of said ''yes they have caught up with us, that is good training''.You must of been annoyed when Geoff Thompson got so much recognition from his 'Animal days'.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 04:55 PM

Quote:

I dont know if Iv said 'he is wrong'.I think lots just have a different veiw of what MMA is.It could be the wrong word to use.NHB.Vale Tudo,anything goes.Which to use?



Actually I agree with both of you. ITFunity is right about TKd being an amalgamation of arts, hence making it an 'original' MMA, but I also agree with you in that people see the term and think of UFC or mixing striking and grappling.. both of you are correct

Quote:

In my view and how we train and the way that MMA has evolved it is the tactical combination of grappling and striking.



Thats a could way to decribe modern MMA I think.

Quote:

It is not putting one art to this or that.So its not doing karate then doing a Judo,for example



I think the point was not doing one then the other, but taking parts of both.

Quote:

So ,Stuart,you are saying that TKD trained like originaly?



No, I didnt say that, not as a whole across TKD. there were definatly some instructors training with more than kick/punch.. but not as a main stram thing. Though if we look at TKD as a whole, the manuals, all the techniques, the different training methods etc. then I think that was there.. I also think that the whole -- "make TKD well known and uniformed" -- thing took over.

Quote:

Mas Oyama combining Karate with MT



Never heard that before.. thats interesting.. where did you read that?

Quote:

So lots were looking yet they all mised TKD which was training like that?



I guess it sort of like the bible/Koran.. its how you interet it.. maybe Im just "different/odd/realistic/forward thinking" (delete whats appropriate)

Quote:

They toured yet never showed this to promote it?



Who said that? Who knows what was shown.. it wasnt caught ion camera unfortunatly, but taking all on-comers means they must have dealt with such things, at least on occasion!

Quote:

The point is is that the combination of grappling and striking ,if they did it is not to that high of a level anyway.



This I agree with, even the ground stuff was basic basic basic (and obscure), that said, the same is true of all the styles except those that specifically dealt with that area. Before BJJ.. ground was judos realm.. times have changed, things have evolved, we know more than they did back then.. so TKd evolves that area as well, but it was there to a dedree, even if we now look back and see it as basic.

Quote:

So that must be stated for TKD to not lose face.



What is it with the losing face thing!! TKd has lost face due to the Mcdojos and belt factories.. I dont think saying it had something, but it was dam basic makes any difference!

Quote:

The clinching,for example, on that video was not to a high level,grabbing the shoulders is a big no no.



Whatever.. as i said, it was simply some guys doing tradtional sparring.. what they did is down to them, it wasnt trying to impress anyone or make a technical film, just someone had a camera there that night and wasnt training due to an injury.. hence the video.

Quote:

So Tkd looses face if,and I get the impression some are,TKD is put on a pedestal beyond what it is.



Sorry, you lost me there... what are you talking about!!

Quote:

Does it mention all training,on the ground?If so my instructor has it and im dissapointed he is not following it,and everyone in TKD in Britain except very very few.That would be HUGE failure.



Yes it does actually, though as Ive said above, its basic.. but the knowledge that was there back then to make it more than basic I dont think was abundent enough! Its easy to judge 60 years on.. you should speak wth your instructor then!

Quote:

It does not make sense for some to dismiss MMA training as sport



It really depend son the mindset of the instructor/student IMO. Problem in, from what Ive seen, most MMA cubs train ground 99% of the time.. and thats the last place you would want to be in a stret fight.. hence the "sport" anology many make. Personally i can see its ebnefits for SD if trained right!

Quote:

then say your footage,which you claim is how it was trained and meant to be trained,is great when it resembles it in ways.



Sorry, lost me again. Are you having a hard time with the fact that we trained similar to that video before MMA was even heard of.. sorry, but thats just the facts.. doesnt belittle MMA in anyway, in fact IMO opinion, MMA has kind of refined stuff in that area.

Quote:

That point does not matter if you did it before or after it became commercial.It means you would of said ''yes they have caught up with us, that is good training''



Personally I dont care either way, MMA is fine, TKd is what i do and have to teach my students... so I do it to the best of my ability with the tools I have.. Im no rogue to jump ship just cos MMA is the new big thing! Ill stand by TKD but at the same time I understand its weakness, but also do what I need to to correct that. You & others can debate than on a forum.. as is it, is it not TKD.. I dont care.. my students are my priority.

Quote:

You must of been annoyed when Geoff Thompson got so much recognition from his 'Animal days'.



No. Geoff is excellant and a genius.. those that dont listen to what he has to say are simply ignorant.. why the f##k would I be annoyed.. im more annoy that you would assume such a thing. BTW, geoff is trad karate you know or did he have an insight into MMA before it was born.. that must annoy you

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 05:28 PM

Quote:

You must of been annoyed when Geoff Thompson got so much recognition from his 'Animal days'.



BTW.. Animal day was a totally different concept. We were simply using as much from the TKD reportoire as possible, with safety, Geoffs Animal Day session was fighting from bad positions, being caight unawares and of course, all full contact! Pre-MMA as well


Geoffs a pioneer... I have nothing but admiration for him!

Stuart
Posted by: janxspirit

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 06:17 PM

Quote:

I dont know if Iv said 'he is wrong'.I think lots just have a different veiw of what MMA is.It could be the wrong word to use.NHB.Vale Tudo,anything goes.Which to use?

In my view and how we train and the way that MMA has evolved it is the tactical combination of grappling and striking.
It is not putting one art to this or that.So its not doing karate then doing a Judo,for example,in my eyes.
Now I see that if someone sees MMA is adding an art to another then wires can get crossed and points can be missed.

So TKD is a modern art MMA in those terms.I see that.
Though its not tacticaly combining striking and grappling.
If they were aiming at that they didnt get it right.

So ,Stuart,you are saying that TKD trained like originaly?
I dont buy.It doesnt fit with lots which could take up a whole thread and would bring in what others big in the martial arts world were doing.No whole style was doing it,just individuals who broke off on there own,ie Don Bluming combining Judo with Karate,Mas Oyama combining Karate with MT.So lots were looking yet they all mised TKD which was training like that?
They toured yet never showed this to promote it?
MMm I dont know.

The point is is that the combination of grappling and striking ,if they did it is not to that high of a level anyway.So that must be stated for TKD to not lose face.The clinching,for example, on that video was not to a high level,grabbing the shoulders is a big no no.Unless its a nobody.Which if thats said to the students is fine.
So Tkd looses face if,and I get the impression some are,TKD is put on a pedestal beyond what it is.

Dereck admits his is mixed with MMA training though.And he has not got anything against that.Im sure he can see how the drills and sparring crosses over,if he does similar to what I do, in to fighting off an assault.
ITFUNITY trains as the encyclopedia says and has never claimed anything beyond that.Does it mention all training,on the ground?If so my instructor has it and im dissapointed he is not following it,and everyone in TKD in Britain except very very few.That would be HUGE failure.

It does not make sense for some to dismiss MMA training as sport,then say your footage,which you claim is how it was trained and meant to be trained,is great when it resembles it in ways.That point does not matter if you did it before or after it became commercial.It means you would of said ''yes they have caught up with us, that is good training''.You must of been annoyed when Geoff Thompson got so much recognition from his 'Animal days'.




MMA does not mean just "mixed Martial Arts." It does not mean "Any Two or More Martial Arts Mixed Together."

MMA is specifically referring to a mix of functional striking, grappling, and submission arts operating in all three ranges - stand up, clinch and grappling.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 08:43 PM

Yes, I believe the term MMA has evolved to the point where it defines a blend of grappling, striking, submissions and etc. There are some schools that advertise such as; "You don't have to mix martial arts to know how to fight like one".

What does it take to make TKD credible? What's the root of the problem? Do we remove all the Mcdojos? Why not just train our practitioners for MMA and send 'em out to UFC, Pride etc. and call it day?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 11:41 PM

Quote:

Quote:

But schools that call themselves MAs, are concentrating more on child rearing, especially in areas of discipline, self control, respect & weight control. Now that is not MAs, but a component,



Except the child rearing bit! Thats a parents job!Stuart




Yes couldn't agree more. But parents come into the DoJang often, asking for help with just that. I think parents care less about SD, kicking & punching, then just having junior say yes sir & thank you, as well as focusing better.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 11:47 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY trains as the encyclopedia says and has never claimed anything beyond that.Does it mention all training,on the ground?If so my instructor has it and im dissapointed he is not following it,and everyone in TKD in Britain except very very few.That would be HUGE failure.





Yes, but remember the key to Chang Hon under the ITF founder was to practice with realism. The most important physical part of TKD is SD. So, when following the instructions to use realism, how does one NOT follow through on the ground, if that is where the fight ends?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/01/08 11:51 PM

Quote:

MMA does not mean just "mixed Martial Arts." It does not mean "Any Two or More Martial Arts Mixed Together."

MMA is specifically referring to a mix of functional striking, grappling, and submission arts operating in all three ranges - stand up, clinch and grappling.





Sorry, but I am using the literal translation. I am ignorant as to any accepted present day definition, so please forgive me. But to me, when you take a MA & combine it with another or others, it is plainly a MMA. As I stated previously, I do not add a specific % mix, or set formula of the mix, just using a general common sense or literal translation.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 12:32 AM

Quote:

Quote:

MMA does not mean just "mixed Martial Arts." It does not mean "Any Two or More Martial Arts Mixed Together."

MMA is specifically referring to a mix of functional striking, grappling, and submission arts operating in all three ranges - stand up, clinch and grappling.





Sorry, but I am using the literal translation. I am ignorant as to any accepted present day definition, so please forgive me. But to me, when you take a MA & combine it with another or others, it is plainly a MMA. As I stated previously, I do not add a specific % mix, or set formula of the mix, just using a general common sense or literal translation.




This is precisely what I meant with my earlier post where I said calling TKD an MMA or saying that it was developed as an MMA is misleading. The term "mixed martial arts" and the abbreviation "MMA" was not even widely used until UFC promoters started using it to describe their sport. Thus the de facto accepted meaning of MMA today is the ring sport as exemplified by UFC, Pride, etc. One can call TKD, or Hapkido, or whatever combination of martial arts as MMA based on the "literal" meaning all you want, but you are doing so in contradiction to how most people use that term. If you walk into an actual MMA gym and tell them you also teach an MMA because you teach TKD, they will be totally confused.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 03:10 AM

Quote:

What does it take to make TKD credible?



I dont believe we can in some peoples eyes. If you teach a crappy school or stick to the old patterns/comp sparring type of thing.. they are labeled TKD/rubbish or if you try to do something about it, your labelled "Not TKD anymore"! Cant win either way!

Quote:

What's the root of the problem? Do we remove all the Mcdojos?



Wouldnt that be great!

Quote:

Why not just train our practitioners for MMA and send 'em out to UFC, Pride etc. and call it day?



See point 1

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 03:15 AM

Quote:

The term "mixed martial arts" and the abbreviation "MMA" was not even widely used until UFC promoters started using it to describe their sport. Thus the de facto accepted meaning of MMA today is the ring sport as exemplified by UFC, Pride, etc.




Im in agreement with this (in the main), though I also understand where ITFunity is coming from, and though the term MMA is used as you say, people were refering to those systems that combined bits of other arts as "Mixed (martial) Arts" way before "MMA" became the catch-all term for the modern UFC etc (circa 80s & 90s).

Like I said, I understand ITFunitys point but wouldnt use it to decribe TKD myself. Interesting that you say its to "describe their sport" but when people refer to it as "sport" many get disgruntled!!!


Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 03:24 AM

Quote:

MMA does not mean just "mixed Martial Arts." It does not mean "Any Two or More Martial Arts Mixed Together."

MMA is specifically referring to a mix of functional striking, grappling, and submission arts operating in all three ranges - stand up, clinch and grappling.




I think thats probibly the best definition of MMA Ive heard.

Going back to the OP, obviously the rise of MMA has contributed to everything elses popularity, so I have a question for you.. why do some MMA clubs feel the urge to slag off other martial arts?

After reading your definition, which as I said I thought was good, I went to have a look at your site and saw this page: http://www.stlouistrainingcircle.com/not.to.expect.htm

Hence my question?

I ask as it reads as if it refers to the whole world of martial arts rather than localised clubs (that may be a bit "iffy" in your area or make a point about Mcdojangs etc.. I just wondered why the club feels the need to do that. I always felt it a bit undignified to slag off other arts/clubs when instead you should just list the good points of your own club as you have done on the other page.. and let people decide to themselves! Besides which, much of it is incorrect and OTT!

No offence, Im just wondering why some clubs do this sort of thing as it seems to be a bigger thing in MMA circles!

Stuart
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 11:43 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

MMA does not mean just "mixed Martial Arts." It does not mean "Any Two or More Martial Arts Mixed Together."

MMA is specifically referring to a mix of functional striking, grappling, and submission arts operating in all three ranges - stand up, clinch and grappling.





Sorry, but I am using the literal translation. I am ignorant as to any accepted present day definition, so please forgive me. But to me, when you take a MA & combine it with another or others, it is plainly a MMA. As I stated previously, I do not add a specific % mix, or set formula of the mix, just using a general common sense or literal translation.




This is precisely what I meant with my earlier post where I said calling TKD an MMA or saying that it was developed as an MMA is misleading. The term "mixed martial arts" and the abbreviation "MMA" was not even widely used until UFC promoters started using it to describe their sport. Thus the de facto accepted meaning of MMA today is the ring sport as exemplified by UFC, Pride, etc. One can call TKD, or Hapkido, or whatever combination of martial arts as MMA based on the "literal" meaning all you want, but you are doing so in contradiction to how most people use that term. If you walk into an actual MMA gym and tell them you also teach an MMA because you teach TKD, they will be totally confused.




badachagi


I totally agree. Personally I had seldom herd the term mma until the emergence of the ufc, pride ect. I believe that the term took on an identity of it's own and now days is automatically identified with these organizations and as a sport by most people. The rules for competition distinguish it a sport.

TKD as trained will not be effective in this area because much of what we learn to combat or negate some of this type fighting will never, and appropriately so, be allowed in competitions. This is why I part with people that feel mma is a stronger SD system. Yes ground fighting is great if you have to go there but a properly trained striker should not have to during SD unless caught off guard or overwhelmed by numbers and in this case one is probably screwed anyway. Ground should still be learned but definitely not priority. Many of us could take a person down but how many of us would want to do it with a thumb in our eye and our head facing the wrong way! just a silly example you get the point. I catch h-ll for this opinion from people because mma has done a good job of promoting it's self and many identify it as being the ultimate SD, the real deal, I do not. Mma is very popular but I would not call it SD I call it realistic fighting and one is trained to fight this way in the confines of specific rules mostly for SPORT!

What is ironic is that prior to training MA most of us were more likely to crudely defend like an mma fighter, you know end up on ground wrestling around ground and pound etc. Any one who has had to fight as a kid or young adult has been there. Personally I joined MA to become more than that even though I was very good at it. I am not knocking MMA I find it very entertaining. I am just saddened, amazed ,and disappointed at the number of TKD persons that think what they do does not measure up to MMA for SD. If one feels this way one should be asking them selves if they are training where they need to be. This is where I personally believe TKD might be losing some popularity.

For me personally, as a MA's I am about SD not fighting and I do not believe for a second that on average my SD training does not match that of an MMA fighter. I would however admit that an MMA fighters training is tougher due to the type of competitions they train to compete in. I could pick up my own training if desired and if I wanted to be a fighter. I guess what I am saying is that I have high regard for MMA fighters, they are a physically and mentally though bunch and in this regard have an edge on most any single art training today. However when it comes down to SD technique, any properly trained TKD practitioner should do just fine comparatively speaking but lets not confuse our sparing as self defence. This is another area where people want to try and wrongly compare TKDs SD skills by assuming that this is all we are about. If TKD wants to save face we should be show casing our SD training as much as we do our sparing competitions, only then will people understand what we are and how we match up against other arts. This would also force those schools with inferior training to step up to the plate and properly train their students.
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 03:30 PM

Quote:

why do some MMA clubs feel the urge to slag off other martial arts?




Because some people are incredibly inept and lack any reasonable logic. Some even attempt to make valid points but it ends up being a bias and troll-fest.Its the typical "My dad kicks your dad's arse" playground argument.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 03:57 PM

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So ,Stuart,you are saying that TKD trained like originaly?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


No, I didnt say that, not as a whole across TKD. there were definatly some instructors training with more than kick/punch.. but not as a main stram thing. Though if we look at TKD as a whole, the manuals, all the techniques, the different training methods etc. then I think that was there.. I also think that the whole -- "make TKD well known and uniformed" -- thing took over.






I got the impression you were saying it did.Trying to give more credit to TKD.Which has been my point as to why it looses face.Which is the thread discussion.

Mas Oyamas best fighter ,Kurozaki Kenji, lost to a Thai fighter and then went over and trained and he brought those methods back and Kyokusin karate incorporated them.

What they showed on the tours is not documented either as well as caught on film?
Convenient.
We can only imagine that it must of resembled later filmed tours or what was in the encyclopedia and what was taught by the original TKD people.
Now if they did not show it then they copped out.Hee Ill Choi,Jhoon Rhee,Rhee the british pioneer.Countless others.Virtualy all of britain,probably american,Even what was going on in korea.They neglected to show that or put it in?Then they all sold out.I dont havethe encyclopeia but it was up to those above me to show me.And those above those etc.So its all a sham and that gets on my tits big time if thats the case.And so it should everyone else.And it destroys all the tenents and philosophy if thats the case.

Yes times have evolved.So its good to add it.Bang on what iv been saying.I dont agree on saying it was all there originaly which I got the impression was being said.


Now your saying its basic.You didnt say that before.
The loose face thing is the discussion.My point was it looses it by making out TKD is more than it is.So thats what that is.Just my veiw that.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So Tkd looses face if,and I get the impression some are,TKD is put on a pedestal beyond what it is.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sorry, you lost me there... what are you talking about!!





Like I said.My point.If you were claiming TKD had it all anyway,which it looked like you were,that would be ridiculus.
Now I know you were not.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It does not make sense for some to dismiss MMA training as sport


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It really depend son the mindset of the instructor/student IMO. Problem in, from what Ive seen, most MMA cubs train ground 99% of the time.. and thats the last place you would want to be in a stret fight.. hence the "sport" anology many make. Personally i can see its ebnefits for SD if trained right!






Thats a mistake then.Its the equivilent of others saying TKD is all kicking from what they have seen.

My point was why is it ok for TKD to train like that a for it to be original TKD and great for SD, yet if MMA guys do it its sport?
As soon as MMA was mentioned it got jip and I defended it.Then footage of 'original' TKD is shown using the same ideas and it was ok.
It did not make sense.
If original TKD was as is said,then noone in TKD can say anything against MMA as they would be the same.And anyone training in MMA type ways would actualy be doing original Tkd,or more original TKD that those just punching and kicking and a few locks or throws.
I hope you see that point.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That point does not matter if you did it before or after it became commercial.It means you would of said ''yes they have caught up with us, that is good training''


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Personally I dont care either way, MMA is fine, TKd is what i do and have to teach my students... so I do it to the best of my ability with the tools I have.. Im no rogue to jump ship just cos MMA is the new big thing! Ill stand by TKD but at the same time I understand its weakness, but also do what I need to to correct that. You & others can debate than on a forum.. as is it, is it not TKD.. I dont care.. my students are my priority.




Good.Glad you see its weakness.Like I say,you seemed to have been making out TKD had it all originaly.
Im a rogue yea.Just after good solid training.Ships ahoy.I will incorporate my TKD into it if no onw is going to show me another way.If every one has copped out of showingme what can I do?
And if I do that,by your terms,I will bedoing original TKD anyway by training like that.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You must of been annoyed when Geoff Thompson got so much recognition from his 'Animal days'.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


No. Geoff is excellant and a genius.. those that dont listen to what he has to say are simply ignorant.. why the f##k would I be annoyed.. im more annoy that you would assume such a thing. BTW, geoff is trad karate you know or did he have an insight into MMA before it was born.. that must annoy you




I said that,sarcasticaly, because if you were doing it alread you would be a pioneer like ,Geoff or Steve Morris who was doing way,way before.''Everyday was animal day in Earlam street'' to quote Steve.
Yes Geoff was trad but alot of his stuff comes from boxing,judo,sambo that works and his adapting of trad to make it work.As Trad it did not work.He said that himself.
Anyway.Going off topic,sorry.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 04:01 PM

MMA does not mean just "mixed Martial Arts." It does not mean "Any Two or More Martial Arts Mixed Together."

MMA is specifically referring to a mix of functional striking, grappling, and submission arts operating in all three ranges - stand up, clinch and grappling.




Well put.Kind of what I was trying to say.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 04:08 PM



Quote:

I catch h-ll for this opinion from people because mma has done a good job of promoting it's self and many identify it as being the ultimate SD, the real deal, I do not




I dont know many who say this Von.So you wont get much jip.Or should not.Most say that MMA type training is just the closest thing to a real fight you get without actualy going out and fighting.Thats all.
And its not just about ground fighting or ground and pound which people who dont train in it seem obsessed with bringing up.

Ok Von.Post some good realistic SD training.
Thats what we need.Footage.
We can get footage of street cams filming assaults.Footage of fights.Footage of MMA fights and compare them all.
Footage of real choatic violence and see what it looks like.
The thread has gone bonkers lets go the whole hog.
Its turning into a kind of 'style' verses.
Let just make it a good training verses bad training thread .
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 05:30 PM

The thread is what is it Matt, and I haven't seen anything that contravened forum rules (although that's for someone else to decide now).

I would like make a point about the idea that TKD is now disrespected. I think those who are trying to improve TKD are not always united in how they think the art should change in order to improve.

For instance, some like Mr Anslow here see the SD side of TKD as it's most important aspect, and do everything with that in mind. In this case, MMA effective does not necessarily mean street effective, because it is thought that the two worlds differ so much.

A second group, which I think you would belong to Matt(if I may be so bold lol), sees sport as probably the most important tool in the box in regards to good training. MMA might be seen as the best avenue for which to take TKD into, because it has the most relaxed rule set, although I think you would still give kickboxing and Muay Thai some credit as being good for learning to defend oneself. The principle is I think- if you can do it in a sporting environment, then it will be far easier to reproduce in a life or death scenario.

So my opinion: I love sport. The more I do martial arts the more I realise that I have very little interest in the self defense aspects themselves, I just like fighting with people in a reasonably safe environment. To this extent, most of the TKD schools I have trained at have been just what I wanted- a focus on sparring drills and practice that were pretty much the same as training for kickboxing, kyukoshin etc. I do not believe it matters whether a TKD school teaches one iota of ground-work or even clinch-work, so long as the instructor can point out another school which trains these areas specifically.

I have trained at a school that taught everything under one roof as it were, but I found I could out-strike everyone on their feet and submit everyone on the ground,(no, no I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet, but make a point) because I trained the two ranges separately and intensely under experts in their one range, rather than trying to learn it all from one instructor, which frankly I think is very difficult to do- we all have preferences!(my weakness by the way is the stand-up clinch)

So that is my opinion. It may be useful for some of you who prefer the "fighting" aspects of martial arts- however I think it will simply not make any sense for those of you who prefer the "self defense" aspects. But this is how most activities are- people do things for different reasons, and it would be folly to assume that the guy who is doing the same MA as you is in it for the same reasons, or agrees with your approach. I think the vibrancy of this discussion and of the forum generally demonstrates that amply.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/02/08 06:06 PM

Quote:



Quote:

I catch h-ll for this opinion from people because mma has done a good job of promoting it's self and many identify it as being the ultimate SD, the real deal, I do not




I dont know many who say this Von.So you wont get much jip.Or should not.Most say that MMA type training is just the closest thing to a real fight you get without actualy going out and fighting.Thats all.
And its not just about ground fighting or ground and pound which people who dont train in it seem obsessed with bringing up.

Ok Von.Post some good realistic SD training.
Thats what we need.Footage.
We can get footage of street cams filming assaults.Footage of fights.Footage of MMA fights and compare them all.
Footage of real choatic violence and see what it looks like.
The thread has gone bonkers lets go the whole hog.
Its turning into a kind of 'style' verses.
Let just make it a good training verses bad training thread .





matxtx

I just stated that MMA was realistic fighting, where we part is that I do not consider MMA type fighting ultimate SD I call it fighting, for a lot of reasons. As far as me posting real life SD techniques, that would be impossible because it would all depend on a given situation.
I assure you my goal would not to let things turn into a fight and if it did I would not want it to last very long. Fighting is foolish unless it is for sport so when I speak of SD I am referring to becoming much more dangerous than a fighter because my life depends on it. I have lived a while and have been in the company of plenty of dangerous and assaultive individuals the kind that you speak of and am familiar with chaotic violence. I can tell you from experience that most of them are pu---s when it comes to technique. They are best at surprising you and getting the upper hand which usually involves a weapon. I also have worked in corrections for 10 plus years and have daily contact with many nasty people from many back grounds. I know how they think and how they victimize others and what most of them are capable of. Now how would I fair against an MMA person in a competition? probably not to well because I do not train to fight this way because I am not a fighter. What I am trying to say is that MMA is good at what it trains for which is fighting but real SD employes many techniques that would neutralize a person hell bent on fighting. If a weapon is involved any one is in trouble no matter what training they have and now on top of that is the surprise factor, and on top of that is these people are seldom alone so I don"t care how good a fighter you are. If an individual does not feel they are learning good practical SD and this is what they seek they are training under the wrong person, wrong organization , and wrong system. That was all I was trying to say, never wanted to give the impression that one system is better than another. My whole point is that fighting these people is the wrong way to go so becoming a good fighter is not good enough. One must decide what they seek, is it to become a fighter ,or is it something else? If it is self SD and one is training TKD or any other system and feel they are not learning than they need to reevaluate their training organization.

I bring up the ground game of MMA because that is what stands out in peoples minds the most as far as MMA and TKD being different. It is not meant to be a jib at MMA. Now again I say that many MMA fighters would not utilize much of their MMA ring training for a real SD situation, at least I would hope not, because they have probably learned many techniques better suited for SD than actually fighting like they would in competition.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 03:00 AM

Funny, I always thought it was called MMA because there was a mixture of MA's in the ring (or octagon), karate vs MT, BJJ vs Sumo etc
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 03:39 AM

Quote:

I got the impression you were saying it did.Trying to give more credit to TKD.Which has been my point as to why it looses face.Which is the thread discussion.



Funnily enough, I dont think people give the original TKD enough credit myself.. those looking from the outside only ever talk of kicking distance and points competitions.. no others parts of TKD. Credit where its due, TKD had throws, locks and fighting off the floor (limited as it was)

Quote:

Mas Oyamas best fighter ,Kurozaki Kenji, lost to a Thai fighter and then went over and trained and he brought those methods back and Kyokusin karate incorporated them.



And did KK suddenly become Thia cos of it!!

Quote:

What they showed on the tours is not documented either as well as caught on film?
Convenient.



Dunno about documented (perhaps ITFunity could answer that).. as for film.. no one had video cameras in them days Im afraid!

Quote:

Now if they did not show it then they copped out.Hee Ill Choi,Jhoon Rhee,Rhee the british pioneer.Countless others.Virtualy all of britain,probably american,Even what was going on in korea.They neglected to show that or put it in?Then they all sold out.



I dont think so. Perhaps they could have shown a wider spectrum of what TKD offered as a general thing thats all. Though there are videos around of more then just punching and kicking. I recall on another forum someone posted an 8mm film of a TKD pionner demonstrating joint locks & throws.. to a poster who wouldnt belive TKD had throws, even though they were in the manuals!

Quote:

I dont havethe encyclopeia but it was up to those above me to show me.



Is it! I thought that was down to instructors!


Quote:

Yes times have evolved.So its good to add it.Bang on what iv been saying.I dont agree on saying it was all there originaly which I got the impression was being said.



Was is this "all" you keep banging on about? No art has it all.. not then, not now. TKD has/has a lot of parts to it though.. kicks, punches, locks, throws, takedowns and even limited ground (type) work.. though not "rollin" as in BJJ.. this I think is its weak link but back then it wasnt considered so as the philosphy was different and it was more akin to SD philosophy - where if you went down, you did whatever was needed to get back up.. you didnt look for a submission.

Quote:

Now your saying its basic.You didnt say that before.



I said the stuff on the floor was basic.. it still is and TBH other arts have it much more refined and even did back then. Its funny because many TKD BB's were also Judo BB's and its ashame the ne-waza didnt become part of TKD (IMO).

Quote:

The loose face thing is the discussion.My point was it looses it by making out TKD is more than it is.



I dont think anyone has.. the point peple are actually making was that it has more to it that is taught/shown today.



Quote:

Like I said.My point.If you were claiming TKD had it all anyway,which it looked like you were,that would be ridiculus. Now I know you were not.



I look forward to hearing what you mean by "all" . Again, no art has it all and no offence to MMA guys, but neither does MMA.


Quote:

It does not make sense for some to dismiss MMA training as sport



I dont think anyone dismissed it as pure sport, but on the other hand most clubs do train for sport, Ive not heard of MMA's SD policy ever!! I've never seen a street fight look like the ones in the UFC TBH.. bits of ones perhaps, but no street fight looks for a submission or aims to take it to the ground and argue that as you like but thats what happens in most UFC type matches.
I dont wanna get into MMA what is, what its not type of thing, as I respect the art and have a few friends who train in and/or teach it.


Quote:

Thats a mistake then.Its the equivilent of others saying TKD is all kicking from what they have seen.



Others do say that about TKD and like you say, its down to the MMA world to show different.. just like I feel its down to TKD to show different.

Quote:

My point was why is it ok for TKD to train like that a for it to be original TKD and great for SD, yet if MMA guys do it its sport?



Like I said, Im not getting into an anti-MMA thing, but the difference as far as what we were doing is that if you were swept or thrown, you would strike or aim for vital points to allow time to stand up or, if in a good position go for a choke.. as I said above, there wernt really any submissions then (unless you did Judo too), we would aim for the eys, joints and anything else that could be considered a valid target in SD (all in a fair type of safety mind you).. hence the difference.. one is fair game, the other is banned by the rules!

Quote:

As soon as MMA was mentioned it got jip and I defended it.Then footage of 'original' TKD is shown using the same ideas and it was ok. It did not make sense.



Its probibly because your comments seem to be attacking TKD, so peope will defend it.

Quote:

If original TKD was as is said,then noone in TKD can say anything against MMA as they would be the same.And anyone training in MMA type ways would actualy be doing original Tkd,or more original TKD that those just punching and kicking and a few locks or throws. I hope you see that point.



I do but i dont agree that they would look the same or the training would be the same.. there may be similarities, after all, how many ways can you ht a pad or move in for a hip throw etc. but the overall gameplan would make them different.

Quote:

That point does not matter if you did it before or after it became commercial.It means you would of said ''yes they have caught up with us, that is good training''



I think it is good training, refined training too. Ecah can learn form each other, theres no bottomles pit of knowledge.



Quote:

Good.Glad you see its weakness.Like I say,you seemed to have been making out TKD had it all originaly.



Theres that all thing again!!

Quote:

Im a rogue yea.Just after good solid training.Ships ahoy.I will incorporate my TKD into it if no onw is going to show me another way.If every one has copped out of showingme what can I do?



Sorry, you lost me again. i wasnt implying your a rogue, just that rogue MMA clubs are setting up, same as rogue kick boxing clubs did when that was the big thing!


Quote:

I said that,sarcasticaly, because if you were doing it alread you would be a pioneer like ,Geoff or Steve Morris who was doing way,way before.



So you agree, they were MMA before MMA was invented?


Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 03:40 AM

Quote:

Funny, I always thought it was called MMA because there was a mixture of MA's in the ring (or octagon), karate vs MT, BJJ vs Sumo etc




Thats actually a dam good point! Perhaps MMA'ers have evolved the meaning in time, to suit how they now train. I disctinly remember the early UFC's (1,2 & 3) being billed as "Mixed Martial Art" events!

Hmm.. anyone know who came up with the term MMA?

Stuart
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 06:44 AM

What I think a lot of people forget something about the evolution of TKD when considering Chang Hon. It was developed through the military and taught to soldiers.

I stand (pun intended) to be corrected, but probably one of the last things you really want to do in a combat-zone encounter is go to ground. I imagine you want to be able to out manouver them and perhaps throw them down and take them out, not spend valuable time rolling with them when their buddies might suddenly appear.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 08:04 AM

Quote:

What I think a lot of people forget something about the evolution of TKD when considering Chang Hon. It was developed through the military and taught to soldiers.

I stand (pun intended) to be corrected, but probably one of the last things you really want to do in a combat-zone encounter is go to ground. I imagine you want to be able to out manouver them and perhaps throw them down and take them out, not spend valuable time rolling with them when their buddies might suddenly appear.




yup.. I say the same thing in the book I did.

Stuart
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 01:20 PM

Your kind of seeing my point.Yes.
I want to actualy know what it feels like to have someone try to knock me out,tackle me,kick me, choke me,etc at high intensity and the only way to do that safely is with MMA type drills.Because of safety they HAVE to be sport techniques.
I do have the TKD SD side too and I have taken it very,very seriously in the past and realy researched and trained and done the application stuff and gone deep into TKD.
Lots of it just doesnt work in high intensity drills with someone trying to knock you out.Iv tried.
If someone else can it work,show me in high intensity comditions because its never shown.
I have my own interpretations which Iv only figured out through MMA type drills.
Iv found I can only do some of that stuff because I can do the MMA type drills.Foe example I can pummel in the clinch to get to eyes if I like,or the throat.I can get position on the ground to be able to do the 'lethal stuff',if I end up there,and defend.And obviously get back up.
And I prefer the fighting aspects because if someone assaults me as soon as it goes physical,its now a fight.Im in a fight.The real SD was all the stuff before it went physical.Awarness,talking down etc.
So looking at it like that,which is my view, SD is fighting back just being more brutal than if it was a sports fight.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 02:16 PM

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mas Oyamas best fighter ,Kurozaki Kenji, lost to a Thai fighter and then went over and trained and he brought those methods back and Kyokusin karate incorporated them.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And did KK suddenly become Thia cos of it!!




No.Never said it did.Explain the point please.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now if they did not show it then they copped out.Hee Ill Choi,Jhoon Rhee,Rhee the british pioneer.Countless others.Virtualy all of britain,probably american,Even what was going on in korea.They neglected to show that or put it in?Then they all sold out.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I dont think so. Perhaps they could have shown a wider spectrum of what TKD offered as a general thing thats all. Though there are videos around of more then just punching and kicking. I recall on another forum someone posted an 8mm film of a TKD pionner demonstrating joint locks & throws.. to a poster who wouldnt belive TKD had throws, even though they were in the manuals!





Im not talking about throws.I no full well its not just punching and kicking.
I said show a clip of real TKD As it was originaly trained and you played yours.
Now youv moved the goal posts.Your doing an updated version with modern elements incorporated and trying to progress in areas.Which is great.
If you were to claim that was how they originaly trained,like your clip,yet there is no other similar footage or talk of it or any of that demonstrated then they all would of copped out for not showing it like that.Everyone from the top downwards as General Choi did non at it at seminars I know of.Did not grade countless people on it.Coultless pioneers not mentioning it.So it would of been a cop out on there part for not giving paying students what they knew or how they realy trained.


Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont havethe encyclopeia but it was up to those above me to show me.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Is it! I thought that was down to instructors!




Yes.The instructors.That what I meant by those above me.As a young guy I put my seld in there shoes to teach me realistic SD.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes times have evolved.So its good to add it.Bang on what iv been saying.I dont agree on saying it was all there originaly which I got the impression was being said.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Was is this "all" you keep banging on about? No art has it all.. not then, not now. TKD has/has a lot of parts to it though.. kicks, punches, locks, throws, takedowns and even limited ground (type) work.. though not "rollin" as in BJJ.. this I think is its weak link but back then it wasnt considered so as the philosphy was different and it was more akin to SD philosophy - where if you went down, you did whatever was needed to get back up.. you didnt look for a submission.




Your clip was doing it all.And you said it was how they trained originaly.
All I mean striking with the idea of grappling.Or vice versa.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The loose face thing is the discussion.My point was it looses it by making out TKD is more than it is.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I dont think anyone has.. the point peple are actually making was that it has more to it that is taught/shown today.



Ok We disagree.I dont think many TKD puts itself into honest perspective,.Lots claim,in my experience, its realy lethal,it has anti-grappling,we dont need this or that etc,its to kill, all that over top malarky.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It does not make sense for some to dismiss MMA training as sport


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I dont think anyone dismissed it as pure sport, but on the other hand most clubs do train for sport, Ive not heard of MMA's SD policy ever!! I've never seen a street fight look like the ones in the UFC TBH.. bits of ones perhaps, but no street fight looks for a submission or aims to take it to the ground and argue that as you like but thats what happens in most UFC type matches.
I dont wanna get into MMA what is, what its not type of thing, as I respect the art and have a few friends who train in and/or teach it.





Do most clubs train for sport?Id love to see statistics.
UFC? Whats that got to do with it.Thats just a place for people to challenge in a competition.Its a place to apply MMA.
And every MMA person looks for submissions too?Erm ok.A bit of type casting going on.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thats a mistake then.Its the equivilent of others saying TKD is all kicking from what they have seen.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Others do say that about TKD and like you say, its down to the MMA world to show different.. just like I feel its down to TKD to show different.





In your book you have a section on misinterpretations of TKD.Surely you can see that its funny for you to then make assumptions about MMA.
If others can do it to TKD then it works the other way too.
Your not practicing what you preach.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My point was why is it ok for TKD to train like that a for it to be original TKD and great for SD, yet if MMA guys do it its sport?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Like I said, Im not getting into an anti-MMA thing, but the difference as far as what we were doing is that if you were swept or thrown, you would strike or aim for vital points to allow time to stand up or, if in a good position go for a choke.. as I said above, there wernt really any submissions then (unless you did Judo too), we would aim for the eys, joints and anything else that could be considered a valid target in SD (all in a fair type of safety mind you).. hence the difference.. one is fair game, the other is banned by the rules!




Again,your making assumptions.
The tactic I train is to strike at very high intensitys and not get caught in A submission game,Strike strike strike ONLY go for submission if it happens to be here or its all you have.
Obviously subbmissions need to be know and it helps for defence.Know your enemy.
You will find most fights now in competition are and have been going towards striking.
You have still got UFC sport in mind.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I said that,sarcasticaly, because if you were doing it alread you would be a pioneer like ,Geoff or Steve Morris who was doing way,way before.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


So you agree, they were MMA before MMA was invented?




They were striking with the idea of grappling,yes.Quite a few were way before.
I would not say MMA was 'invented'.Its progressed.The gracies and UFC just brought it to light.So im guessing you mean at that point it was 'invented'.
Sorry if I missenterpret that.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 03:26 PM

Quote:

I would not say MMA was 'invented'.Its progressed.The gracies and UFC just brought it to light.So im guessing you mean at that point it was 'invented'.





But the Gracies don't do MMA (as a style/practice) they do Gracie BJJ
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 03:29 PM

Quote:

What I think a lot of people forget something about the evolution of TKD when considering Chang Hon. It was developed through the military and taught to soldiers.

I stand (pun intended) to be corrected, but probably one of the last things you really want to do in a combat-zone encounter is go to ground. I imagine you want to be able to out manouver them and perhaps throw them down and take them out, not spend valuable time rolling with them when their buddies might suddenly appear.




I am not sure if this is allowed but basically as they said it karate kid.

Fight for life not for points.

Your enemy was trying to kill you so you would need to defend yourself with that in mind. This has been told to me repeatedly by one of the instructors of TKD in the korean army.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 03:39 PM

Flynch, what I meant was that rolling and locking-out are things to do if you have time and actually don't want to kill.Surely grabbing and throwing then following up with a kick to the downed man would be better than going to ground and rolling with them.

OK, I do take your point about the need to be able to deal with any kind of attack.

There are pictures of early CH TKD demos showing unarmed defences against rifle/bayonet attacks, which are probably more likely the kind of thing you'd come across in the field than Royce Gracie.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 06:40 PM

Quote:

No.Never said it did.Explain the point please.



Point is, when a TKD school incorporates something not in its original make up (ie. decent groundwork) then suddenly everyone says its no longer TKD!

Quote:

Im not talking about throws.I no full well its not just punching and kicking.



No sure you do.. as obvious if there are throws there is stand up grappling, and if a throw is performed and the fight continues, there is ground fighting.. all the bits you sem to feel arnt/wernt there!!

Quote:

Now youv moved the goal posts.Your doing an updated version with modern elements incorporated and trying to progress in areas.Which is great.



Nope.. see above. That type of sparring wasnt main stream but it did go on.. hence why I was taught it (my instructors been doing it 40+ years btw)... bit like the applicational side of things actually. I have seen some old footage of it, many years ago, but not sure where it was or how to find it now, hence why I havnt mentoned it. The main difference was that when one went down, they went for a finish (as in a strike) rather than "rolled".. as mentioned in previous posts.

Quote:

If you were to claim that was how they originaly trained,like your clip,yet there is no other similar footage or talk of it or any of that demonstrated then they all would of copped out for not showing it like that.



Dam.. now Im gonna have to do some research and try and locate the footage.. probibly on an old video somewhere. On second thoughts,, its probibly on the net somewhere if you go look.

Quote:

Everyone from the top downwards as General Choi did non at it at seminars I know of.Did not grade countless people on it.Coultless pioneers not mentioning it.So it would of been a cop out on there part for not giving paying students what they knew or how they realy trained.



Not really, instructors are free to teach what they want. I dont teach it to junior grades, and wont allow the heavy contact stuff til BB. Though I agree in part that Gen choi pushed too much of one side of the art & not the other. Perhaps Mr Flynch can ask GM CK Choi if he sparred with more than punches & kicks!


Quote:

Yes.The instructors.That what I meant by those above me.As a young guy I put my seld in there shoes to teach me realistic SD.[/quotes]
Perhaps you should speak to them then!

Quote:

All I mean striking with the idea of grappling.Or vice versa.



you think thats a new thing.. appearing only with MMA!! many styles do that!


Quote:

Ok We disagree.I dont think many TKD puts itself into honest perspective,.Lots claim,in my experience, its realy lethal,it has anti-grappling,we dont need this or that etc,its to kill, all that over top malarky.



Many arts claim many things to sell it.. including MMA. The claims dont really matter as its down to the practioner. I take it you`ve seen a lot of TKd then.. as three long time practioneers on here, one with 3/4 decades behind him have told you so, but still you feel you know better cos you cant find a video on youtube or something!

Quote:

Do most clubs train for sport?Id love to see statistics.
UFC? Whats that got to do with it.Thats just a place for people to challenge in a competition.Its a place to apply MMA.



MMA is good alround stuff, but has limitations like anything else.. after all, you fight how you train, and if that is diving the the ground then your in for trouble on the street. Im not saying all MMA clubs do that, but they do train that for the competitive side. Same applies to the way other arts are trained.. including TKD. I think the sport stuff comes from the fact that MMA evolved from sport.. the UFC.. as pointed out by Trevek in his post. MMA didnt evolve the UFC it was the other way around.. in the early UFc's billed as "Mixed Martial Arts" it was just that, a competition involving a mixture of martial arts fighting one another.


Quote:

And every MMA person looks for submissions too?Erm ok.A bit of type casting going on.



Oh I agree.. but then again, watching the high profile MMA stuff on the box, you see a hell of a lot of that kind of thing, hence a lot of training for it must be going on.. after all yuo fight how you train.. especially in UFC/MMA comps.

Quote:

In your book you have a section on misinterpretations of TKD.Surely you can see that its funny for you to then make assumptions about MMA.



I dont make those assumptions.. Im refering to why others may do. Still, perhaps it will give some of the MMA a decent section for their books instead of all the pages on submissions eh!

Quote:

Again,your making assumptions.



I havnt made any assumptions.. just the facts.. rules of sport prhibit certain things.. things which are fair game when theres no rules involved.

Quote:

The tactic I train is to strike at very high intensitys and not get caught in A submission game,Strike strike strike ONLY go for submission if it happens to be here or its all you have.



Not very mixed is it


Quote:

You have still got UFC sport in mind.



Thats cos thats most of the MMA I see.. though a friend of mine went to Pain & Glory a while back and he said it was mostly ground stuff too!! Plus, as said, MMA evolved from UFC!

Quote:

I would not say MMA was 'invented'.Its progressed.



Progressed from what... people mixing various parts of martial arts.. kinda like the exact thing you disagree with ITFunitys referral about eh!

Quote:

The gracies and UFC just brought it to light.So im guessing you mean at that point it was 'invented'.
Sorry if I missenterpret that.



Evolved maybe.. again, from the UFC, which the Gracies invented to highlight their style.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/03/08 06:43 PM

Quote:

The real SD was all the stuff before it went physical.Awarness,talking down etc.



Actually thats "SP" not "SD". SD comes after that and fighting follows after that!

Stuart
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 01:59 PM

Quote:


Point is, when a TKD school incorporates something not in its original make up (ie. decent groundwork) then suddenly everyone says its no longer TKD!




I agree people do that.Never said anything to do with it.I said you incorpoated and its good to progress.So was not sure why is was directed at me.If it was.

Your joking right?
You write a chapter and go on about how TKD is misenterpreted then do it your self?
Its ok for TKD to 'roll' and its not sport,but if MMA guys do it its sport?
TKD has it all,hang on whats all,oh it was basic,hang it isnt its as good as judo,we roll,they rolled,no they dont,its the military,they dont go to the floor,hang they sparred on the floor,wait, erm.?
Its all over the place.It changes in so many places to suit.
And you dont seem to know much about MMA or whatever you want to call it beyond sport or clique crap.
Im not repectfull of that kind of behavour so dont realy care anymore or about your views.

I believe what I know and think I have an honest down to earth veiw of what TKD is and is not.Ill continue to find out and make my own mind up.
Plus im not a TKD hater yet I cant make points without seeming to be so.
Your instructor is important in British martial arts then.What is his name so I can pass that on and ask others who know alot if they came across him.
And find that footage that demonstates ALL you have been saying.

Cheers.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 02:10 PM

LOL Stuart and matxtx =

Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 02:25 PM

Quote:

Flynch, what I meant was that rolling and locking-out are things to do if you have time and actually don't want to kill.Surely grabbing and throwing then following up with a kick to the downed man would be better than going to ground and rolling with them.

OK, I do take your point about the need to be able to deal with any kind of attack.

There are pictures of early CH TKD demos showing unarmed defences against rifle/bayonet attacks, which are probably more likely the kind of thing you'd come across in the field than Royce Gracie.




Yes I agree. The judo throws were taught, the defense against rifle/bayonet were a primary focus as that was the weapon of choice on the battlefield at that time (we are still learning/teaching these defenses good or bad). Remember also that as part of the trainning thye had to become proficient in the use of the rifle/bayonet, staff/pole and knife. Should we be teaching this given we are teaching defenses against them?

I have learned eye gouge, head butt, throat attack, and groin attack as part of self defense in a life or death situation. In these cases the attack is meant to as you say end the fight before it gats started by disabling your attacker.

I agree that you proably want to avoid going to the ground in this type of environment and I am not sure if your opponent would be trying to take you to the ground either. But learning new stuff never hurt anyone...I guess.

This is not to say anything about the effectiveness of grappling in this situation as I have no real idea about this.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 02:58 PM

I asked and here it is. "If people think TKD just uses hands and feet then it is not properly taught" GM CK Choi

Preparation for tournament sparring was completely different and usually seperate from normal sparring.

Actually in class they were allowed to spar with holding, grabbing, knees, elbows, judo throws and even foot stomp opponents on the ground

If you are in a small close quarters fight you have to fight with these things and the following.

Head butts, groin attack and throat attack etc are taught in different ways. It is pretty hard to use those in free sparing safely.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 03:20 PM

wow, that's pretty cool stuff flynch.

Interesting that I recall a couple of years ago TKD Times having an article by a Master who was saying how the role of the stamp/stomp had been forgotten and should be reintroduced.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 04:24 PM

Quote:

Quote:

What they showed on the tours is not documented either as well as caught on film?
Convenient.



Dunno about documented (perhaps ITFunity could answer that).. as for film.. no one had video cameras in them days Im afraid!





I am sure that documentation exists. However, I am not sure in what form. The point was already made video cameras were few & far between. I will follow up on this, but it will take awhile.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 04:56 PM

Quote:

Everyone from the top downwards as General Choi did non at it at seminars I know of.Did not grade countless people on it.Coultless pioneers not mentioning it.So it would of been a cop out on there part for not giving paying students what they knew or how they realy trained.





Please understand some basic facts/points. TKD is the world's most popular MA. However, there is very little standardization with the Art, other than the name & for many the tournament rules. Many simply look at TKD as an umbrella name for KMAs, (striking). Others look at it as a martial or olympic sport. The smallest group is governed by the ITF & is often called Chang Hon.

The military Art of SD was from the Oh Do kwan, which later developed into the ITF or Chang Hon style of TKD. It is often referred to as original TKD, as it was the 1st to use the name, using it for some 10, 17, 18 or 23 years before others widely accepted its use. As the KTA, Kukkiwon & WTF identified themselves as a KMA, via mostly the tournament sparring rules, following the lead of the JiDo kwan, others called the ITF/Chang Hon traditional TKD, as it empahasized less sports sparring rules. Over time, when this version of rules was adopted & then included into the Olympics, this way of viewing TKD grew more popular. Note, the popularity of TKD around the world, belongs initially to Gen Choi, the pioneers & the ITF, but later & maybe even more so to Dr. Kim & the WTF, along of course with the KTA & Kukkiwon.

The 70s saw a bit of a change to mixing MA styles or techniques (note avoidance of using MMA), led by Bruce Lee & JeetKunDo. The 80s with the arrival of the Karate Kid movies & then the 90s with the NinJa Turtles, moved kids in large numbers to what was previously an adult SD based activity. I think these movements led to an increase or surge in MMAs to fill this void.

The pioneers did emphasize SD. It waned when what people wanted changed or when they realized that more money could be made by increasing access to TKD to all people for more reasons. In the 70s, my ITF school, led by an ITF Master had spartan training that was SD based. Fighting on the floor was not allowed, as it was (according to my teacher) impolite & against the sparring rules. This was rectified by myself & others when we had our own school.

Gen Choi taught SD. He did it his way & that was it must be based in realism. So when official ITF registered schools do not follow this, they are not following his wishes. As far as repeated criticisms that the founder did not cover SD at his seminars, that is not wholly true. However, the overwhelming attention was always to movement & Tuls, as this was his signature & what helped set off TKD from other MAs. He required strict standardization to that aspect & was very successful in doing it on a worldwide basis. However, as most would realize & concide, SD is a personal aspect, with little standardization, as what is required is dependent on attacker(s), defender(s) & situation, including enviornment. Hence little time was devoted to this, as it was best handled by the actual teacher, who knows the student best.

Now there seems to be much criticism of TKD, both here & in general. However, here is seems to me, that the defense & then counters are for the most part limited to original TKD, aka, traditional or military SD, which we know was the basis for the ITF. One must keep in mind, military training is that, for the military.

Now is there a defense of TKD to be made by other than Chang Hon based TKD students?
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:05 PM

Well i guess it is effective if you have on army boots and you have just throw your attacker to the ground. But you might want to learn the throw as well
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:06 PM

Quote:

Quote:

No.Never said it did.Explain the point please.



Point is, when a TKD school incorporates something not in its original make up (ie. decent groundwork) then suddenly everyone says its no longer TKD!

Quote:

Im not talking about throws.I no full well its not just punching and kicking.



No sure you do.. as obvious if there are throws there is stand up grappling, and if a throw is performed and the fight continues, there is ground fighting.. all the bits you sem to feel arnt/wernt there!!




Quote:

If you were to claim that was how they originaly trained,like your clip,yet there is no other similar footage or talk of it or any of that demonstrated then they all would of copped out for not showing it like that.



Quote:

Everyone from the top downwards as General Choi did non at it at seminars I know of.Did not grade countless people on it.Coultless pioneers not mentioning it.So it would of been a cop out on there part for not giving paying students what they knew or how they realy trained.




Quote:

Not really, instructors are free to teach what they want. I dont teach it to junior grades, and wont allow the heavy contact stuff til BB. Though I agree in part that Gen choi pushed too much of one side of the art & not the other. Perhaps Mr Flynch can ask GM CK Choi if he sparred with more than punches & kicks!





This is what I mean by realism. If you are fighting freely (free sparring) with almost everything goes for SD, how can you not at times end up on the floor?
If this is the case, how can you not continue to fight?
So when schools do not do this, they simply are not following the founder's directions & are mistakenly, inadvertingly or otherwise, mixing SD with tournament sparring. Not a no-no for the Art, but for the teacher.
JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:16 PM

Quote:

TKD has it all,hang on whats all,oh it was basic,hang it isnt its as good as judo,we roll,they rolled,no they dont,its the military,they dont go to the floor,hang they sparred on the floor,wait, erm.?
Its all over the place.It changes in so many places to suit.

I believe what I know and think I have an honest down to earth veiw of what TKD is and is not.Ill continue to find out and make my own mind up.





Yes I see your point & agree somewhat. However, I think you judge TKD on what you see & not what it is suppossed to be. In the end, it is all about money for many. TKD has suffered as it became more commercialized, just like other MAs. Now MMAs I believe was born out a a real need to fill this SD void. As such, it is successful IMHO in that aspect. There is no question in my mind, that if one wants a more hard core, street tuff SD, they need to consider joining a MMA school & not a TKD school. However, a real TKD school following its original design, can offer a good & effective SD for many, plus a whole lot more. Just don't confuse which TKD school you should join, as when making a choice, one must find what best fits their individual needs with a school that is in the best position to meet those needs or requirements of the student.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:19 PM

Quote:

I asked and here it is. "If people think TKD just uses hands and feet then it is not properly taught" GM CK Choi
Preparation for tournament sparring was completely different and usually seperate from normal sparring.
Actually in class they were allowed to spar with holding, grabbing, knees, elbows, judo throws and even foot stomp opponents on the ground
If you are in a small close quarters fight you have to fight with these things and the following.
Head butts, groin attack and throat attack etc are taught in different ways. It is pretty hard to use those in free sparing safely.





Sounds like GM Choi Chang Keun has been training ay my or Mr. Anslow's school! LOL
Just kidding, but thanks Mr. Flynch, as I couldn't agree more.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:22 PM

Quote:

Interesting that I recall a couple of years ago TKD Times having an article by a Master who was saying how the role of the stamp/stomp had been forgotten and should be reintroduced.




Stamping Kick
Cha BapGi
Required technique in our system.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:37 PM

It is also useful for generating power when there is little room for reaction force. I'll see if I can find the article, but I think one of my language students might have it somewhere.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:46 PM

Quote:

However, I think you judge TKD on what you see & not what it is suppossed to be.




I just want to address this.I judge it on taking it very seriously in the past,hard training,research,what iv seen, what iv trained,questioning everything and trying them.

I would like to think im making properly thought out points that are unbiased to anything.

Lots of other points you make I dont agree with in places and others I do.

I just wonder when a line will be drawn on what TKD is and was.Did it have everything originaly any other style has and was hardcore?
One minute its yes then its no.
Does it have things not in there and could be better and modernised with up to date training drills,methods and ideas borrowed from other sources ?
One minute its yes then its no.

Its too confusing to bother discussing it seems.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:52 PM

I think that it has to develop, even if that means going backwards to pick up some things which have fallen off the roof.

Personally, I think that now the General is gone then it will become harder to define TKD as it slips under its own umbrella term and begins to re-examine itself and how it needs to adapt.More and more exponents are exploring ground techniques and I think these will eventually become a major part of the syllabus. Even people like Hee il Cho have worked many years incorporating aspects of Hapkido into their art.

On that point, I once asked Mr Cho how far you can adapt and change before it isn't TKD. His reply was that, in his opinion, if you remembered where you came from you would always be TKD. I think this is where the art and philosophy comes into play over the mere physical technique.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 05:54 PM

On another point, I think it might be entirely possible that before all the standardisation many teachers specialised and no one school wuld have 'the' entire syllabus.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 06:22 PM

Quote:

Quote:

However, I think you judge TKD on what you see & not what it is suppossed to be.



I just want to address this.I judge it on taking it very seriously in the past,hard training,research,what iv seen, what iv trained,questioning everything and trying them.
I would like to think im making properly thought out points that are unbiased to anything.

I just wonder when a line will be drawn on what TKD is and was.Did it have everything originaly any other style has and was hardcore?




I question neither your experience or sincerity. I only say that TKD is so broad. I am only offerring counterpoints from the Chang Hon or ITF standpoint, which is the smallest of the groups.

What is TKD? Who knows. It seems like it is more of an umbrella name than anything. Next comes the martial or olympic sport. The narrowest definition that I used to use, but no longer do, as it makes little sense, is that TKD was an Art founded by Ambassador Choi & his military followers.
Now I was not there in the Korean Army, but do know that is what a combination of other fighting arts of the day, including but not limited to Judo, wrestling & boxing, with the biggest influence being Japanese Karate.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 06:25 PM

Quote:

On that point, I once asked Mr Cho how far you can adapt and change before it isn't TKD. His reply was that, in his opinion, if you remembered where you came from you would always be TKD. I think this is where the art and philosophy comes into play over the mere physical technique.





Of course it would still be TKD, as it was an early cobination of different styles & techniques. So anything added, would just supplement its main mission, SD. Note GM Cho Hee Il, was an early military student of TKD, who later worked for the ITF to spread it worldwide. he has been on his own for decades doing same.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 06:41 PM

I once heard that GM Cho actually asked to grade before the General for his 7th and 8th Dan. Any ida if this is true?
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 07:32 PM

Video's do/did exist. For example for year GM CK Choi has been in search of a full TKD trainning video he was paid to create in the seventies for the president (could be some other term for leader) of Paraguay
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 07:42 PM

Motobu Choki ,Okinawan Karate pioneer apparently said this.

“The techniques of kata have its limits and one must come to understand this. The techniques of kata were never developed to be used against a professional fighter, in the arena or on the battlefield. They were however, most effective against someone who had no idea of the strategy being used to counter their aggressive behavior."

Tkd roots back to Karate.So it makes sense it applies to TKD patterns and so the SD.
Tkd people,in my experience, find this hard to accept andget annoyed and try to give TKD more jazz........Man.
Maybe TKD because took from boxing, judo, etc apparently, and so feel it has more?
But put into that perspective things make sense.
Are students clearly told this?
I dont know.Not to me it seems.
If people just want that and know it.Great.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 08:32 PM

I think it is acceptable to see it for what it is now as that is what is avalibale for many students. I can see how it may seem like we are talking about something very different. GM CK Choi knows what it has become in some circles and he would like to see what it was and should be come back (as he believes) comeback.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 09:38 PM

Quote:

I agree people do that.Never said anything to do with it.I said you incorpoated and its good to progress.So was not sure why is was directed at me.If it was.



It was a general observation of how it differs if TKd does it, as opposed to other arts doing similar. it wasnt directed at you per se, just it formed part of the post which was responding to you (if that makes sense). To clarify.. general observation, not directed at you personally.. sorry for the confusion.

Quote:

Your joking right?
You write a chapter and go on about how TKD is misenterpreted then do it your self?



Not at all.. I havnt slagged off MMA, I simply stated that most of what people see of it is the sport on the TV! I've made no comment on the way clubs train.. as obviously different clubs will focus on what they feel are the important aspect, just what "others/most" will have seen and tried to clear up why many will see it as a "sport".. to clarify.. I havnt said "I" see it that way.. again, its a general view with regards to the subject matter you presented.

Quote:

Its ok for TKD to 'roll' and its not sport,but if MMA guys do it its sport?



I dont "roll" as they do in MMA.. again it was a general point about a weak link in TKD (IMO). When we go to ground, we go to finish - quickly.. its not a tactical thing (as in MMA is more tactical in their manouvers IMO).. its simply survival training.. first to finish.. wins.

Quote:

TKD has it all,hang on whats all,oh it was basic,hang it isnt its as good as judo,we roll,they rolled,no they dont,its the military,they dont go to the floor,hang they sparred on the floor,wait, erm.?



Wait indeed. In you attempts to make me look bad or something you are mixing up post to try and make a point. Lets break it down again:
1. "TKD has it all" - I didnt say that.. I said it has more than is recognised in most schools today.. I also acknowledge weak areas. the only person using the "All" description is you!
2. "Isnt as good as judo" - was in reference to the throwing section of TKD. Obviously it stands to reason that an art the practices many facets as opposed to mainly one (like throwing in judo)isnt going to be as good at it. Again, my opinion.
3. With regards to rolling - ain't got a clue what your on about TBH. I refer to "rollin" as it was relayed to me by a MMA instructor I know - as in when going to the ground, moving for position whilst looking for a submission or strike. I use the term to diffientiate from what TKD saw as ground work.
4. I never said they sparred on the floor.. I said they did take downs and followed up/finished

-- again.. dont f##king misquote me cos your points aint being made!



Quote:

Its all over the place.It changes in so many places to suit.



Actually, I think yours are, as when you hear something that doesnt fit your now "formed" opinion you get all angsty and make poss like this. You asked.. I answered, and also did more to clarify things for you.. see end of this post for some final clarification. This post (the one Im replying to) simply sounds like a kid chucking his toys out the pram cos he aint getting his own way!

Quote:

And you dont seem to know much about MMA or whatever you want to call it beyond sport or clique crap.



See above with regards to MMA/sport.. and I agree, Im no expert on MMA.. I have trained with some MMA instructors and talked to a fair few.. but only speak of what Ive seen//experienced.. I make no comments as an authority on the subject.

Quote:

Im not repectfull of that kind of behavour so dont realy care anymore or about your views.



Perhaps you should check yourself then. If you dont value my opinion.. dont ask me questions.. simple really!

Quote:

I believe what I know



As most do!!!!

Quote:

and think I have an honest down to earth veiw of what TKD is and is not.



Of what your TKd experience is it seems!

Quote:

Ill continue to find out and make my own mind up.



that you should.. as I do.

Quote:

Plus im not a TKD hater yet I cant make points without seeming to be so.



Perhaps you should reread your posts. even so.. it makes no difference as the answers are the same either way, hater or not!

Quote:

Your instructor is important in British martial arts then.



Why? He does his own thing and simply stays true to the TKD as he was taught.

Quote:

What is his name so I can pass that on and ask others who know alot if they came across him.



Whose your instructor? Mine is very very easy to find out, but I dont wish to post his name on a public forum as hes a quiet guy who just does his thing.

Quote:

And find that footage that demonstates ALL you have been saying.



This has already been reponded to.. but see following post as well.

With regards to "Traditional Sparring" and sparring related to more than competition type.. in a previous post (in a response to you) I asked Flynch to ask GM Choi (a genuine living pioneer of TKD if his parring was similar and involved more). Mr flynch kindly did do and here is his response.. (I have highlighted those points that are in direct reference to your questions/observations in this thread)
Quote:

Quote:

"I asked and here it is. " If people think TKD just uses hands and feet then it is not properly taught " GM CK Choi
Preparation for tournament sparring was completely different and usually seperate from normal sparring.
Actually in class they were allowed to spar with holding, grabbing, knees, elbows, judo throws and even foot stomp opponents on the ground
If you are in a small close quarters fight you have to fight with these things and the following."



-- many many thanks to Flynch for asking GM Choi for clarification and I believe this answers your (matxtx) points about "from the top down etc."!!

Follow on with a post by ITFunity (replied to my post, but obviously concerning this part of the discussion and TD going to the ground):
Quote:

This is what I mean by realism. If you are fighting freely (free sparring) with almost everything goes for SD, how can you not at times end up on the floor?
If this is the case, how can you not continue to fight?
So when schools do not do this, they simply are not following the founder's directions & are mistakenly, inadvertingly or otherwise, mixing SD with tournament sparring. Not a no-no for the Art, but for the teacher.




ITFunity has further responded to your post, but Ill leave you to respond to that on a seperate post. However, this quote is quote by ITFunity inline with you main points:
Quote:

Sounds like GM Choi Chang Keun has been training ay my or Mr. Anslow's school!


.. IMO this should read the other way round.. which funnily enough (though I would love to) I havent trained with GM Choi.. though it goes a long way to show my training isnt far fetched as you (matxtx) are trying to make out!


Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 09:42 PM

Quote:

I just want to address this.I judge it on taking it very seriously in the past,hard training,research,what iv seen, what iv trained,questioning everything and trying them.



According to you... we dont know how much of that you've actually done or in what areas or what directions. I dont mean this as disrespectful.. but its simply your word, so carries as much weight as any others word on a public forum.

Quote:

I would like to think im making properly thought out points that are unbiased to anything.



Based on your experiences.

Quote:

Does it have things not in there and could be better and modernised with up to date training drills,methods and ideas borrowed from other sources ?



Any art over 50 years old can benefit with up to date training methods.. thats a given. But its not a reason to discreit an art.. just common sense IMO.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 09:50 PM

Quote:

Motobu Choki ,Okinawan Karate pioneer apparently said this.

“The techniques of kata have its limits and one must come to understand this. The techniques of kata were never developed to be used against a professional fighter, in the arena or on the battlefield. They were however, most effective against someone who had no idea of the strategy being used to counter their aggressive behavior."

Tkd roots back to Karate.So it makes sense it applies to TKD patterns and so the SD.
Tkd people,in my experience, find this hard to accept andget annoyed and try to give TKD more jazz........Man.



points:
1. I have made the same point on many thread reagrding patterns/SD.
2. Not withstanding the fact that Motobu Choki hated Funakoshi, so did what he could to discredit him and his sytem.
3. Is one of the reasons I say pattern applications are not "in fight" techniques.. and that, that is learnt in sparring (Traditional or Mixed/MMA type).


Quote:

Maybe TKD because took from boxing, judo, etc apparently, and so feel it has more?
But put into that perspective things make sense.



How so?

Quote:

Are students clearly told this?



Why should they be? allmost all arts developed as a mix of "own thoughts" based on other arts.. very few expend the efforts to explain this. Karate for example doesnt go to ends to explain its kung fu roots or even its okinawan roots.. why should TKd be any different or held more accountable!!

Personally I think if asked, yes explain.. if not, then its part of every students reasearch into their art... and if they dont research.... I doubt they are interested or care anyway.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 09:53 PM

Quote:

LOL Stuart and matxtx =






LOL..
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 10:46 PM

Quote:

I once heard that GM Cho actually asked to grade before the General for his 7th and 8th Dan. Any ida if this is true?




I have not heard this. I think he left as an ITF 6th dan.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/04/08 10:49 PM

Quote:

Tkd roots back to Karate.So it makes sense it applies to TKD patterns and so the SD.
Tkd people,in my experience, find this hard to accept andget annoyed and try to give TKD more jazz........





This is an important reason why the history of TKD has been so clouded & to be frank, fudged by many people. It is something that will slowly be corrected, with the internet helping.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 02:59 AM

That's funny Matt, cos I recall the TAGB handbook once stated TKD had 'the best hand techniques of Shotokan Karate'.

I'd agree about the limits of kata/tul. After all, look at how many kicks you learn in TKD which you never use up to BB in patterns. It would suggest there is a lot more than the tul.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 04:22 AM

Apologies for my rather off tone in my big post response to you. I had a rough day yesterday and replied whilst in a bad mood.

I went back to edit it today, but it wouldnt allow me.


Stuart
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 01:43 PM

Quote:

Not at all.. I havnt slagged off MMA, I simply stated that most of what people see of it is the sport on the TV! I've made no comment on the way clubs train.. as obviously different clubs will focus on what they feel are the important aspect, just what "others/most" will have seen and tried to clear up why many will see it as a "sport".. to clarify.. I havnt said "I" see it that way.. again, its a general view with regards to the subject matter you presented.




It did not come across like that to me.It looked like you just making misconceptions after seeing a bit of it and not having trained.Similar how others see TKD in the olympics or in demo and think its just fancy kicking.

Quote:

I dont "roll" as they do in MMA.. again it was a general point about a weak link in TKD (IMO). When we go to ground, we go to finish - quickly.. its not a tactical thing (as in MMA is more tactical in their manouvers IMO).. its simply survival training.. first to finish.. wins.




I said post a clip how it was trained and you were rolling.
You could of said this is TKD with enhancement.Rollings rolling.
Anyone in there right mind tries to finish.They do it a sports fight because it might be their best area and even then want to end it quickly.It turns to tactics because the other guy is good and fightingback.They are not purposly taking ages to stop each other.Thats just what happens when skilled people meet.
Plus,thats still a veiw based on sports stuff.

Quote:

Wait indeed. In you attempts to make me look bad or something you are mixing up post to try and make a point. Lets break it down again:
1. "TKD has it all" - I didnt say that.. I said it has more than is recognised in most schools today.. I also acknowledge weak areas. the only person using the "All" description is you!
2. "Isnt as good as judo" - was in reference to the throwing section of TKD. Obviously it stands to reason that an art the practices many facets as opposed to mainly one (like throwing in judo)isnt going to be as good at it. Again, my opinion.
3. With regards to rolling - ain't got a clue what your on about TBH. I refer to "rollin" as it was relayed to me by a MMA instructor I know - as in when going to the ground, moving for position whilst looking for a submission or strike. I use the term to diffientiate from what TKD saw as ground work.
4. I never said they sparred on the floor.. I said they did take downs and followed up/finished

-- again.. dont f##king misquote me cos your points aint being made!





I was making genuine points.I realy cant be arsed to go through posts nit picking qoutes and comparing so just generaly said how it looked in one sentence.

You showed a clip.You were doing what I would call 'all' in the context of this discussion.Stand up to ground and rolling.
You said it is as good as Judo if trained properly in response to me saying if TKD has judo why does it not resemble it.
You never said either way about the floor or made it clear.To me anyway.Im going by the clip and what youv been saying.
Hopefull you can see what I was saying ,even if im mistinterpreting you, and not just being a tit to make you look bad.

Quote:

Actually, I think yours are, as when you hear something that doesnt fit your now "formed" opinion you get all angsty and make poss like this. You asked.. I answered, and also did more to clarify things for you.. see end of this post for some final clarification. This post (the one Im replying to) simply sounds like a kid chucking his toys out the pram cos he aint getting his own way!





Well if I am I am only human and im not deliberatly doing that.I will take that on board re-read and asses myself.

Quote:

See above with regards to MMA/sport.. and I agree, Im no expert on MMA.. I have trained with some MMA instructors and talked to a fair few.. but only speak of what Ive seen//experienced.. I make no comments as an authority on the subject.




Well at times you sounded definite.

Quote:

Perhaps you should check yourself then. If you dont value my opinion.. dont ask me questions.. simple really!





Imnot sure iv asked question per se.Just responded to you.
Dont worry I try to be a self aware person.I will check myself over.

Quote:

Perhaps you should reread your posts. even so.. it makes no difference as the answers are the same either way, hater or not!




I dont unsertand that fully.Oh well.Imnot a hater.Its coming across that way as I oppose some views.I would suggest.

Quote:

Why? He does his own thing and simply stays true to the TKD as he was taught




No.Because He would be doing it before anyone else I know of in britain.As a combined thing.Basicaly what would later be MMA.I know of people who realy searched for hardcore stuff in the 60s and 70s.As far as I know Steve Morris did it first in britain,around 73 or 74.A full contact anything goes gym in combination.Standing,grappling,keep going anythinggoes.So you instructor pre dates that by nearly 10 years if he was doing it for 40 plus years so is someone who should be recognised.And who they all missed in looking when some were looking at researching that kind of stuff at the time.

Quote:

This has already been reponded to.. but see following post as well.

With regards to "Traditional Sparring" and sparring related to more than competition type.. in a previous post (in a response to you) I asked Flynch to ask GM Choi (a genuine living pioneer of TKD if his parring was similar and involved more). Mr flynch kindly did do and here is his response.. (I have highlighted those points that are in direct reference to your questions/observations in this thread)

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I asked and here it is. " If people think TKD just uses hands and feet then it is not properly taught " GM CK Choi
Preparation for tournament sparring was completely different and usually seperate from normal sparring.
Actually in class they were allowed to spar with holding, grabbing, knees, elbows, judo throws and even foot stomp opponents on the ground
If you are in a small close quarters fight you have to fight with these things and the following."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- many many thanks to Flynch for asking GM Choi for clarification and I believe this answers your (matxtx) points about "from the top down etc."!!

Follow on with a post by ITFunity (replied to my post, but obviously concerning this part of the discussion and TD going to the ground):

Quote:




Good points though irrelevant.Iv not disputed any of that.
I f...ing know all that.

Iv disputed MMA type sparring,grappling with the idea of striking ,rolling,Ground work ,keeping going.
Pick out my quotes and I will explain again if youv taken them as meaning the above.

Is he still teaching like that though?Thats not clear or seems to be the case if he has to ask so its still iffy as to why not.Is it copping out?
Also in what context.Full contact elbows and knees etc?
Or like one step and Hosinsul with an certain ammount of compliance?
Its sensible to conclude thats how they did it at this point.He might put me right.

And the footage is a must for me.I question everything so sorry.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 01:49 PM

Quote:

According to you... we dont know how much of that you've actually done or in what areas or what directions. I dont mean this as disrespectful.. but its simply your word, so carries as much weight as any others word on a public forum.





True.I cant say anymore.Believe the above or believe im just saying all this for the crack.

Quote:

Based on your experiences.





True.All I am is my experiences.All anyone is is based on theirs.

Quote:

Any art over 50 years old can benefit with up to date training methods.. thats a given. But its not a reason to discreit an art.. just common sense IMO.




I am not trying to f..ing discredit any art.If you believe that fully,Just dont respond to me there is no point.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 01:57 PM

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe TKD because took from boxing, judo, etc apparently, and so feel it has more?
But put into that perspective things make sense.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


How so?





It was a question.Because TKD has taken from fighting arts apparently boxing,juo etc ,do TKD people get annoyed if people say it works best on the unskilled?

Quote:

Why should they be? allmost all arts developed as a mix of "own thoughts" based on other arts.. very few expend the efforts to explain this. Karate for example doesnt go to ends to explain its kung fu roots or even its okinawan roots.. why should TKd be any different or held more accountable!!

Personally I think if asked, yes explain.. if not, then its part of every students reasearch into their art... and if they dont research.... I doubt they are interested or care anyway.




I disagree totaly.Sorry.A human being has a certain responsiblity to others.If they dont tell a young girl for example the context of the things she is being taught for SD it is an ABSOLUTE DISCRACE.Thats my passionate personal opinion.
How a person could have the balls to open a school and do that I dont know.
Like I say.My personal opinion.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 02:26 PM

Quote:

This is what I mean by realism. If you are fighting freely (free sparring) with almost everything goes for SD, how can you not at times end up on the floor?
If this is the case, how can you not continue to fight?
So when schools do not do this, they simply are not following the founder's directions & are mistakenly, inadvertingly or otherwise, mixing SD with tournament sparring. Not a no-no for the Art, but for the teacher.
JMHO




True.
But the oppurtunity to fight freely like that was not given so it seems.Thats kind of the argument.Its not given in most places even now.
Was that permission given?Did TKD originaly allow it to go on like MMA does and as sturats clip makes out?Is there reference to the general stating this?
Or is it now,under modern influence,interpreted as that?
In one step and hosinul definintly anything goes,with a certain amount of co operation finishing with a strike ,which is presumed finished the job.
.
In hindsight its so obviouse but we know that most martial style that were striking arts mainly arts did not go to ground for one reason or the other.Plus with it being military based we know they were no encouraged to do so.
Plus to do that it must of been sports types techniques not what TKD considers TKD techniques or it would not have been safe.
Another point is that boxing and Judo are sport based anyway and incorporated into TKD so that confuses the issue about sport type things and so MMA being not SD.
Im actualy losing the will to care haha.Its too confusing.
Each to there own.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 02:32 PM

Not sure what your getting at.
I was saying that when TKD is put into perspective, that its SD against an unskilled person, it makes sense.
But do TKD people find this hard to accept or disagree with it?
Do they disagree because it was apparently influenced by fighting arts like boxing and judo.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 04:25 PM

Quote:

“The techniques of kata have its limits and one must come to understand this. The techniques of kata were never developed to be used against a professional fighter, in the arena or on the battlefield. They were however, most effective against someone who had no idea of the strategy being used to counter their aggressive behavior."

Tkd roots back to Karate.So it makes sense it applies to TKD patterns and so the SD.
Tkd people,in my experience, find this hard to accept andget annoyed and try to give TKD more jazz........Man./
Quote:





My point is that tul serve a particular purpose but are not the be all and end all. As the quote you provided says, it has its limitations.


My point about the kicking is to back this up. Think about how many different techniques you will have learned by BB which are not included in your tuls to that point.


The matter about TKD being rooted in karate is well known and admitted, at least by the Chang Hon. even your own assoc used to put it in their handbook. I think any anti-karate stance is based more on Korean nationalism than anything else.


You keep saying TKD 'took' from judo and boxing. well, I imagine TAGB TKD took from boxing because for a while their Chief Instructor was GM Hee Il Cho, who once fought as a boxer and incorporated it into his style of TKD. To some this was heresy. Ask Kenny walton about the time when he was in UKTA and GM Rhee criticised his win in the world championships because he wasn't using 'pure' TKD.


Another thing to consider is that TKD didn't necessarily 'take' from these styles. Remeber that when Chang Hon was founded Korea had been under Japanese rule for years. Many of the new TKD exponents had learned Japanese arts. The pioneers were also in the army fighting a war. When General Choi amalgamated the different schools under the umbrella of TKD I'm sure these guys didn't say "OK, we must never use any Judo techniques ever again". These guys would have known these techniques and used them.


Matt, forgive me for asking, but what is it you are looking for? I don't want to sound nasty but it seems like you are chasing your tail trying to find someone to tell you that the TKD you want is the real one. Sorry, but I get the idea that you feel insecure in your relationship with TKD since you've started looking at MMA and don't want to feel like you've been wasting your time with TKD OR that you are somehow betraying TKD by bringing in other techniques which are not "real TKD".


Mate, there is no such thing as real TKD. There is only YOUR TKD. As GM Cho said, you can bring things TO TaeKwonDo and as long as you remember who you are and where you are from (TKD) then you'll always be TKD.


Maybe I've got the wrong idea. If so just ignore me. Only about 2% of anything I say is worth listening to anyway
Posted by: EvenRats

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 04:52 PM

Quote:

Not sure what your getting at.
I was saying that when TKD is put into perspective, that its SD against an unskilled person, it makes sense.




Right, despite the fact that it was originally developed for use in the military?
What do you mean by putting it in perspective? Do you mean philosophy and goal?
Are you saying it took decades to establish a fighting system that only prepares it's combatants to fight against regular folks and bums?

Quote:

But do TKD people find this hard to accept or disagree with it?



Of course I acknowledge the shortcomings of my art. But if I was learning any other MA I would think the same. There are flaws in virtually EVERY art. That's why I supplement my training with all aspects of fighting. Correct me if I'm wrong but the founders of TK-D never said "don't go into the in-depth nature of groundfighting, throws and submissions or we'll cut your gum-gums off".

Quote:

Do they disagree because it was apparently influenced by fighting arts like boxing and judo.



It takes two baby.


In my view you're putting your perspective as if every street corner was filled with bloody thirsty streetfighters and MMA practitioners. MMA is NOT SD.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 08:18 PM

Quote:

Or like one step and Hosinsul with an certain ammount of compliance?




There is no compliance in our (ITF) 1 steps. None! That is why we apparently do them different from others. Reference to my long back & forths with Dereck, concerning same.
ITF HooSinSul, when learning moves requires a certain amount of compliance, as I think it would be with what you do. However, when it is all put together in free sparring or HooSinsul, there is no compliance, as that is not training under realistic conditions. Which you must remember is the mandate of the founder. Compliance in HooSinSul is also there for demo purposes, but never should it exist during SD training.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 08:43 PM

Quote:

But the oppurtunity to fight freely like that was not given so it seems.Thats kind of the argument.Its not given in most places even now.
Was that permission given?Did TKD originaly allow it to go on like MMA does and as sturats clip makes out?Is there reference to the general stating this?




Look, you really sound like you are not really well versed in the TKD textbooks & syllabus of the founder. This is & was always the way it was suppossed to be. Now your experience with TKD is apparently limited to your experiences. remember, TKD is the world's most popular MA. However, many look at it simply as an umbrella name. Others as a sport. The smallest group is the ITF. So you seem to be critiquing an Art based on schools you have seen or trained at. You said you don't have the Encylopedia. Get it! Any edition! I have almost all of them. So when you get hold of a copy, I will give you specific pages, depending on the edition you come across. It is all over the system of sparring section & the hoosinsul one as well.

I can also tell you that he told me this in person & when he taught seminars. You won't believe this as you want it on tape. rest assurred, I have never posted anything false or misleading on purpose in this or any other forum. Never. In fact, when people question what I post, I clarify or when they are right, I corrected it. When I question some who have held oppossing points & asked for references, they usually never come. When I have had people question me, I asked for one instance where they think I was wrong or misleading. That challenge has still remained unanswered. Even here, posting without a name, integrity is of the utmost importance to me. I blast the ITF when deserved. It is important to me to remain honest, because if I don't, with ITF TKD being the minority, it will serve a crushing blow to my ability to help others learn what TK-D was meant to be, according to the founder.

So continue your assault on TKD. There are good points that can & should be made to highlight certain schools shortcomings & mutiple instances of students not following the ITF syllabus. However, this is not the fault of the 1st or original TKD system.


Quote:

In one step and hosinul definintly anything goes,with a certain amount of co operation finishing with a strike ,which is presumed finished the job.




Again, this shows your lack of grasp of the ITF syllabus. I can make no defense of how other schools do it, or even an ITF school that does it wrong. This is not how the founder wanted step sparring done! So I can not address your criticism, as it is unfounded in our case, according to our syllabus.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/05/08 08:52 PM

Quote:

I was saying that when TKD is put into perspective, that its SD against an unskilled person, it makes sense.
But do TKD people find this hard to accept or disagree with it?




What are you getting at? There are of course better ways to learn SD. However, TKD is not JUST for SD. You want the best SD, find a school that will concentrate on that & use realistic conditions to insure you learn. PERIOD.

Now any MA can make someone better able to defend themselves, even a weak school or a school that emphasizes sport, as the work out will help build a person in many ways. The reason or 1 reason why MMAs have grown is because of the softness of many MAs schools, not limited to TKD.
So whats your point?

If you train in a tuff MMA or strict combat fighting school & go up against one from a weak or soft MA school, with all other things being equal, size, shape, toughness, strength etc, you win, plain & simple. I would even wager that you win when going against someone from my way of training, with all other things being equal, as your training concentrates on that aspect. However, I will pick my students for most of the other things that the ITF syllabus builds & develops.
Apples & Oranges!
I certainly am not afraid to acknowledge shortcomings my way, but I am proud of what we accomplish, as it is much more that we do then SD. What we do lasts longer & comes in more often then pure SD skills are needed. JMHO
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 03:47 AM

Quote:

It did not come across like that to me.It looked like you just making misconceptions after seeing a bit of it and not having trained.



Actually Ive seen quite a bit of it, including how clubs and some of the top people train. Though I repeat, you brought up the TKD/MMA thing.. when "sport" was mentioned (from what it did actually develop from, no matter how it may be sued btw), you got all angsty.. I simply tried to explain why it would be seen as "sport".. but nothing is 100%.. boxing is technically a sport, but carries much merit with regards to the fighting side of SD as well.

Quote:

Similar how others see TKD in the olympics or in demo and think its just fancy kicking.



Sadly, many clubs are like that which is one reason why TKD gets its crappy, undeserved rep.

Quote:

I said post a clip how it was trained and you were rolling. You could of said this is TKD with enhancement.



I have always said that anything we do on the gound longer than a few seconds isnt really part of TKD and have always said its TKDs weak link. That said, I dont really se it as "rolling", not as "Rolling" was described to me by an MMA guy - which is manouvering about, looking for locks and positioning etc.

Quote:

Rollings rolling.



According to what you are saying, anything done in a non standing postion is called "rolling".. if thats so, then yes you are right... I beg to differ.

Quote:

Anyone in there right mind tries to finish.They do it a sports fight because it might be their best area and even then want to end it quickly.



Well yes, the difference is.. in SD you woudnt weight up the odds of finishing.. meaning you would simply go for it staright away as its imperitive to get back up, in sports or evening forms of training, you wouldnt always do this straight away in case you leave yourself vunerable.. the onus isnt the same. Not sure if Ive explained that too well!!


Quote:

It turns to tactics because the other guy is good and fightingback.



Again I agree.. and disagree. In SD fighting there is only one tactic.. to destroy your oppoenent to get back up.

Quote:

They are not purposly taking ages to stop each other.Thats just what happens when skilled people meet.



Sometimes.. othertimes they wont commit as it may leave then vunerable.

Quote:

Plus,thats still a veiw based on sports stuff.



Your saying its one and the same arnt you.. the only difference being intent (which makes a big difference btw) and may be one of the underlying things of this discussion we have not touched upon enough.

Quote:

I was making genuine points.I realy cant be arsed to go through posts nit picking qoutes and comparing so just generaly said how it looked in one sentence.



Points of not, It was not all stuff i said and if you gonna quote someone as fact.. you should get it right. If you cant be arsed.. dont do it, simply make your point without reference.

Quote:

You showed a clip.You were doing what I would call 'all' in the context of this discussion.Stand up to ground and rolling.



Yes.. we use to call it "all in" sparring, I simply differ on your definition that all ground stuff can be considered rolling.

Quote:

You said it is as good as Judo if trained properly in response to me saying if TKD has judo why does it not resemble it.



Sorry, I thought you were refering to the throws. If so, I stand by my point, if you are refering to Judo randori.. the ruleset and techniques allowed are different, so it will look different. If you are refering to Judo as a whole, TKD has other facets so would not look taht similar except when performing throws.. which takes us back to point one above. As for the Judo influence.. I think even though the throwing was taken on board, the ne-waze wasnt (not by all anyway, perhaps in some schools, I dont know).

Quote:

You never said either way about the floor or made it clear.To me anyway.Im going by the clip and what youv been saying.



Well hopefully its cleared up now.


Quote:

Well at times you sounded definite.



I definate in my opinion.. as I mention at the beginning, I have seen a fair bit... on TV Ive been watch MMA bouts since the Bushido events which actually pre-date the UFCs. I have over the years seen lots of the schools in training, along with much more up to date training methods in the clbs. I also know some MMA guys & instructors.

Quote:

I dont unsertand that fully.Oh well.Imnot a hater.Its coming across that way as I oppose some views.I would suggest.



It makes no different in your intent.. the answers remain the same.

Quote:

No.Because He would be doing it before anyone else I know of in britain.As a combined thing.Basicaly what would later be MMA.



Well, he has been training a long time, but I can only speak of when I started training with him (beginning of 1990). Whether he did similar with his instructors I dont know, what I can say is that he always encouraged the takedown and finish stuff and as we approached BB levels he encouraged fighting off the floor etc. My training partner and I often took this further as obviously, with resistence, things dont aways go to plan first time and this has been developed over the years as time went by. What I can say is that he (my instructor) is a "pure" TKD man.. having never trained in other arts (AFAIA) and a stickler to the manuals way of doing things (bit like ITFunity).

Quote:

A full contact anything goes gym in combination.



When we did the stuff I refer to above, there was contact of varying levels, but it was never full contact, though often hurt none the less.

Quote:

Good points though irrelevant.Iv not disputed any of that. I f...ing know all that.



Actually its probibly the most relevant thing her to your questions and funnily enough you dismiss it. You main point was about if TKD incorported some form of ground stuff and that you never saw it and this was a "fault" from the top down.. a true TKD pioneer has said it was done early on and you dismiss it.. ITFunity has also stated in other posts that Gen Choi enocouraged it and you dismiss it.. it seems no answer will be right for you as your mind is already made up.. making this who discussion mute!

Quote:

Iv disputed MMA type sparring,grappling with the idea of striking ,rolling,Ground work ,keeping going.



And you`ve been shown to be wrong in this contect, though I still dont feel its MMA type sparring myself, its sort of "include this if you go to the ground".. no one ever looks to go to the ground.. whereas in MMA they often do.

Quote:

Pick out my quotes and I will explain again if youv taken them as meaning the above.



If you cant be arsed, then neither can I!

Quote:

Is he still teaching like that though?Thats not clear or seems to be the case if he has to ask so its still iffy as to why not.Is it copping out?



Only Mr flynch can answer that.


Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 03:52 AM

Quote:

It was a question.



Erm , okay.. looked like more of an observation to me as it didnt actually have a "question" part, just a question mark on the end!! Never mind.

Quote:

Because TKD has taken from fighting arts apparently boxing,juo etc ,do TKD people get annoyed if people say it works best on the unskilled?



LOL.. everything works best on the unskilled.. including every other martial arts. It doesnt cahneg the fact it acn work against skilled people as well!

Quote:

I disagree totaly.Sorry.A human being has a certain responsiblity to others.If they dont tell a young girl for example the context of the things she is being taught for SD it is an ABSOLUTE DISCRACE.Thats my passionate personal opinion.



You were talking about historical connections of the arts, not the context of techniques. I agree SD techniques and their context should be explained properly.. this is a given but different to what you first infered.

Quote:

How a person could have the balls to open a school and do that I dont know.



Do what? You mean not acknowledge their arts history or not explain things properly (technique wise)!!!

Stuart
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 06:10 AM

Personally I don't see why it is so necessary to explain the history of an art unless that is part of the philosophy.

With TKD a percentage of the philosophy is absed around Korean nationalism/identity. The persons whom the tul are named after are there to act as inspiration to the student.

However, what is the necessity of teaching the Karate roots of TKD? Why stop there? Why not teach the (alleged/posible)Chinese roots of Karate and Korean arts.

Do boxers get taught about characters such as James Figgs? do MMA guys get taught the possible connection between Cornish wrestling and BJJ? How many contemporary wrestlers or MMA people could tell you about Hackenschmidt or Dinnie?

Also, the problemwith citing "karate roots" is that karate isbeing put unde one umbrella. There are many kinds of Karate, each with different influeces and techniques. How many might contain the elements which TKD might be said to be missing.

If a student does not know the history, does it actually affect their SD skills? Also, how useful is it to know too much about what a technique can do? Might it not stop a person using it at a vital moment?
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 09:34 AM

Quote:

Quote:

TKD has it all,hang on whats all,oh it was basic,hang it isnt its as good as judo,we roll,they rolled,no they dont,its the military,they dont go to the floor,hang they sparred on the floor,wait, erm.?
Its all over the place.It changes in so many places to suit.

I believe what I know and think I have an honest down to earth veiw of what TKD is and is not.Ill continue to find out and make my own mind up.





Yes I see your point & agree somewhat. However, I think you judge TKD on what you see & not what it is suppossed to be. In the end, it is all about money for many. TKD has suffered as it became more commercialized, just like other MAs. Now MMAs I believe was born out a a real need to fill this SD void. As such, it is successful IMHO in that aspect. There is no question in my mind, that if one wants a more hard core, street tuff SD, they need to consider joining a MMA school & not a TKD school. However, a real TKD school following its original design, can offer a good & effective SD for many, plus a whole lot more. Just don't confuse which TKD school you should join, as when making a choice, one must find what best fits their individual needs with a school that is in the best position to meet those needs or requirements of the student.




I agree with you whole heartedly because while TKD has these techniques ( ground fighting, throws, etc. ) it is hard to concentrate on these areas for an extended period since the syllubus is so large many schools are only open for a few hours a night . As you said, if you want this training, find a MMA school that concentrates on these techniques.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 09:34 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Similar how others see TKD in the olympics or in demo and think its just fancy kicking.



Sadly, many clubs are like that which is one reason why TKD gets its crappy, undeserved rep.





Funny I would say this is why TKD has its deserved poor reputation, as so many shools focus on so much more than SD.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 09:40 AM

Quote:

Personally I don't see why it is so necessary to explain the history of an art.......If a student does not know the history, does it actually affect their SD skills?




Knowing the history of TKD has virtually nothing to do with the ability to defend oneself. It may offer a clue to what it was developed for, so one can guage whether present methods are approriate for the needs of the student of today.

History is important to other areas of what one can obtain from an Art of SD, just as you mentioned.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 09:44 AM

Quote:

I agree with you whole heartedly because while TKD has these techniques ( ground fighting, throws, etc. ) it is hard to concentrate on these areas for an extended period since the syllubus is so large many schools are only open for a few hours a night . As you said, if you want this training, find a MMA school that concentrates on these techniques.




True Mr. Boik! But please remember that this is the ITF syllabus, which we know is the smallest group of those who use the name TKD. So it doesn't apply to the over whelming majority of those doing a different TKD. So in effect this is a defense or counter for our style of TKD. Where is the defense of the other styles of TKD?
How come it seems that the only defenders or the most vocal defenders are ITF based?
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 12:26 PM



True Mr. Boik! But please remember that this is the ITF syllabus, which we know is the smallest group of those who use the name TKD. So it doesn't apply to the over whelming majority of those doing a different TKD. So in effect this is a defense or counter for our style of TKD. Where is the defense of the other styles of TKD?
How come it seems that the only defenders or the most vocal defenders are ITF based?





ITFUNITITY
All respect but....


I agree with much of what you post on this forum but feel that I must comment on your statement about why is it that ITF people are the ones that seem to always be defending TKD. What do you mean that this is the ITF syllabus? What were you referring to?

1. ITF people think they are the only organization to teach effective SD, this is a false assumption and people need to realize that many WTF schools took what they believed to be effective SD from the ITF syllabus and discarded what they did"t think was effective then incorporated more things like hapkido judo etc. This is not a bad thing it is progress in many eyes. I know I am going to get the no WTF standard syllabus argument and it is a legitimate argument. My only response is that as a whole WTF affiliated schools are still evolving which means that TKD as an art is still evolving. I believe this is the problem, old school vs new school mentality and fear of change, is it for better? time will sort things out. Me personally, I am always looking for improvement and one must be willing to break tradition to find out if new is improved.

2. ITF is much more bitter and radical and very stuck in their past, notice the word - their.

3. I have observed many ITF training videos and can honestly say that our WTF affiliated school teaches as much if not more thorough SD techniques, mostly hapkido and judo based, very effective.

4. It drives me crazy how ITF persons are constantly blaming or assuming that it is WTF affiliated organizations that are the main problem with TKD because they are exposed to the olympics. This has been the under lying tone of this forum for a long time.

5. I honestly do not believe that enough ITF people truly understand WTF training and philosophy and insist that our training does not match or even exceed the ITF syllabus.

6. Our full contact sparing does serve a good purpose and can be very painful even with all the protective gear, broken ribs, jaws, teeth, head injuries, don"t even want to here the pitty patter crap that many like to spew. I have an injury that is more than three years old and will not heal! I admit our sparing does not resemble real fighting but one needs to remember, it is not suppose to! non WTF people do not get that, therefore can not relate. I could attempt to explain it but my suggestion would be that one participate in some of our tourneys, maybe then they will have an understanding of what it is and appreciate the value. Oh and did I mention that many students never even participate in competition, so what are they training for day in and day out, nothing?

6. People keep forgetting that the sparing is a very small part of what most WTF schools train but that is most of the criticism of WTF schools, there is much more going on and no one will give credit, they keep harping on our sparing even though they never even tried it. This drives me crazy!

7. Many of our instructors are former ITF instructors! there might be some good reasons to come to the dark side but many old school will never even try to understand what it"s about. It is no more money motivated than any ITF organization.

8. Many ITF organizations do not fully train their own syllabus but still criticize WTF affiliated schools for not having a standard syllabus or fully following the ITF syllabus. So if many are not training their own syllabus can you really even call it a standard syllabus? obviously not.

Conclusion, WTF, ITF need to cooperate and come to a conclusion as to what components from each is worthy and incorporate them into one strongly defined system or this devision will never end and TKD will always be viewed as inferior. To do this ITF will need to let go of much of their past and except some of the good regarding WTF. After all if TKD becomes unpopular no one will care except those of us left behind pointing fingers. You are write about history being important and it is time to re-write it and move on, except that TKD has changed forever and unite both systems into one, only then will we have a true, whole and respected TKD.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 01:18 PM

Quote:

There is no compliance in our (ITF) 1 steps. None! That is why we apparently do them different from others. Reference to my long back & forths with Dereck, concerning same.
ITF HooSinSul, when learning moves requires a certain amount of compliance, as I think it would be with what you do. However, when it is all put together in free sparring or HooSinsul, there is no compliance, as that is not training under realistic conditions. Which you must remember is the mandate of the founder. Compliance in HooSinSul is also there for demo purposes, but never should it exist during SD training.




Ok.So you actualy hit each other in the throat?You knee each other in the balls?You break each others arms?You actualy kick each others knees?You actually elbow each other full board in the face?You go for the eyes fully?I thow eacho ther full on onto thefloor and stamp on each others heads?
ETC ETC ETC?
That is the most hardcore place I know of.

I think maybe you are missinterpretting me.
Oh well.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 01:34 PM

Quote:

What are you getting at? There are of course better ways to learn SD. However, TKD is not JUST for SD. You want the best SD, find a school that will concentrate on that & use realistic conditions to insure you learn. PERIOD.

Now any MA can make someone better able to defend themselves, even a weak school or a school that emphasizes sport, as the work out will help build a person in many ways. The reason or 1 reason why MMAs have grown is because of the softness of many MAs schools, not limited to TKD.
So whats your point?

If you train in a tuff MMA or strict combat fighting school & go up against one from a weak or soft MA school, with all other things being equal, size, shape, toughness, strength etc, you win, plain & simple. I would even wager that you win when going against someone from my way of training, with all other things being equal, as your training concentrates on that aspect. However, I will pick my students for most of the other things that the ITF syllabus builds & develops.
Apples & Oranges!
I certainly am not afraid to acknowledge shortcomings my way, but I am proud of what we accomplish, as it is much more that we do then SD. What we do lasts longer & comes in more often then pure SD skills are needed. JMHO





What am I getting at?
That TKD is a good martial art for SD against an untrained person it can be fun and have alot to offer.It has not got everything and is not best suited if you want to learn to fight at all ranges.
What is wrong with saying that?
Why is it so bad?
This is my point as to one reason why it looses face.
Most other arts seem to accept it.
Yes it gets a bad rep and has more than people realize but you guys are going to far the other way basicaly saying it was MMA type stuff and as hardcore as a mountain.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 01:51 PM

Quote:

Look, you really sound like you are not really well versed in the TKD textbooks & syllabus of the founder. This is & was always the way it was suppossed to be. Now your experience with TKD is apparently limited to your experiences. remember, TKD is the world's most popular MA.
However, many look at it simply as an umbrella name. Others as a sport. The smallest group is the ITF. So you seem to be critiquing an Art based on schools you have seen or trained at. You said you don't have the Encylopedia. Get it! Any edition! I have almost all of them. So when you get hold of a copy, I will give you specific pages, depending on the edition you come across. It is all over the system of sparring section & the hoosinsul one as well.

I can also tell you that he told me this in person & when he taught seminars. You won't believe this as you want it on tape. rest assurred, I have never posted anything false or misleading on purpose in this or any other forum. Never. In fact, when people question what I post, I clarify or when they are right, I corrected it. When I question some who have held oppossing points & asked for references, they usually never come. When I have had people question me, I asked for one instance where they think I was wrong or misleading. That challenge has still remained unanswered. Even here, posting without a name, integrity is of the utmost importance to me. I blast the ITF when deserved. It is important to me to remain honest, because if I don't, with ITF TKD being the minority, it will serve a crushing blow to my ability to help others learn what TK-D was meant to be, according to the founder.

So continue your assault on TKD. There are good points that can & should be made to highlight certain schools shortcomings & mutiple instances of students not following the ITF syllabus. However, this is not the fault of the 1st or original TKD system.




Are you well versed in 20 th century martial arts?
It does not fit ,thats all ,with eveidence of other things going on.Nor can you get even photos or references tolink me to

An example.
Jhoon Rhee was with Bruce Lee at times and apparently showed him some kicks.
There are pictures and accounts yes?
So he is researching all fighting and Jhoon Rhee forgetts to mention how TKD was doing all that before?
We know Bruce lee was doing grappling near he end of his life and Dan Inosanto has said and shown what it was they were doing and clealy stated it was not rolling or going all out,it was the classicway,,guy does lock and it ends no fight back or whatever.No carry on fighting like MMA.And this was from Gene Labells influence amongst others.
There is no logical or solid thing that places TKD doing what would later be MMA atthat time.It just does not fit.Sorry.
We have footage and references and accounts to how they trained,and although hard and containing locks,sweeps,throws, etc not in the that way.

Reference me a place please because I can get to look an encylopedia.

Anyway,it seems its impossible for me to get an unbiased discussion as you are very passionate about TKD.
This getting way to negative.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 02:27 PM

There is some tosh in those posts and some points,some twisted interpretations,some hypocrisy and finaly some admittence and realism.

Well it has been and is like playground bull so im going to step back and not commemt on your negative points about me or fuel anymore.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 02:44 PM

Efrain


Want to thank you for starting this thread. This topic allows coverage of most all the issues and differences of old and modern TKD. I think what this thread has done is give us the ability to vent all of our frustrations under the appropriate topic and clarifies things for many of us. Not saying that people are changing their opinions but we are getting better perspective of the old vs. new and where some of the problems originate. This is why this thread has lasted so long and is still going strong.

Thanks

von1
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 03:14 PM

To add to a few of von1's points:

All the schools I have trained at were with KKW certified instructors, and had successful sport TKD programs with athletes medaling in major WTF-style competitions. That being said, in our regular classes we also spent a good deal of time on things like basics, forms, one-steps/self-defense/attack-defend types of drills. One club I belonged to integrated wrestling/BJJ takedown defenses around a TKD foundation. Another I belonged to incorporatd extensive Hapkido and Kung Fu trapping/grabbing/locking techniques into a TKD foundation. At another club, for one of my dan tests, I had to spar 2-3 attackers at once. At another dan test, I was attacked with random techniques and had to respond accordingly (not one-step sparring).

Additionally, it's not as though KKW TKD schools are teaching SD solely by borrowing things from other styls. The KKW website has an online version of the KKW textbook, and of the techniques shown, I'd say more than half are not even applicable Olympic-style sparring... they are either forms or SD techniques. So KKW TKD properly taught gives a SD foundation as well.

I say all this because the common criticism made against KKW style schools is that they just focus on competition and sparring. While there is truth to this, I'd say such claims are often overstated. And in the schools/clubs/teams that do focus on sport TKD, I've never seen them claim that what they teach is for SD. More often than not, I see these types of criticism made from people outside the system with limited experience in the KKW system. I have trained in KKW style TKD since I was a child, with 20 years of experience. In that time, I have trained mainly at three different KKW TKD schools, and and cross/guest trained at several other KKW TKD clubs. All the clubs had successful sport TKD programs, but all the clubs also embraced the full KKW curriculum, incl. self-defense.

I posted this elsewhere, but will make the point again. Yes, sport TKD sparring has it's appeal. But at the end of the day, few schools can survive on offering only sport TKD sparring. People want SD, to learn how to fight, to be fit, to improve themselves, etc. So if a TKD school is going to prosper it has to offer the complete package of TKD. In addition to being true to the art, it's simply better business to do so than just offer Olympic sparring.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 03:20 PM

Quote:


There is some tosh in those posts and some points,some twisted interpretations,some hypocrisy and finaly some admittence and realism.

Well it has been and is like playground bull so im going to step back and not commemt on your negative points about me or fuel anymore.




Matxtx, I don't think anyone is intentionally trying to criticise you, rather there is a debate about your arguments.

Quote:


Ok.So you actualy hit each other in the throat?You knee each other in the balls?You break each others arms?You actualy kick each others knees?You actually elbow each other full board in the face?You go for the eyes fully?I thow eacho ther full on onto thefloor and stamp on each others heads?
ETC ETC ETC?
That is the most hardcore place I know of.




Well, that is certainly not what non-compliance means. Rather you are talking about lack of control. Compliance is a partner allowing you to attack attack without defending themselves, or doing what they are "supposed to do." I think ITFUnity is pointing out that one-steps are not compliant because the attack is random- it can be a hand or leg technique, a grab etc. The fact that there is some compliance after the attack has been made is purely a tool for allowing people to practice techniques once in a while, instead of being forced to do it in sparring, where you may never get an opportunity to pull many techniques off against better opponents.

For what it's worth, I actually disagree that there is no compliance in one-steps. Because the counter is done against a still target, not exactly realistic, it would be difficult to call it not compliant. Afterall, a fight rarely involves one technique. However, I can recognise it as a useful tool for some people, especially for learning to block and move away from techniques.

Quote:

That TKD is a good martial art for SD against an untrained person it can be fun and have alot to offer.It has not got everything and is not best suited if you want to learn to fight at all ranges.
What is wrong with saying that?
Why is it so bad?
This is my point as to one reason why it looses face.




There's nothing bad about it, unless you disagree of course. But that doesn't make you a bad person mate haha! You know, I have always trained TKD for one range only- stand-up striking. However, I have access to judo schools, BJJ schools etc. where I can learn other ranges. Perhaps if you do not have access to such things then having one school proficient in all ranges is more important. And ofcourse, I was able to dedicate 3-4 hours 6 days a week to going to classes, and most people simply can not do this and would prefer to find a style that incorporates the lot.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 03:53 PM

Von1 and Badachagi, I think Unity was just saying he didn't hear alot from your side but your posts have proven otherwise. This is what we need to hear/read. We need to hear about the schools that teach the Art, not just Olympic sparring, or TKD daycares but the complete art.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 04:07 PM

Quote:

How come it seems that the only defenders or the most vocal defenders are ITF based?




Quote:

ITFUNITITY All respect but....I agree with much of what you post on this forum but feel that I must comment on your statement about why is it that ITF people are the ones that seem to always be defending TKD. What do you mean that this is the ITF syllabus? What were you referring to?





Wow, whoa, slow down!
Please read what I said! I never bad mouthed anyone or any style. I simple said with reference to this thread, that TKD does deserve somewhat its poor reputation in many instances for SD. This criticism was not limited to you, your school, the Kukkiwon, the WTF, the ITF, as all of these places, including mine, have weaknesses. All to some extent have been softened or corrupted over time. hence, the rise of MMAs to fill a void.
Now it seemed that the back & forth that was being exchanged, seemed to me to be myself, Mr. Anslow, Mr. Boik & other ITF type of TKD posters that were defending or explaning the present day perception of TKD with respect to loosing face/popularity.
I was merely wondering why non-ITF style students were not more vocal in the exchange.

I will not respond to the rest of your post, as it seems you have some pent up resentment to the ITF. I never have posted my way is the best way, or even better. In addition, I am a frequent critic of many things I see in the ITF. I try to refrain from commenting on things I have little experience with. Most of my entire exposure in the MAs has been to ITF TKD. It serves my purpose & I am continuing a life long pursuit of it, so I may better understand it more fully. I certainly am not a jack of all trades.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 04:11 PM

Quote:

Ok.So you actualy hit each other in the throat?You knee each other in the balls?You break each others arms?You actualy kick each others knees?You actually elbow each other full board in the face?You go for the eyes fully?I thow eacho ther full on onto thefloor and stamp on each others heads? ETC ETC ETC? That is the most hardcore place I know of.I think maybe you are missinterpretting me.
Oh well.




No you don't share the same definition of compliance that I do. I would define what you post above as control. By compliance I merely mean that the attacker attacks for real, in the case of 1 steps with 1 attack whose aim is to strike the opponent, not partner. The defender either either defends or gets hit & they are limited to one counter attack, as no opponent will ever pose for someone else, allowing them to go to town on a model.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 04:16 PM

Quote:

That TKD is a good martial art for SD against an untrained person it can be fun and have alot to offer.It has not got everything and is not best suited if you want to learn to fight at all ranges. What is wrong with saying that? Why is it so bad?




I agree & it is not so bad, as TKD offers more than just SD. However, it does have limitations with respect to SD. Hopefully more will realize this & if SD is paramount to them, either correct it, supplement it or find a school that concentrates on street tuff SD.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 04:18 PM

Quote:

Reference me a place please because I can get to look an encylopedia.




I already did. Plus I stated that if you tell me the edition of the Encylopedia you can get a hold off, I give you the exact pages. The offer still stands.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 04:29 PM

Quote:

Well, that is certainly not what non-compliance means. Rather you are talking about lack of control. Compliance is a partner allowing you to attack attack without defending themselves, or doing what they are "supposed to do." I think ITFUnity is pointing out that one-steps are not compliant because the attack is random- it can be a hand or leg technique, a grab etc. The fact that there is some compliance after the attack has been made is purely a tool for allowing people to practice techniques once in a while, instead of being forced to do it in sparring, where you may never get an opportunity to pull many techniques off against better opponents.

For what it's worth, I actually disagree that there is no compliance in one-steps. Because the counter is done against a still target, not exactly realistic, it would be difficult to call it not compliant. Afterall, a fight rarely involves one technique. However, I can recognise it as a useful tool for some people, especially for learning to block and move away from techniques.




Exactly!
In addition, our 1 steps & all our step sparring is limited to 1 immediate counter attack, as no person will simply stand there & pose as a model whan you go to town on them. The purpose is to simulate actual combat, the 1st exchange. You either get hit or defend. As far as the counter goes, it is a drill to do an immediate counter, with the emphasis on learning correct tool to approriate vital spot.
Real fighting comes in with free sparring, where students are free to use any & all techniques. Not to be confused with tournament sparring.
So 1 step sparring is the final drill in step sparring. The purpose of 3 steps is to teach & emphasize distance for brand new beginners. 2 steps are to teach & familirize students with the use of BOTH hand & foot for attack, defense & counter. With 1 step purpose explained above. They are all part of a sequence within the context of a larger syllabus. Again, offered only to explain, not to claim better than any other way.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 04:31 PM

Quote:

Von1 and Badachagi, I think Unity was just saying he didn't hear alot from your side but your posts have proven otherwise. This is what we need to hear/read. We need to hear about the schools that teach the Art, not just Olympic sparring, or TKD daycares but the complete art.




You got it Mr. Boik! I am glad someone can understand my dribble. n Thanks!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 04:43 PM

Quote:

Jhoon Rhee was with Bruce Lee at times and apparently showed him some kicks.
There are pictures and accounts yes?
So he is researching all fighting and Jhoon Rhee forgetts to mention how TKD was doing all that before?

Anyway,it seems its impossible for me to get an unbiased discussion as you are very passionate about TKD.
This getting way to negative.




First of all, here is where your lack of apparent understanding gets in the way. (NOTE: This is not a personal attack) Jhoon Rhee was simply a student of the Chung Do kwan, not TKD. He was not a military TKD pioneer. So your critique does not apply here, as you are using an apple to be compared against the orange I put forth.

Jhoon Rhee basically taught Korean Karate when he came to the States as a student. He later adopted the Chang Hon patterns, which he later discarded when he came up with his own set. Again, nothing wrong with that. he then adopted the name TKD, as it became very popular due to the work of the military pioneers as they spread their system around the globe. So he more approriately fits under the TKD that is used as an umbrella name.
So I can not respond to your point, as it is not directed to the original TKD that was developed in the Korean Army. Again, you are mixing apples & oranges.

Please don't give up the debate. I am passionate about my style of TKD, I try to reamin unbiased, please reference my repeated criticisms of my own style & direct me to where I have let any bias get in the way.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 05:06 PM

Quote:

First of all, here is where your lack of apparent understanding gets in the way. (NOTE: This is not a personal attack) Jhoon Rhee was simply a student of the Chung Do kwan, not TKD. He was not a military TKD pioneer. So your critique does not apply here, as you are using an apple to be compared against the orange I put forth.

Jhoon Rhee basically taught Korean Karate when he came to the States as a student. He later adopted the Chang Hon patterns, which he later discarded when he came up with his own set. Again, nothing wrong with that. he then adopted the name TKD, as it became very popular due to the work of the military pioneers as they spread their system around the globe. So he more approriately fits under the TKD that is used as an umbrella name.
So I can not respond to your point, as it is not directed to the original TKD that was developed in the Korean Army. Again, you are mixing apples & oranges.

Please don't give up the debate. I am passionate about my style of TKD, I try to reamin unbiased, please reference my repeated criticisms of my own style & direct me to where I have let any bias get in the way.





Mmm.Ok.I understand that.
Though still cant see how he would not have heard from fellow koreans or taken up those methods.
Its like it was a big secret no one told anyone,demonstrated or photed,filmed etc yet in later on,especialy in recent times to co incide with peoples wake up to grappling,it appears tkd was doing it all.

What about He Ill Cho?He finished first as far as I know in the military test(?) .He in recent times has incorporated BJJ and stated grapplings importance.Would he and should of not been doing that for 50 odd years already?
I remember him specificaly commenting on MMA and and one his guys was goingto try for the UFC AFTER incorporating grappling.He said nothing of having already done it.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 05:19 PM

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, that is certainly not what non-compliance means. Rather you are talking about lack of control. Compliance is a partner allowing you to attack attack without defending themselves, or doing what they are "supposed to do." I think ITFUnity is pointing out that one-steps are not compliant because the attack is random- it can be a hand or leg technique, a grab etc. The fact that there is some compliance after the attack has been made is purely a tool for allowing people to practice techniques once in a while, instead of being forced to do it in sparring, where you may never get an opportunity to pull many techniques off against better opponents.

For what it's worth, I actually disagree that there is no compliance in one-steps. Because the counter is done against a still target, not exactly realistic, it would be difficult to call it not compliant. Afterall, a fight rarely involves one technique. However, I can recognise it as a useful tool for some people, especially for learning to block and move away from techniques.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Exactly!
In addition, our 1 steps & all our step sparring is limited to 1 immediate counter attack, as no person will simply stand there & pose as a model whan you go to town on them. The purpose is to simulate actual combat, the 1st exchange. You either get hit or defend. As far as the counter goes, it is a drill to do an immediate counter, with the emphasis on learning correct tool to approriate vital spot.
Real fighting comes in with free sparring, where students are free to use any & all techniques. Not to be confused with tournament sparring.
So 1 step sparring is the final drill in step sparring. The purpose of 3 steps is to teach & emphasize distance for brand new beginners. 2 steps are to teach & familirize students with the use of BOTH hand & foot for attack, defense & counter. With 1 step purpose explained above. They are all part of a sequence within the context of a larger syllabus. Again, offered only to explain, not to claim better than any other way.




I see those points.
Though I said a certain amount of compliance.The compliance you both talk about being there.That HAS to be there.Your not actualy hitting so its compliance, not lack of control,in my eyes.The attacker has compliantly stopped attacking pressuming he was hit in hhis throat or balls or head stamped on etc.

And there is still confusion over the free sparring your claiming is MMA type anything goes allowing all techniques.Doing that has to be sport techniques,which is not Original TKD.
OR to do it with ALL true TKD techniques you still need the 'lack of controll',that your calling it,or compliance.And that would not resemble MMA type ,continuing sparring.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 05:32 PM

Quote:

In my view you're putting your perspective as if every street corner was filled with bloody thirsty streetfighters and MMA practitioners. MMA is NOT SD.





Wrong then im afraid.
I can put MMA type drills and sparring in perspective and know full well what it is and what it is not.How could I not after bleeting on about putting TKD into perspective.
I just find it sensible,more fun and challenging to train with a highly skilled opponent in mind.
I still train in TKD and actualy find more in it now making personaly adaptions and applications.
I dont feel you see how MMA/NHB type drills can cross over to SD or what type of drills go on or how they can be created to fit many, many situations.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 07:23 PM

Quote:

There is some tosh in those posts and some points,some twisted interpretations,some hypocrisy and finaly some admittence and realism.



Translation: Made some points, they were answered.. didnt like them.. didnt fit with my feelings.. write line above instead of continuing discussion.

Quote:

Well it has been and is like playground bull so im going to step back and not commemt on your negative points about me or fuel anymore.



I dont recall making negative points about you personally!!!

------------------- anyway, to carry on with the rest of the folk discussing things here, I think things are getting confused.

1. When ITFunity mentioned MMA he was refering to how TKD mixed different arts togethor (or parts of) in its formation.. not that it was the same as the current MMA (as seen on TV etc.). This has been explained, but continually ignored by certain posters.

2. A few disagree on whether the current definition of MMA was the original one.. based on the UFC.. though this is besides the point as all things evolve and really the only relevance it has to this discussion was that if it evolved via the early UFC it actually makes ITFunitys original definition correct! If its the later definition then its different as TKD doesnt really (IMO) work the same three areas equally as an MMA'er would (or should).

3. No one has said TKD is the forerunner of the current MMA scene, but many have alluded that TKD has allowed floor based stuff (including but not limited to, continuing a fight/spar if it went to the ground) and this was happening before the MMA scene came about.. again, no one is claiming this is anything to do with the development of the current MMA scene.. just that TKD was not limited to pure stand up only. Again this is ignored over and over.

4. I and others that have been privilidge to see and/or be involved in this stuff do not refer to it as MMA, nor do we see it as MMA (as in its current form).. just a continuation of free sparring. I and others that I know do not see the above (no. 3) as MMA, simply part of TKD and even when comparing, the ground time in this part of sparring is often limited.. in MMA its not.

5. When asked for conformation that this type of sparring had gone on and was "allowed" and part of TKD .. but from higher and older sources.. ITFunity offered to point to references in the Ch'ang Hon manuals and Mr Flynch actually asked a first generation pioneer of TKD.. again, ignored.. when it was exactly what was asked.

6. No one is disputing MMA is a decent form of fighting, some merely dispute it forms the best basis for Self Defence.. if you do not diffientiate self defence from fighting, then obviously this can be comprehended.

I think that about sums up my and, erm, I wont say any name so they dont feel oblidged to respond to anything.. discussion

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 07:25 PM

Quote:

Quote:


There is some tosh in those posts and some points,some twisted interpretations,some hypocrisy and finaly some admittence and realism.

Well it has been and is like playground bull so im going to step back and not commemt on your negative points about me or fuel anymore.




Matxtx, I don't think anyone is intentionally trying to criticise you, rather there is a debate about your arguments.




Though it does seem theres one rule for the goose and another for the gander!! I could warrent much the same 1st line to his part of the discussion!!!

Stuart
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/06/08 08:30 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Von1 and Badachagi, I think Unity was just saying he didn't hear alot from your side but your posts have proven otherwise. This is what we need to hear/read. We need to hear about the schools that teach the Art, not just Olympic sparring, or TKD daycares but the complete art.




You got it Mr. Boik! I am glad someone can understand my dribble. n Thanks!




As a clarification, I wanted to say that my previous post was not responding to ITFUnity or any ITF practitioners in general (as von1's post appeared to be). Rather, I was offering some supporting points to von1's rebuttal of the general criticism "WTF schools only teach Olympic sparring."
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 12:19 AM

Matxtx:
Quote:

Quote:

Though still cant see how he would not have heard from fellow koreans or taken up those methods.
Its like it was a big secret no one told anyone,demonstrated or photed,filmed etc yet in later on,especialy in recent times to co incide with peoples wake up to grappling,it appears tkd was doing it all.




I don't know why you can comprehend what i am writing. Others seem to, so why not you?
Remember, I am not defending TKD, the umbrella name, as it includes too many types, ways & methods. Nor am I defending TKD as a Martial or Olympic sport, as I am not versed enough. I am simply trying to relay to you, that original TKD was developed in the Korean Army as a military system of SD. It was effective. It was feared. It was a combination of techniques from various fighting methods of the time, with the main one being Karate. you point to lack of photos, films etc at a time when they just did not exist in a poor developing country that was ravaged by a brutal occupation & devasting civil war. Why is that so hard to understand? Why do you think that a lack of the above equates it wasn't that way? Why do you inject people like GM Jhoon Rhee, a jr BB from the Chung Do kwan, which was basically a civilian Karate school? He came to the States in the 50s as a student. Students are young. How much experience or training do you think he did? How long was he really around seniors? Now this is not a slag against him or other Koreans that came over early on. They were not gaints in the MAs field. They became so, when they were living abroad, as they introduced an Art to novices of a different culture, with little to no exposure to this activity. GM Rhee has made great contributions & accomplishments to countless people. Even the 1st President Bush refers to him as Master Rhee. he is a very deeply spiritual person.

Quote:

What about He Ill Cho?He finished first as far as I know in the military test(?) .He in recent times has incorporated BJJ and stated grapplings importance.Would he and should of not been doing that for 50 odd years already?
I remember him specificaly commenting on MMA and and one his guys was goingto try for the UFC AFTER incorporating grappling.He said nothing of having already done it.




Again, you are talking about a military man that went abroad & was teaching a commerical MA. As you may be aware of, at the time, late 60s & 70s, an explosion started in the MAs in places like the States, where GM Cho moved to. He simply taught what was the current emphasis with respect to the growing tournament scene. This of course did not include grappling, as it was against the rules.

Please stop mixing apples & oranges!

Original TKD, which eventually went from the Oh Do kwan to Chang Hon ITF TKD, started in the military. When it went overseas it natuarally morphed into another emphasis, as the student population was radically different. The reasons it slipped overyears are numerous & the decline in areas in not limited ITF TKD, TKD in general or any MA for that matter. The softening contributed to the popularity of the MMA of today. Original TKD was never a MMA as the concept that is held today. The MMA I referred to, is simply a combination of the techniques of different systems of then!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 12:24 AM

Quote:

And there is still confusion over the free sparring your claiming is MMA type anything goes allowing all techniques.Doing that has to be sport techniques,which is not Original TKD.
OR to do it with ALL true TKD techniques you still need the 'lack of controll',that your calling it,or compliance.And that would not resemble MMA type ,continuing sparring.




Please don't mistake free sparring with the different types of tournament rules that the TKD entities follow. I am talking about students gearing up & sparring freely. In other words they are free to use all available techniques, within reason of course, under as realistic conditions as possible. So no, we don't poke each other in the eyes, or choke them till they die, etc. So when they fight, if someone grabs a leg or effects a takedown, the fight continues on the floor & if someone wants to pin or pound, the fight continues. We are not a MMA school or using UFC rules. we simply train SD in a way that is not limited to tournament style. What is so hard to grasp about the above?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 12:26 AM

Thanks Mr. Anslow! Well said.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 12:31 AM

Quote:

As a clarification, I wanted to say that my previous post was not responding to ITFUnity or any ITF practitioners in general (as von1's post appeared to be). Rather, I was offering some supporting points to von1's rebuttal of the general criticism "WTF schools only teach Olympic sparring."




Thanks! I am glad other styles of TKD are speaking up.

The problem is not that TKD is poor with respect to SD, but that many McDojangs just want money or teach something besides SD or just babysit. Since TKD is the world's most popular MA, there is a lot of McDojangs. However, this criticism is not limited to TKD, as I have seen many McDojos as well. I however would not critique an Art, based upon a school(s) poor teachings of the Art or basic ripoff of students for money. JMHO
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 03:36 AM

Quote:

What about He Ill Cho?He finished first as far as I know in the military test(?) .He in recent times has incorporated BJJ and stated grapplings importance.Would he and should of not been doing that for 50 odd years already?




Hee Il Cho had been working a lot with Hapkido for many years befoe UFC. He was also one of the experts BB magazine asked, following the first UFC, about how they would deal with a Gracie attack.

You seem to be overlooking the effect UFC had when it first came out. A system might have had grappling and groundwork but what UFC did was bring such techniques to the fore and make them more prominent. It also made people reconsider their needs.

Like I've said before, in areas like Scandinavia or the Balkans you were much more likely to meet a wrestler than an MAist, so MAists there needed to consider that WAAAAAAAAAAY before MMA and UFC. However, in other areas stand-and-strike arts were more common. Now the balance has shifted somewhat.

You might also ask why people like Chuck Norris and Bill Wallace et al weren't doing MMA. Both studied Judo in the 1950/60's (I believe) and most of that generation would certainly have done wrestling in school/college.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 11:20 AM

Quote:

Quote:

And there is still confusion over the free sparring your claiming is MMA type anything goes allowing all techniques.Doing that has to be sport techniques,which is not Original TKD.
OR to do it with ALL true TKD techniques you still need the 'lack of controll',that your calling it,or compliance.And that would not resemble MMA type ,continuing sparring.




Please don't mistake free sparring with the different types of tournament rules that the TKD entities follow. I am talking about students gearing up & sparring freely. In other words they are free to use all available techniques, within reason of course, under as realistic conditions as possible. So no, we don't poke each other in the eyes, or choke them till they die, etc. So when they fight, if someone grabs a leg or effects a takedown, the fight continues on the floor & if someone wants to pin or pound, the fight continues. We are not a MMA school or using UFC rules. we simply train SD in a way that is not limited to tournament style. What is so hard to grasp about the above?




Master Barkley was interviewed in Traditional TKD and made a statement that goes along with what is being said. He said that GM( Master) Park Jong Soo taught in Toronto and many of his students were White Collar workers so he geared his workouts towards this clientel. GM (Master) Nam SuK Lee taught in Hamilton, which was more Blue collar, and geared his class towards them, more rough and tumble, so to speak.
This doesn't mean GM Park didn't have the ground teachniques or throwing techniques, He taught what he felt his students needed and geared his classes to them.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 11:42 AM

Good point Mr. Boik!

However, one minor clarification if you may. GM Lee Nam Suk, although a very prominent & influential early Korean MAist, was not a member of the original TKD or Oh Do kwan that would become Chang Hon. He was a member (co-founder) of the Chang Moo Kwan & was one who did adopt the name early on. However he was basically ShotoKan or Japanese Karate, with some Chinese influence. He was influential inn the formation of the WTF.
So this example IMHO would be better placed with either the umbrella name or the WTF defense side.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 01:44 PM

Quote:

Translation: Made some points, they were answered.. didnt like them.. didnt fit with my feelings.. write line above instead of continuing discussion.




THAT is play ground bull.I dont want to be apart of that anymore or in discussion with you unless I have to clarify things.

Let me sum something up.
You write and book,go on forums and talk about how people dont know TKD,misinterpretit,are not doing real TKD etc et.Make a big song anddance about it.
Then you think it is ok to do exactly that,what you dont want done to TKD, to other styles.
Thats hyppocrasy.No two ways about it.And your trying to worm your way out of it.
I dont want to deal with people like that sorry.

Quote:

1. When ITFunity mentioned MMA he was refering to how TKD mixed different arts togethor (or parts of) in its formation.. not that it was the same as the current MMA (as seen on TV etc.). This has been explained, but continually ignored by certain posters.




That was cleared a while ago.So dont stir.Go and read back.
ITFUNITY was thinking in a different way to what I was.It was two people using the same phrase for different meanings.

Quote:

3. No one has said TKD is the forerunner of the current MMA scene, but many have alluded that TKD has allowed floor based stuff (including but not limited to, continuing a fight/spar if it went to the ground) and this was happening before the MMA scene came about.. again, no one is claiming this is anything to do with the development of the current MMA scene.. just that TKD was not limited to pure stand up only. Again this is ignored over and over




This started with yourclip Stuart.I said post a clip of this hardcore, original, military TKD and it would shut everyone up.
You posted yours.
Yes?
I said that is TKD with modern updates and progressin in other words influenced TKD,not how I believe it was.
Thats basiicaly it.
Iv made good points and slowly you admitted that but t hen didnot,then did etc.
ITFUNITY still seems addamant (not adam ant the singer) that is how they trained.
You,and others, keep twisting by it saying I am arguing that TKD never had some grappling or throws ort akedowns.
I am not.
I am arguing aboutthe way t hey did it andd ont agree it was in an MMA way going on and on rolling.Now yes.Not then.
I can make a good claim to thinking this and have been and will be more.

Quote:

5. When asked for conformation that this type of sparring had gone on and was "allowed" and part of TKD .. but from higher and older sources.. ITFunity offered to point to references in the Ch'ang Hon manuals and Mr Flynch actually asked a first generation pioneer of TKD.. again, ignored.. when it was exactly what was asked.





G b ackj and re read by comments on what Mr Flynch instructor said.We are waiting still.
Again your ignoring that iv adressed that and bringing itback up again.
Shat stiring.Thats two sources so far wow.There are tonns that state how it was trained that dontfit what you and ITF are saying.
The references he is just not posting.
Why cant he jusy type the quote.It might b e a while before I get to see the encyclopedia if I can.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 02:03 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAx466yXTD0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8dC1Pw1gyc

I was going to write a post on how eVidence points to how was it was trained yet found these to sum it up.

Now I expect ITFUnity to mention the unbrella and apples and oranges again.Not sure if he is shopping on a rainy day or what
(No offence a slight jest).

It demonstates that classic one hit approach they take.In then out.
Not the boxing type footwork movementthat WTF influenced on TKD.
Military,so Ivbeen told, style refers to grappling as defending against it with strikes and anti grappling breaks and strikes maybe.Not in the sense of a TKD guy deliberarly trying to grapple.From my understanding thats a no no.Strike to finish or stun philosophy as its a soldier with baggage and a weapon.
As I say,My understanding and what everything points towards.
It also shows there was a chance of someone filming it.Even shows some military guys watching.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 02:30 PM

Matxtx:

With all due respect, we, as in me & you, seem to be debating 1 focal point. That is basically, did TKD in its early formative days include a more fuller range of SD, including fighting on the ground.

Now you intimate that knowlege of history is not your strong point, nor does the study of history have much to do with how you or others learn effective SD today.

Given that, you continue to deny that TKD early on, in its development in the Korean Army, included fighting on the ground. You keep asking for 21st century confirmation of it, via some type of electronic recording. This medium really did not exist. In many places people were still going to movie theaters to view the days events on news reels. TVs were rare & certainly rarer in Korea, a poor developing country ravaged by a brutal occupation & civil war. You also expect that there would be films of military training, which I think even today, many Armies would be reluctant to share.

With respect to your points concerning history, I have refuted each of them. You not only give my counters little credence, but you are still looking for videos of the military training as aceptable proof. Now your major arguement against these historical happenings, is that it is not done that way today & your experiences has not led you to believe it ever did.

Now you & I agree that TKD is loosing face & popularity due to a widely accepted perception that many TKD schools offer soft SD, sport or baby sitting services. This is not limited to only TKD schools. Since TKD is the most popular MA in the world, this affect can be seen more readily or appear more apparent, especially since some view TKD as a martial sport that has gained Olympic status.

Now I can not speak to other styles of TKD. I speak for the ITF or Chang Hon system that started in the military gym, called the Oh Do Kwan, led by an Korean Army Major-General. They developed a modern, at the time, 50s onward, with some connection to the 40s, military system of fighting. This system was developed by dozens, if not hundreds of talented army men, who all had some previous exposure to fighting & were talented, as they were hand picked from groups of thousands. This was & remains unprecidented in the MAs.

Now when these pioneers went abroad & started to teach commercially in order to earn a living AND support family back home, the focus & methods changed, as did the student base & the purpose of teaching. Why is this so hard for you to understand & accept?

Now ITF TKD has a different history & development from the TKD of the present day KTA, the WTF & the Kukkiwon. It also has a different history from those still doing Korean Karate, but using the popular name of TKD.

Remember, because you don't think so or feel it happened that way, doesn't mean it didn't.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 02:42 PM

Great vintage footage of old demos for the public, but not on military training sessions. I have seen these before & see how they do support your general conception.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 03:34 PM

Quote:

The references he is just not posting.
Why cant he jusy type the quote.It might b e a while before I get to see the encyclopedia if I can.




You again are sadly mistaken. I have repeatedly wrote what he said, but did not include quotes, as it was not a direct queote. I did give you the exact sections in would be found in, namely HooSinSul & Sparring. I offerred to give you the exact page numbers if you gave me an edition of the Encylopedia that you would have access to. You still have not provided same. Please remember, there are several editions of his texts. Therefore the page numbers & placing will vary according to what text you use & what edition it is.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 04:56 PM

Quote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAx466yXTD0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8dC1Pw1gyc

I was going to write a post on how eVidence points to how was it was trained yet found these to sum it up.

Now I expect ITFUnity to mention the unbrella and apples and oranges again.Not sure if he is shopping on a rainy day or what
(No offence a slight jest).

It demonstates that classic one hit approach they take.In then out.
Not the boxing type footwork movementthat WTF influenced on TKD.
Military,so Ivbeen told, style refers to grappling as defending against it with strikes and anti grappling breaks and strikes maybe.Not in the sense of a TKD guy deliberarly trying to grapple.From my understanding thats a no no.Strike to finish or stun philosophy as its a soldier with baggage and a weapon.
As I say,My understanding and what everything points towards.
It also shows there was a chance of someone filming it.Even shows some military guys watching.





I don't know about the first vid but the second one is Tang Soo Do. If the first was the Chung Do Kwan, it too was TSD.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 06:05 PM

Quote:

THAT is play ground bull.I dont want to be apart of that anymore or in discussion with you unless I have to clarify things.



Ah! I get it.. what I call discussion, you call playground bull. When something you feel is refuted and proved different, you call it playground bull.. now I understand. How old are you?

Quote:

You write and book



Got nothing to do with it.

Quote:

,go on forums



I was on TKD related forums many many years before I released the book

Quote:

and talk about how people dont know TKD



Not at all. I only ever bring it up when people mention "TKD aint got this etc". I dont make a point of trying to set people on the right path or anything.

Quote:

Make a big song anddance about it.



You mean like you, jumping up and down because time and time again people are refuting what you think is right.. because you are wrong!

Quote:

Then you think it is ok to do exactly that,what you dont want done to TKD, to other styles.



Sorry, but are you thick or something? I have not slagged off any other styles, I hold martial arts with very much respect, so Ill repeat it obnce more as your ears seem to be permanantly closed to anything you dont want to hear: "I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN WHY MANY PEOPLE WOULD SEE MMA AS A SPORT" - it wasnt my opinion of it, though I can see that side of it! Why cant you comprehend that!!!

Quote:

Thats hyppocrasy.No two ways about it.And your trying to worm your way out of it.



Dont thin so. I beginning to think you cant read properly.. no offence, but you continually keep missing any points you dont agree with in kine and many others posts!

Quote:

I dont want to deal with people like that sorry.



I think the first thing you need to deal with is your closed mind!

Quote:

That was cleared a while ago.So dont stir.Go and read back.ITFUNITY was thinking in a different way to what I was.It was two people using the same phrase for different meanings.



Like i said in the points.. its the main points and this one is another it took an age for you to accept, when most others got it right away!

Quote:

This started with yourclip Stuart.I said post a clip of this hardcore, original, military TKD and it would shut everyone up. You posted yours. Yes?



So.. my clips not MMA.. doesnt claim to be MMA and has gott nothing to do with MMA!! Another point you cant seem to grasp!

Quote:

I said that is TKD with modern updates and progressin in other words influenced TKD,not how I believe it was. Thats basiicaly it.



And others, including pioneers have rebutted this.. bt still you refuse accept the very thing you asked for!

Quote:

Iv made good points and slowly you admitted that but t hen didnot,then did etc.



Dont think so.. so far most of your points have been incorrect or proved incorrect by others.

Quote:

ITFUNITY still seems addamant (not adam ant the singer) that is how they trained.



And ITFunity is a respected member of this forum, who I bet everyone will say has always been forthright and honest.. do you think hes lying now, just to prove you wrong!! I dont think so. Apart from that, he has trained TKD for nearly 40 years and trained with Gen Choi on numerous occassions, as well as many otehr pioneers.. but none of that is good enough for you! How long have you trained?

Quote:

You,and others, keep twisting by it saying I am arguing that TKD never had some grappling or throws ort akedowns.



The ony twisting going on is you mixing some finishing work and fighting on the floor with MMA!

Quote:

I am arguing aboutthe way t hey did it andd ont agree it was in an MMA way going on and on rolling.Now yes.Not then.[.quote]
I dont believe its an MMA way then or now... so what are you arguging about!

Quote:

I can make a good claim to thinking this and have been and will be more.



We`ll we ahve been waiting 22 pages of this thread for you to do so.. so unleash it and set us free from our misconceptions will you

Quote:

G b ackj and re read by comments on what Mr Flynch instructor said.We are waiting still.



Geesh!!!

Quote:

Again your ignoring that iv adressed that and bringing itback up again.



How can I be ignoring it if Im bringing it back up again... doh! Not that I know what you are referring to!!

Quote:

Thats two sources so far wow.There are tonns that state how it was trained that dontfit what you and ITF are saying.



Erm , Me, ITFunity, Mr Flynch, VDJ, Trevek, GM CK Choi and Gen Choi, some others on this thread.. as opposed to.................................................... .................. you!




Stuart
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 07:12 PM

Yes I do find it hard to understand and accept.
Got a problem with that guys?
Might as well endthe discussion.

Iv looked at interviews with The general,of He Ill Cho,Sihak Henry Cho,Nam Tae Hi,some others and non of them reference groundwork or doing it in the capacity you guys are claiming.All in rolling.
Even when they talk of the military sparring.Most refer to how it looks in that clip and one says its simliar to now except no pads.
One says it was basicaly Korean Karate.
Iv looked at clips of North Korean army training now and recent times and its not as you are saying.

So you can blame me for weighing everthing up and making the conclusions I do?

Is there not even any photos?Instructors I can reasearch doing it now,interviews to read?
I also know of someone via email claiming to teach military who has told me how it was.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 08:26 PM

Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 08:34 PM

You AGAIN pick another poor example of a Korean MAists!

S. Henry Cho:
Wrote 3 books on Karate!
1- Korean Karate, 2- Better Karate for Boys & 3- Self Defense Karate

GM Cho can be described as umbrella TKD or WTF TKD, as he helped them form & help with the tournament sparring rules.

His training was at the JiDo Kwan, which was a ShotoKan deriviative or Korean Karate. The JiDo Kwan was a major influence in the WTF & the rules that helped distinguish what they were doing from the hated Japanese Karate.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/07/08 11:45 PM

As far as I can determine, a big changed occurred in how KMAs were given a new face & direction. This took place in 1963. It was when the tournament rules were adapted to make sure KMAs were different from Japanese MAs. In this new rules, grabbing was prohibited, as was hitting below the waist. These changes were developed by those still training in Korean karate & calling it Tae Soo Do, among other names, like Kong Soo Do. Not the military men who founded original TKD.
It should be noted that Gen Choi Hong Hi, now Ambassador to Malyasia did not approve or accept these changes. The ITF rules were much different & developed primarily by Gen. Woo.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 04:32 AM

Thats an interesting point you bring up regarding the dates etc. When talking of TKD, we are talking 1940's to present day. For this specific subject we are talking 1940's to when the word MMA was used in the vein it is now (late 1990's I think). Thats a lot of years to cover.

I think its getting all messed up because "continuing on the ground" is getting sided with being the same as MMA (as it is today). Until they are accepted as different, they continue to add to the 'is it/is it' not type of argument. I say again, the focus of moderm MMA is much more advanced on the ground than any "follow ups" that were taught in TKD. As you (ITFunity) have said, if a fighter goes down and continues to resist, it stands to reason a ground fight will ensue.. the tactics, stragety and techniques of MMA were not about back then.. so how can they be the same!

Further to this, theres the instructors preference, would they allow it or would they not.. plus the instructors history and own learning and influences.

I think a certain poster here is looking for someone to say it was common practice, accepted on a wide/mainstream scale like patterns of something.. which, personally, I dont feel it was. I see it like "alternative/better" boon hae.. the main stream simply followed the normal stuff, but there were TKD instructors that wernt happy with some applications and taught their own because they were more effective in their opinion.. again, not a main stream practice, but there.. but that was the structure of TKD back then.

Most already know of Gen Chois thoughts of being on the ground within early TKD in the military, so anything more than takedown, finish.. I would bet wasnt brought in front of him or at least, the instructors wouldnt have pushed the boundries that way, except in their own schools.

Going back to the date thing at the start of this post, influences over such a massive time period must have been part of it all, so saying it wasnt there (even if there was concrete evidence) at the beginning, doesnt mean it didnt become part of it later on, doubly so with all the Judo black belts involved in TKD (remember Judo already had Ne-waza and randori, so it wouldnt be surprising if these were influences - after all the throws of judo found their way to TKD).

One cannot define TKD as how it was when it very first started, it evolvd over numerous decades and for some, it still is.

The simple point is, if some TKD instructors incorportated following on from a prone position as part of their classes, then this was continued by their students etc. it became part of TKD.. when this occured, who can say really, was it main stream, probibly not, was it accepted practice.. yes by some, probibly not by others. All this is backed up by numerous posters on here across the world who have had it as part of their training (ie. not one single source).

Going back to the "wheres the video" argument.. all the videos posted in the era's wanted (50's 60's) are of demonstration (ie. the main stream stuff), but they were filmed on TV like cameras, no one had a camcorder to take to their club... if they were more common back then and filming was allowed in schools, thats most likely where you would find the evidence sought.. sadly, I dont think it exsists, although hopefully someone will find some.

Stuart
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 06:01 AM

Considering the Korean army was serving alongside the British and US army during the Korean war, perhaps it might be useful to see what these guys were using and being taught for SD by the military. I think if you look at British commando training you won't find long wrestling routines but 'get 'em down and kill 'em' routines. It might be useful in accepting a military mind set.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 09:53 AM

Quote:

Quote:

How come it seems that the only defenders or the most vocal defenders are ITF based?




Quote:

ITFUNITITY All respect but....I agree with much of what you post on this forum but feel that I must comment on your statement about why is it that ITF people are the ones that seem to always be defending TKD. What do you mean that this is the ITF syllabus? What were you referring to?





Wow, whoa, slow down!
Please read what I said! I never bad mouthed anyone or any style. I simple said with reference to this thread, that TKD does deserve somewhat its poor reputation in many instances for SD. This criticism was not limited to you, your school, the Kukkiwon, the WTF, the ITF, as all of these places, including mine, have weaknesses. All to some extent have been softened or corrupted over time. hence, the rise of MMAs to fill a void.
Now it seemed that the back & forth that was being exchanged, seemed to me to be myself, Mr. Anslow, Mr. Boik & other ITF type of TKD posters that were defending or explaning the present day perception of TKD with respect to loosing face/popularity.
I was merely wondering why non-ITF style students were not more vocal in the exchange.

I will not respond to the rest of your post, as it seems you have some pent up resentment to the ITF. I never have posted my way is the best way, or even better. In addition, I am a frequent critic of many things I see in the ITF. I try to refrain from commenting on things I have little experience with. Most of my entire exposure in the MAs has been to ITF TKD. It serves my purpose & I am continuing a life long pursuit of it, so I may better understand it more fully. I certainly am not a jack of all trades.





ITFUNITY


I realize that my post came across as too anti ITF for this I am sorry. To explain the tone of my posting I can only offer the following.

Most of the recognized experts and most vocal on this forum mainly consist of long time ITF people. Many times I have read things implicating or insinuating WTF organizations as a major cause of the down grading of TKD"s reputation. When one responds or wants to interject from a WTF perspective we get shunned as you did to me by refusing to even acknowledge any of my points. This is one reason you won"t get more input from WTF people, we are simply not significant enough to long time posters. I did not want to offend any one , I just wanted to post some of the frustrations that many WTF people encounter on this forum. I actually chose you because you are always willing to comment and even you wouldn"t. Again sorry if you feel I was too negative towards ITF it was more about wanting WTF participating organizations to be better understood and herd.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 10:34 AM

ITFUNITY

I also noticed that not one other person would acknowledge even one point accept badachaig and he is WTF. This is what I am talking about. To acknowledge would mean one may have to publicly document that there is some positive contributions from WTF organizations, very frustrating.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 11:10 AM

Iv re-read posts and its interesting how times and dates have moved and points have changed.This is why im accusing people of twisting and just getting playgroundy.
Stuart,you accused me of bringing up MMA and sport.Re-read.I dont come in until page 13 or so.Its already being discussed.
Thats just one example of why theres no point if things are going to get twisted.It could on forever.Playgroung bull
Want examples more of you doing that?
This is just to point out and back myself up on that what I say has solid grounding.



ITFUNITY.
Quote:

Now you are correct that naming TKD does not make it TKD. What made it TKD was what he & his committee did in the military. This was different from those that where there when he named it. This committee was his team of military men, who were also martial artists. They were led by him & Col. Nam Tae Hi. They were assisted by Han Cha Kyo & Sgt Major Kim Bok Man, Gen Woo & numerous others. It was this committee or team that devised TKD. What they did was spread throughout Korea, via the military & police, where GM Lee Byung Moo was the chief instructor for the police. As these men went overseas, starting in 1959, this was the TKD they took with them. It was them & their efforts that made TKD popular




Now you say.

Quote:

Now when these pioneers went abroad & started to teach commercially in order to earn a living AND support family back home, the focus & methods changed, as did the student base & the purpose of teaching.




Can you see why its hard to accept and understand.You guys change it all or say the Koreans im referencing did not know.

You also refer to 50' 60 as its development years on about page 3 but take it back to the 1940s when I mention clips of photos.
Also you agree with Flynch that his instructor said it was Free striking sparring plus Judo.Stuart and you say they are Judo black belts.So its Judo plus military TKD(Oh Do Kwan).
Yet later TKD was an MMA as in mixing.
So hoefull you can see my thinking or you guys make up your minds.
Re read and things will become clear as to who said what ,when,where.Who brought this up or that up.

So stuart you are now saying it was a secter kept from the general?
Your saying it was Pioneered by individuals and outside training methods and influences?
Thats what iv been saying.Its developed you yourclip.
Not the other way round.
Re read the whole thread if you like.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 11:22 AM

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And there is still confusion over the free sparring your claiming is MMA type anything goes allowing all techniques.Doing that has to be sport techniques,which is not Original TKD.
OR to do it with ALL true TKD techniques you still need the 'lack of controll',that your calling it,or compliance.And that would not resemble MMA type ,continuing sparring.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Please don't mistake free sparring with the different types of tournament rules that the TKD entities follow. I am talking about students gearing up & sparring freely. In other words they are free to use all available techniques, within reason of course, under as realistic conditions as possible. So no, we don't poke each other in the eyes, or choke them till they die, etc. So when they fight, if someone grabs a leg or effects a takedown, the fight continues on the floor & if someone wants to pin or pound, the fight continues. We are not a MMA school or using UFC rules. we simply train SD in a way that is not limited to tournament style. What is so hard to grasp about the above?




Its not hard to understand.Buts thats not continous MMA tryp sparring.Your claiming they were doing that originaly.
Continuous MMA sparring is carrying on and on,so a guy is on you and hits you snd you turn it round ,now your back in controll,hang on, its tuned again etc.
TKD originaly had no pads,and was not sport type sparringin this instance.So using ALL TKD non sport techniques would make it impossible to do the continuous sparring.Can you not see that?
How can it be so lethal and hardcore yet on the other hand be ableto be done continuously?Plus the idea,we know, of themilitary style was quick finish in vital areas,power power power.
So ,again,hope you can see why its hard to understand.Even if you dont agree.
Everything points points to a controlled finish.What I called compliance of the attacker to pressume he was stopped.
Its the closest you will get using TKD SD techniques.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 11:24 AM

matxtx -

You are really coming across as a knob.

You are seeking to lump all TKD as one thing, when CLEARLY if you read the damn thread, it has been practiced in many forms over time. I don't see how you are not getting this through your skull. You are not wrong about YOUR TKD experience. StuartA is not wrong about his. ITFunity is not wrong about his, etc.........

TKD is not MMA in the UFC sense, although you will find schools that have practiced in a similar manner. You will also find terrible McDojos. One does not negate the other - they both exist. Just like in karate, kung-fu, etc.

You will do yourself a big favor when you learn to stop thinking in absolutes.
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 12:02 PM

I dont think there was much call for that.
How big of you to say that over the net.
Up yours.

If thats the case they are knobs too as theyv been as persistant with their points to override mine.
If its just me then its your problem or anyone else who thinks that way.
Its was probaly said partly to get goodbye from me anyway, so goodbye.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 12:32 PM

matxtx-

Quote:

Up yours.




*snork*


Anyway,

They have actually MADE points, instead of immaturely arguing semantics, as you are doing. You do not seem to know much about the history of TKD, but refuse to believe those that have deep knowledge of the subject.

You are coming across as the stereotypical hyperventilating UFC zealot. Calm down and READ what people are saying instead of just blindly trying to discredit things that no one is trying to justify.

Have a nice day.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 01:33 PM

Quote:

Stuart,you accused me of bringing up MMA and sport.



Im sure I only said I tried to explain why people would see MMA as sport related.. on a number of occassions!! If so, then it would have been brought up already as you took offence to anyone who said it was sport.. hence my explanation as to why!!

Quote:

Want examples more of you doing that?



yes please!



Quote:

So stuart you are now saying it was a secter kept from the general?



No.. I dont know if it was actully something that would have been kept from him, though it wouldnt surprise me because of how things went back then - though Im just sumising! Doubly so if he didnt like it. As for "sector".. I didnt say that, I said it probibly wasnt main stream.

Quote:

Your saying it was Pioneered by individuals and outside training methods and influences?



You could say that, though Id be more inclined to say it was guided by their personal expereinces & preference... oh! I did say that! Though it wasnt outside of training methods, as it was a training method, just perhaps one not prefered or taken on board by all.

Quote:

Thats what iv been saying.Its developed you yourclip.
Not the other way round.



Eh! .. erm, okay.. though that would insinuate my clip was the culmination of it all and of course, as has already been pointed out.. it isnt!

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 01:42 PM

Quote:

Its not hard to understand.Buts thats not continous MMA tryp sparring.Your claiming they were doing that originaly.



Whose twisting things!!!!!

Quote:

Continuous MMA sparring is carrying on and on,so a guy is on you and hits you snd you turn it round ,now your back in controll,hang on, its tuned again etc.



So what happens if one opponent knocks the other out with the first few punches?


Quote:

TKD originaly had no pads,and was not sport type sparringin this instance.So using ALL TKD non sport techniques would make it impossible to do the continuous sparring.Can you not see that?



Hence why there was some forms of control.. that stands to reason as well as being explained already!

Quote:

So ,again,hope you can see why its hard to understand.



Everyone else gets it! It just that you dont want to!


Oh.. sorry, this was to ITFunity... oh well.. done now
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 01:50 PM

Quote:



True Mr. Boik! But please remember that this is the ITF syllabus, which we know is the smallest group of those who use the name TKD. So it doesn't apply to the over whelming majority of those doing a different TKD. So in effect this is a defense or counter for our style of TKD. Where is the defense of the other styles of TKD?
How come it seems that the only defenders or the most vocal defenders are ITF based?





ITFUNITITY
All respect but....


I agree with much of what you post on this forum but feel that I must comment on your statement about why is it that ITF people are the ones that seem to always be defending TKD. What do you mean that this is the ITF syllabus? What were you referring to?

1. ITF people think they are the only organization to teach effective SD, this is a false assumption and people need to realize that many WTF schools took what they believed to be effective SD from the ITF syllabus and discarded what they did"t think was effective then incorporated more things like hapkido judo etc. This is not a bad thing it is progress in many eyes. I know I am going to get the no WTF standard syllabus argument and it is a legitimate argument. My only response is that as a whole WTF affiliated schools are still evolving which means that TKD as an art is still evolving. I believe this is the problem, old school vs new school mentality and fear of change, is it for better? time will sort things out. Me personally, I am always looking for improvement and one must be willing to break tradition to find out if new is improved.

2. ITF is much more bitter and radical and very stuck in their past, notice the word - their.

3. I have observed many ITF training videos and can honestly say that our WTF affiliated school teaches as much if not more thorough SD techniques, mostly hapkido and judo based, very effective.

4. It drives me crazy how ITF persons are constantly blaming or assuming that it is WTF affiliated organizations that are the main problem with TKD because they are exposed to the olympics. This has been the under lying tone of this forum for a long time.

5. I honestly do not believe that enough ITF people truly understand WTF training and philosophy and insist that our training does not match or even exceed the ITF syllabus.

6. Our full contact sparing does serve a good purpose and can be very painful even with all the protective gear, broken ribs, jaws, teeth, head injuries, don"t even want to here the pitty patter crap that many like to spew. I have an injury that is more than three years old and will not heal! I admit our sparing does not resemble real fighting but one needs to remember, it is not suppose to! non WTF people do not get that, therefore can not relate. I could attempt to explain it but my suggestion would be that one participate in some of our tourneys, maybe then they will have an understanding of what it is and appreciate the value. Oh and did I mention that many students never even participate in competition, so what are they training for day in and day out, nothing?

6. People keep forgetting that the sparing is a very small part of what most WTF schools train but that is most of the criticism of WTF schools, there is much more going on and no one will give credit, they keep harping on our sparing even though they never even tried it. This drives me crazy!

7. Many of our instructors are former ITF instructors! there might be some good reasons to come to the dark side but many old school will never even try to understand what it"s about. It is no more money motivated than any ITF organization.

8. Many ITF organizations do not fully train their own syllabus but still criticize WTF affiliated schools for not having a standard syllabus or fully following the ITF syllabus. So if many are not training their own syllabus can you really even call it a standard syllabus? obviously not.

Conclusion, WTF, ITF need to cooperate and come to a conclusion as to what components from each is worthy and incorporate them into one strongly defined system or this devision will never end and TKD will always be viewed as inferior. To do this ITF will need to let go of much of their past and except some of the good regarding WTF. After all if TKD becomes unpopular no one will care except those of us left behind pointing fingers. You are write about history being important and it is time to re-write it and move on, except that TKD has changed forever and unite both systems into one, only then will we have a true, whole and respected TKD.





Still waiting for someone, anyone to comment. Apologize for the anti ITF tone of this post just venting some frustration.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 02:37 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

How come it seems that the only defenders or the most vocal defenders are ITF based?




Quote:

ITFUNITITY All respect but....I agree with much of what you post on this forum but feel that I must comment on your statement about why is it that ITF people are the ones that seem to always be defending TKD. What do you mean that this is the ITF syllabus? What were you referring to?





Wow, whoa, slow down!
Please read what I said! I never bad mouthed anyone or any style. I simple said with reference to this thread, that TKD does deserve somewhat its poor reputation in many instances for SD. This criticism was not limited to you, your school, the Kukkiwon, the WTF, the ITF, as all of these places, including mine, have weaknesses. All to some extent have been softened or corrupted over time. hence, the rise of MMAs to fill a void.
Now it seemed that the back & forth that was being exchanged, seemed to me to be myself, Mr. Anslow, Mr. Boik & other ITF type of TKD posters that were defending or explaning the present day perception of TKD with respect to loosing face/popularity.
I was merely wondering why non-ITF style students were not more vocal in the exchange.

I will not respond to the rest of your post, as it seems you have some pent up resentment to the ITF. I never have posted my way is the best way, or even better. In addition, I am a frequent critic of many things I see in the ITF. I try to refrain from commenting on things I have little experience with. Most of my entire exposure in the MAs has been to ITF TKD. It serves my purpose & I am continuing a life long pursuit of it, so I may better understand it more fully. I certainly am not a jack of all trades.





ITFUNITY


I realize that my post came across as too anti ITF for this I am sorry. To explain the tone of my posting I can only offer the following.

Most of the recognized experts and most vocal on this forum mainly consist of long time ITF people. Many times I have read things implicating or insinuating WTF organizations as a major cause of the down grading of TKD"s reputation. When one responds or wants to interject from a WTF perspective we get shunned as you did to me by refusing to even acknowledge any of my points. This is one reason you won"t get more input from WTF people, we are simply not significant enough to long time posters. I did not want to offend any one , I just wanted to post some of the frustrations that many WTF people encounter on this forum. I actually chose you because you are always willing to comment and even you wouldn"t. Again sorry if you feel I was too negative towards ITF it was more about wanting WTF participating organizations to be better understood and herd.


Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 05:53 PM

matxtx,

the thing is that most arts when they start out are MMA in the sense they are made up of parts of various arts and go through a period of flux and change. As they get popular they might become sport-influenced and lose some of the more lethal or aggressive techniques.

Wrestling has loads of techniques which aren't used on the mat because theyve been banned in competition. The upshot is that many who have only learned wrestling since it stopped being used for fighting (as opposed to sport) don't know these techniques and aren't taught them by the coaches.

Boxing used to be all in until Marquis of Queensbury made it totally stand-up and MofQ rules. Before that it was not unlike Vale Tudo in many cases.

Even Kyokushin changed. Steve Arneill has commented that in the old days they did head punches, sweps and allsorts which they don't do today.

Part of the 'cleaning-up' process is because it goes up-market and rich people don't want to roll around on the floor (Savate used to have wrestling until it becme Boxe-Francais, I believe). Also dangerous techniques get limited (think Judo, developed from JuJitsu... morphed back into BJJ) or things get tarted up for consumer purposes (Shotokan, I believe). As situations and times change things get dropped and forgotten. So to a soldier fighting in a war, take-downs etc would be needed. Rolling on the floor for 20 minutes trying to get a choke on wouldn't be a good idea. Move to UK or USA and the public probably want something more like the TKD we know.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 06:04 PM

Yes von, I agree (although I've never been ITF).

However, those hands-down things...

I think this is where a Chang Hon evangelist can wangle their way in. As most attacks are probably punches to face (I have no evidence to support this)and CH-ists even compete with that in mind, it is an easier argument to use.

I mean, imagine an ITF guy and a WTF get into an argument and finally the ITF guy insults the WTF guy. The WTF guy says... "OK, buddy... you've asked for it... PUT 'EM DOWN"
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 06:14 PM

WTF guy would pitty patter him to a pulp! all the while the ITF guy would simi kick and punch the wtf guy! doesn"t get any meaner than that.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 06:41 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY I realize that my post came across as too anti ITF for this I am sorry. To explain the tone of my posting I can only offer the following.
Most of the recognized experts and most vocal on this forum mainly consist of long time ITF people. Many times I have read things implicating or insinuating WTF organizations as a major cause of the down grading of TKD"s reputation. When one responds or wants to interject from a WTF perspective we get shunned as you did to me by refusing to even acknowledge any of my points. This is one reason you won"t get more input from WTF people, we are simply not significant enough to long time posters. I did not want to offend any one , I just wanted to post some of the frustrations that many WTF people encounter on this forum. I actually chose you because you are always willing to comment and even you wouldn"t. Again sorry if you feel I was too negative towards ITF it was more about wanting WTF participating organizations to be better understood and herd.





No problem whatsoever. I greatly respect the WTF, Kukkiwon & KTA for their great work in spreading TKD around the world. I have no problem with the WTF style (Kukki) students. I think that concentrating on a sport aspect, in order to be different from Japanese Karate, has has some downside. However, the poor reputation has so much more to do with the fact that insurance & businesses money makers have concentrated on making money & opening up to kids & everyone, which id good, but does have its downside. All these things affect the ITF, as we are just as guilty.
TKD is TKD. Of course there are differences & various things that are emphasized. In the end, it comes down to good school or bad school. It is a shame that there seems to be more McDoJangs than tuff SD TKD training centers.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 06:42 PM

Quote:

Considering the Korean army was serving alongside the British and US army during the Korean war, perhaps it might be useful to see what these guys were using and being taught for SD by the military. I think if you look at British commando training you won't find long wrestling routines but 'get 'em down and kill 'em' routines. It might be useful in accepting a military mind set.



Good point!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 06:46 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY I also noticed that not one other person would acknowledge even one point accept badachaig and he is WTF. This is what I am talking about. To acknowledge would mean one may have to publicly document that there is some positive contributions from WTF organizations, very frustrating.




As posted, the WTF has made great contributions to the world of MAs. They have produced many strong students & have impacted countless lives in a very positive way, all around the world, bringing all types of people together, which is what it is all about!
I have no problem whatsoever with the WTF & their students.
My only disappointment is writing out Gen Choi, the ITF & the TKD Pioneers from history. I understand why it was done & see that it may be rectifed soon.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 06:52 PM

von, sounds like a great fight... as long as they don't have to go to ground.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:02 PM

Quote:

Iv re-read posts and its interesting how times and dates have moved and points have changed.This is why im accusing people of twisting and just getting playgroundy.




No twisting or game playing here, just a rather stark lack of understanding of KMA history on your part. So you are forgiven. Now please kindly follow along:
Korea was occupied by Japan till Aug 1945, the 15th I think. Before that, the practice of any MA & many Korean customs was outlawed. In the spring of 1944, March 11 I think, a small school in an archery training was set up by GM Ro Byung Jik, called the Song Moo Kwan. It was forced to close within about 6 months by the Japanese. In Sept of 44, the Chung Do Kwan opened under GM Lee, which was also forced to close. Now these schools were teaching Karate, as both learned it in Japan.
At the end of WW II, the MAs, along with other Korean customs started to again flourish. In 1945, Mr. Choi Hong Hi became a founding member in the fledging SK Army when he was commissioned as a Lt. Now both GM Ro & Lee were senior to Mr. Choi, who was also teaching Korean Karate at the time to some of his troops. So the period of the 1940s was not the birth of original TKD. It was from 1954 forward, after the President of SK ordered KMA to be taught to the troops. This gave Mr. Choi, now a general the upper hand. Due to his position & standing, he had access to numerous talented troops, who also had fighting skills from variuos disciplines of the time. It was here in the Oh Do kwan that the modern TKD was born out of various systems of the day, with the biggest influence being ShotoKan.

These pioneers, after completing 3 years of mandatory military service, started to spread TKD around the world. Some of the 1st places were Malyasia, when he was Ambassador & Vietnam, where some 700 Korean instructors, over time, were dispatched there to teach their soldiers. The 1st instructors went there in 1962, Dec, led by Nam Tae Hi, who later retired as a Colonel.
The 1963 date is when the JiDo kwan adopted what would later basically become WTF & then Olympic tournament rules.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:05 PM

How long was Korea under occupaion, was it 1910?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:14 PM

I believe that is the year, 1910 often used as the formal annexation. However, Korea was fought over before by Japan & Russia, with Japan exerting much control prior to 1910.
Note:
After the formal annexation in 1910, Ahn Choong Gun, 4th gup blue belt shot & killed the Japanese Resident General in March & was later executed in Sept of the same year, after being tortured for 6 months. One of the things I like about the ITF, is that you learn much history about Korea, not just the TKD propaganda they put out.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:18 PM

Quote:

1. ITF people think they are the only organization to teach effective SD, this is a false assumption and people need to realize that many WTF schools took what they believed to be effective SD from the ITF syllabus and discarded what they did"t think was effective then incorporated more things like hapkido judo etc. This is not a bad thing it is progress in many eyes.




No actually the main emphasis of the ITF is the DO. SD is their most important physical aspect. But even that is used to lead one back to the DO.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:18 PM

Hiro Bumi Ito, wasn't it? First Japanese governor general of Korea and a leading figure in Korea-Japan 'merger'.
32 moves represent his (An's) age when executed in Lui Shung prison.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:22 PM

Quote:

2. ITF is much more bitter and radical and very stuck in their past, notice the word - their.




Very broad & somewhat over general statement. However I think I understand where you are coming from & do agree somewhat.

My only reply would be, do you know why?

In addition, do you realize the TKD Museum at the Kukkiwon, headquarters for both TKD training & the WTF, has not 1 reference to Gen Choi, his contributions & that of the pioneers, not even that he named the Art. Nothing. Nadda. Zilch. Zero
The only thing remotely connected is the plaque of the Oh Do kwan, displayed with all the other main Kwans & a TKD WC poster with Taekwon-Do spelt the right way.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:25 PM

Not a surprising idea, though, when General Choi used to openly refer to WTF TKD as 'phoney TKD'
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:36 PM

Quote:

3. I have observed many ITF training videos and can honestly say that our WTF affiliated school teaches as much if not more thorough SD techniques, mostly hapkido and judo based, very effective.
4. It drives me crazy how ITF persons are constantly blaming or assuming that it is WTF affiliated organizations that are the main problem with TKD because they are exposed to the olympics. This has been the under lying tone of this forum for a long time.
5. I honestly do not believe that enough ITF people truly understand WTF training and philosophy and insist that our training does not match or even exceed the ITF syllabus.
6. Our full contact sparing does serve a good purpose and can be very painful even with all the protective gear, broken ribs, jaws, teeth, head injuries, don"t even want to here the pitty patter crap that many like to spew. I have an injury that is more than three years old and will not heal! I admit our sparing does not resemble real fighting but one needs to remember, it is not suppose to! non WTF people do not get that, therefore can not relate. I could attempt to explain it but my suggestion would be that one participate in some of our tourneys, maybe then they will have an understanding of what it is and appreciate the value. Oh and did I mention that many students never even participate in competition, so what are they training for day in and day out, nothing?
6. People keep forgetting that the sparing is a very small part of what most WTF schools train but that is most of the criticism of WTF schools, there is much more going on and no one will give credit, they keep harping on our sparing even though they never even tried it. This drives me crazy!
7. Many of our instructors are former ITF instructors! there might be some good reasons to come to the dark side but many old school will never even try to understand what it"s about. It is no more money motivated than any ITF organization.
8. Many ITF organizations do not fully train their own syllabus but still criticize WTF affiliated schools for not having a standard syllabus or fully following the ITF syllabus. So if many are not training their own syllabus can you really even call it a standard syllabus? obviously not.
Conclusion, WTF, ITF need to cooperate and come to a conclusion as to what components from each is worthy and incorporate them into one strongly defined system or this devision will never end and TKD will always be viewed as inferior. To do this ITF will need to let go of much of their past and except some of the good regarding WTF. After all if TKD becomes unpopular no one will care except those of us left behind pointing fingers. You are write about history being important and it is time to re-write it and move on, except that TKD has changed forever and unite both systems into one, only then will we have a true, whole and respected TKD.




The Kukkiwon has some great training. The WTF has only rules. The Kukkiwon textbook is wonderful & I think any TKD student should consider buying it & adding it to their library.
Do you have it?

Training & its quality has more to do with what type of school you have & how the instructor teaches. They either push &/or demand something from their students or they simply take money. The Olympics has had a great & positive effect on TKD. However, some can make an arguement that emphasis on the sport aspect has some downside. However, even ITF schools can & are guilty of this.

There is a syllabus for the ITF as laid out in the 15 volume Encylopdia of TKD. IMHO a truly unprecidented reference tool. I know, I am biased! But I never really have seen anything else like it. Now the fact that some may not follow it & indeed most do not follow it in its entirety, does not take away from the worth of it.

I sincerely hope that both groups will work better together in the future. I think there are signs of that happening. The problem is all the headaches of the past. It will be really up to the younger ones to do it. Hopefully they will not become poisoned by the past bickering, finger pointing & egotistical moves of the founders. This will be helped by the fact that the 2 Koreas are looking for things to share, in an attempt to work closer. TKD, being a proud Korean achievement is helping on that front. The fact that ITF is so strong in NK & SK has the WTF, will really help, as the politicians will force the egos of the TKD leaders to take a back seat, hopefully way in the back, as it is long overdue. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:38 PM

Quote:

Hiro Bumi Ito, wasn't it? First Japanese governor general of Korea and a leading figure in Korea-Japan 'merger'.32 moves represent his (An's) age when executed in Lui Shung prison.




Yes, except I think he title was technically resident general, with it being changed to governor general after his assanination.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:41 PM

Quote:

Not a surprising idea, though, when General Choi used to openly refer to WTF TKD as 'phoney TKD'




You are 100% right. He was very bitter & he may have had good reason, but he also had a big ego. However you never accomplish much goodness or goodwill with negativity. Ironically, now that he is gone, a big impediement, his bitterness is gone.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 07:44 PM

Quote:

Not a surprising idea, though, when General Choi used to openly refer to WTF TKD as 'phoney TKD'





I should add, even though it is obvious, this is a reason why many ITF students throw mud at the WTF side. The trend was passed on. I reject it in its entirety. It has no place in the realm of the MAs. Besides, WTF students of today, all around the world had nothing to do with black listing Ambasador Choi. Nor did the students write him out of history. They only read that TKD is 2,000 years old.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/08/08 09:35 PM

ITFUNITY


I am happy now, thanks for the input and allowing me to vent.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 12:28 AM

No problem Von1

Do you know why many ITF members are bitter?
Do you have the Kukkiwon textbook?
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 03:55 AM

Few points.

I agree that there is bitterness due to lack of recognition of those who worked hard for TKD but this is mainly political and this has little to do with the current WTF or ITF students as even the majority of South Koreans have no knowledge of the founding of their national art/sport. The only thing that has been mentioned to me is that I should help spread the true history of Tae Kwon Do as it has been taught to me.

Beyond this point which is purely historical and political in nature...

I beleive somebody was asking how TKD was taught.

To clarify GM CK Choi does not have a school he rather supports his students (some of which he has had since the early seventies) and their schools. He also gives seminars testings etc. Whatever he can do to support all true Tae Kwon Do practioners.

I feel I am fairly lucky to be able to train with him on a regular basis. I also attend a school run by one of his senior students although a hip injury has sidelined me for a while now.

When I am trainning with him anything goes strikes anywhere with any striking tool, grabs throws whatever the situation dictates. By the way I have never asked him to teach me how to spar in a tournament but I have seen him teach this as well.

They I go to the club which is at a university and is run on basically a cement floor. Funny enough the WTF guys get the padded floor in the new athletic center. The sparring there is pretty much tournament type sparring with maybe some leg sweeps thrown in from time to time. Contact is mild to heavy depending on the person you are sparring with. Most of the other techniques elbows, knees etc are taught with line or partner drills and are all stand up oriented.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 06:34 AM

I must say, as a non-ITF Chang Hon-in (can I say that?), I have trained as a guest at WTF clubs across Europe and have never found any problem. I was always allowed to wear my association dobok and belt (and I always asked first)and have always received a warm welcome. Even in the ITF clubs I've trained at as a guest have been very hospitable and, likewise insisted that I wear my dobok (even when I wore a WTF one) and belt.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:33 AM

not sure of the date of the film, but...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=YoCiKKCB8bQ&feature=related
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 11:06 AM

Quote:

No problem Von1

Do you know why many ITF members are bitter?
Do you have the Kukkiwon textbook?





I understand the hard feelings old time ITF authorities would have, however, I truly believe it is time to get beyond all the bitterness and unite the art into a universally tightly governed, standardized, recognizable art, not ITF not WTF but the best of ea.

If this could be accomplished now while TKD is still popular TKD would be unstoppable. Our own infighting and loose standards are hurting us more than anything. The funny thing is, it is our infighting that has produced the loose standards, this is why I don"t care bunches about early history, like it or not, TKD has changed forever and nothing will change that fact so it is time to write new history.
One may feel as they wish, but making statements like, history of real TKD, only serves in more division and is strictly political and passive aggressive. This is what the old time governing bodies want, they do not seek reconciliation they seek victory and it is only getting further away! I say united we stand divided we fail.

Looking back on TKD"s entire history will not be so painful or bitter once/if, TKD becomes one, it will simply become part of the transformation of TKD. I believe it can only come from a new breed of leader, us! well not me but you get the picture.

And no I do not have the kukkiwon text book but I plan to look into that, thanks.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 01:49 PM

Quote:


I understand the hard feelings old time ITF authorities would have, however, I truly believe it is time to get beyond all the bitterness and unite the art into a universally tightly governed, standardized, recognizable art, not ITF not WTF but the best of ea.




Personally, I dislike the idea of complete standardization. I think the creation of standard names for all the techniques in TKD by the ITF, and the naming of different judo techniques by the IJF is a great step forward, and very useful. However, a standard curriculum in my opinion is simply too restrictive on the individual needs and preferences of instructors and their pupils.

People are always going to have slightly different goals and preferences. Some instructors prefer to do a lot of pad work, some prefer to do lots of patterns, others do very little sparring. And that's fine, afterall, a martial art should not just be a fixed immovable thing, it should be flexible to the individual. An analogy is in modern schooling. Some people learn kinesthetically, some learn better from reading books, others from discussing the ideas. Schools in britain now try to cater for this, and results seem to be improving, so there is some evidence it works.

I have met instructors who were fantastic teachers at certain elements of TKD, but were weak in other areas, and obviously they focused more on the aspects they were good at than those they were poor at. That is not to say these weak areas should be ignored, but I can quite understand how some areas can be taught in much smaller amounts than others. A simple example is gun defense- might be a useful thing in America, but in Britain it becomes much less important, although knife defense might be more important. So you see how a standard, one size fits all, curriculum can actually stifle a MA and cause disagreements and splits where they needn't exist.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 05:02 PM

Quote:

Quote:


I understand the hard feelings old time ITF authorities would have, however, I truly believe it is time to get beyond all the bitterness and unite the art into a universally tightly governed, standardized, recognizable art, not ITF not WTF but the best of ea.




Personally, I dislike the idea of complete standardization. I think the creation of standard names for all the techniques in TKD by the ITF, and the naming of different judo techniques by the IJF is a great step forward, and very useful. However, a standard curriculum in my opinion is simply too restrictive on the individual needs and preferences of instructors and their pupils.

People are always going to have slightly different goals and preferences. Some instructors prefer to do a lot of pad work, some prefer to do lots of patterns, others do very little sparring. And that's fine, afterall, a martial art should not just be a fixed immovable thing, it should be flexible to the individual. An analogy is in modern schooling. Some people learn kinesthetically, some learn better from reading books, others from discussing the ideas. Schools in britain now try to cater for this, and results seem to be improving, so there is some evidence it works.

I have met instructors who were fantastic teachers at certain elements of TKD, but were weak in other areas, and obviously they focused more on the aspects they were good at than those they were poor at. That is not to say these weak areas should be ignored, but I can quite understand how some areas can be taught in much smaller amounts than others. A simple example is gun defense- might be a useful thing in America, but in Britain it becomes much less important, although knife defense might be more important. So you see how a standard, one size fits all, curriculum can actually stifle a MA and cause disagreements and splits where they needn't exist.






Interesting,


That is how TKD is now and there is much complaining and finger pointing. You raise some good points but no matter how you look at it we are still divided and many have hard feelings. TKD could be standardized if it was done correctly. You could do it regionally, that would take care of the gun SD in America vs. the knife SD in Europe example you gave. No matter how you develop curriculum instructors will always very a little from it but a minimum standard could be imposed and regulated. The curriculum would not have to be so rigid that it would impose on instructors, the key would be the minimum standards.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 05:44 PM

Interesting video, but there is some color in it, so I am not sure how old it it.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 05:51 PM

Quote:

I understand the hard feelings old time ITF authorities would have, however, I truly believe it is time to get beyond all the bitterness and unite the art into a universally tightly governed, standardized, recognizable art, not ITF not WTF but the best of ea.




Well I am not sure that many realize the depth of the pain caused by lives ruined with slander, hardship & labels of communsit or traitor. The SK govt is hesitant to acknowledge the true history, as it leads to a dreaded connection that they do not wish to make to Japan & Karate. So it is way more than just technique that they must agree on.

Also, coming together & tightening up standards does little to prevent McDojangs from flourishing. JMHO
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 05:57 PM

Quote:

Personally, I dislike the idea of complete standardization. I think the creation of standard names for all the techniques in TKD by the ITF, and the naming of different judo techniques by the IJF is a great step forward, and very useful. However, a standard curriculum in my opinion is simply too restrictive on the individual needs and preferences of instructors and their pupils.



Standardization of technique, how it is best done & terminology, IMHO doesn't hamper individuals if we realize that one just uese the techniques & appplies them as each person & situation requires. This is why you don't see much in the fighting sections of the texts, as it would just be filler material, beyond general concepts & the like. Teachers best know their charges.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 06:01 PM

Quote:

The curriculum would not have to be so rigid that it would impose on instructors, the key would be the minimum standards.




Yes the key is minimum standards after someone is introduced to the entire syllabus. having a full syylabus helps to students know the Art more fully & have an opportunity to use what fits them best. The minimum standards helps insure they grasp & apply it.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 06:11 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I understand the hard feelings old time ITF authorities would have, however, I truly believe it is time to get beyond all the bitterness and unite the art into a universally tightly governed, standardized, recognizable art, not ITF not WTF but the best of ea.




Well I am not sure that many realize the depth of the pain caused by lives ruined with slander, hardship & labels of communsit or traitor. The SK govt is hesitant to acknowledge the true history, as it leads to a dreaded connection that they do not wish to make to Japan & Karate. So it is way more than just technique that they must agree on.

Also, coming together & tightening up standards does little to prevent McDojangs from flourishing. JMHO




Understood and very sad,


However, many of the people who were damaged the most are gone so the ones who carry the contempt are doing it for general purpose, that always proves to be counter productive. If it is not for general purpose than there is an agenda and that would worry me to as it should anyone involved in TKD. If standards were strictly enforced it would do a great deal to stop mcdo jo"s.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 06:17 PM

I wonder how much it would. How many McDojangs are non-affiliated? In UK alone I can think of at least half a dozen non-affiliated groups.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 06:48 PM

Quote:

Good point Mr. Boik!

However, one minor clarification if you may. GM Lee Nam Suk, although a very prominent & influential early Korean MAist, was not a member of the original TKD or Oh Do kwan that would become Chang Hon. He was a member (co-founder) of the Chang Moo Kwan & was one who did adopt the name early on. However he was basically ShotoKan or Japanese Karate, with some Chinese influence. He was influential inn the formation of the WTF.
So this example IMHO would be better placed with either the umbrella name or the WTF defense side.




Sorry, I meant Lee Suk Hi.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 06:58 PM

Quote:

Understood and very sad, However, many of the people who were damaged the most are gone so the ones who carry the contempt are doing it for general purpose, that always proves to be counter productive. If it is not for general purpose than there is an agenda and that would worry me to as it should anyone involved in TKD. If standards were strictly enforced it would do a great deal to stop mcdo jo"s.




Yes contempt is harmful & counter productive. However, the new leadership in the WTF is I think more inclined to move forward. It is the old hard liners in the Kukkiwon who are more resistant. This 2nd generation were there in the 60s & they will be much harder to win over. JMHO
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:04 PM

With a well defined system and strong governing body those not affiliated would not be TKD. This is impossible though unless ITF and WTF come together as one, determine the standards, monitor those standards, enforce the standards, and legally expel those clubs that do not live up to the minimum standards. The only way to pull this off is with a governing body that consist of both WTF, and ITF, so there is no question who governs and owns the TKD concept. With out involvement from both we end up with what we have now, two main entities fighting for recognition and dominance.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:04 PM

Quote:

I wonder how much it would. How many McDojangs are non-affiliated? In UK alone I can think of at least half a dozen non-affiliated groups.




Thats right! there are far more independent TKD groups then the 2 big ones. Followed by the WTF & then the smallest group being the ITF.

Keep in mind, when it comes to McDojangs, standards mean little, as if they are not applied locally, that is, in the school, then all the high standards don't amount to a hill of beans. For instance a certified ITF II can test up to half their rank. So a 4th dan can give up to a 2nd dan to their students based soley on their signature. Likewise a 6th Dan can do the same up to 3rd. The change takes place at 4th, where the ITF promotion committee rules take over.

I am not sure about the Kukkiwon, but think they may have something similiar. maybe someone else can fill us in.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:07 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Sorry, I meant Lee Suk Hi.




GM Lee Suk Hi is a gentleman & devote Christian (a minister I think). he was one who had hardship & was called a communsit traitor after he went to NK in 1980 & afterwards for TKD. He was the VP of the ITF in the 80s.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:09 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Understood and very sad, However, many of the people who were damaged the most are gone so the ones who carry the contempt are doing it for general purpose, that always proves to be counter productive. If it is not for general purpose than there is an agenda and that would worry me to as it should anyone involved in TKD. If standards were strictly enforced it would do a great deal to stop mcdo jo"s.




Yes contempt is harmful & counter productive. However, the new leadership in the WTF is I think more inclined to move forward. It is the old hard liners in the Kukkiwon who are more resistant. This 2nd generation were there in the 60s & they will be much harder to win over. JMHO




Yes I believe you are accurate in saying this which only further feeds the con temp for the WTF by ITF.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:12 PM

Quote:

With a well defined system and strong governing body those not affiliated would not be TKD. This is impossible though unless ITF and WTF come together as one, determine the standards, monitor those standards, enforce the standards, and legally expel those clubs that do not live up to the minimum standards. The only way to pull this off is with a governing body that consist of both WTF, and ITF, so there is no question who governs and owns the TKD concept. With out involvement from both we end up with what we have now, two main entities fighting for recognition and dominance.




Von1:

In theory great! I would support it. However, how can you stop someone from using or calling what they do TKD? You can't! The ITF tried that for decades. The founder came up with the name. Remember, they were the only ones to really use the name TKD till the mid 1960s. Some did not use it till the late 1970s. So that gave the ITF fuel to boast what the others were doing was not TKD. Where did it get them? No where! Millions of students later, the WTF has 180 member nations & EVEN the IOC says what they govern is TKD. Remember, there are simply more independent TKD then any others. It boils down to many just use it as an umbrella name. The train has already left the station.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:18 PM

Quote:

Yes I believe you are accurate in saying this which only further feeds the con temp for the WTF by ITF.




Please keep in mind, the ITF is the one pushing the merge. They are being met with resistance. Remember, the ITF had a signed written aggrement back in 1980, I think, with the WTF secty genl signing it. Dr. Kim & the SK Govt blocked it. lately, there have been several meetings with coordination committees of the 2 groups, the ITF-NK & WTF. Hopefully the changing political climate between the 2 Koreas will help more than hurt. That is truly IMHO the key. Real world geo-politics, not MA.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:30 PM

Quote:

Quote:

With a well defined system and strong governing body those not affiliated would not be TKD. This is impossible though unless ITF and WTF come together as one, determine the standards, monitor those standards, enforce the standards, and legally expel those clubs that do not live up to the minimum standards. The only way to pull this off is with a governing body that consist of both WTF, and ITF, so there is no question who governs and owns the TKD concept. With out involvement from both we end up with what we have now, two main entities fighting for recognition and dominance.




Von1:

In theory great! I would support it. However, how can you stop someone from using or calling what they do TKD? You can't! The ITF tried that for decades. The founder came up with the name. Remember, they were the only ones to really use the name TKD till the mid 1960s. Some did not use it till the late 1970s. So that gave the ITF fuel to boast what the others were doing was not TKD. Where did it get them? No where! Millions of students later, the WTF has 180 member nations & EVEN the IOC says what they govern is TKD. Remember, there are simply more independent TKD then any others. It boils down to many just use it as an umbrella name. The train has already left the station.





I saw that coming. I believe if most the main players get together, meaning WTF, ITF, and any other significant organizations and become one it is simply marketing, the new organization would have consistency in the minds of the world. Now for the tricky part, the key would still be the olympics, but this time would include more factions. You have to admit if the world sees an olympic organization as the gov body the rest is easy. Really all we are talking about is regrouping and restructuring ourselves to become stronger.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 07:33 PM

Good point Von1. I see your logic!
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 08:27 PM

Dream on right.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 08:37 PM

Absolutely. It is a great dream & 1 that may be helped by some sort of merger. But it really in the end, comes down to you & me, not literally you & me, but students on both sides, ITF, WTF & of course the independents. If we all just worked together, without bickering, we could all grow in a positive direction. I have learned a lot in forums & even the Kukkiwon textbook. So the more we at the bottom share, the better for all. Plus we should set an example for our students & juniors, that hard feelings of the past, don't reflect on us personally, so we should not let other's fights become our own. Nuttin wrong with dreamin!
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/09/08 08:43 PM

Dido
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 12:58 PM

Quote:

I must say, as a non-ITF Chang Hon-in (can I say that?), I have trained as a guest at WTF clubs across Europe and have never found any problem. I was always allowed to wear my association dobok and belt (and I always asked first)and have always received a warm welcome. Even in the ITF clubs I've trained at as a guest have been very hospitable and, likewise insisted that I wear my dobok (even when I wore a WTF one) and belt.




Yes you would be welcomed the same way at our club. Students no matter were they are from can wear the uniform they have and the belt they have. We have many WTF students train at our club. We also have students from New Zealand, Korea, Europe etc. I think they like the sparring at our club. I have fought with many of these students over the year and I have noticed many things some things I though could be added to my trainning and some that I wouldn't
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 01:24 PM

Quote:

Absolutely. It is a great dream & 1 that may be helped by some sort of merger. But it really in the end, comes down to you & me, not literally you & me, but students on both sides, ITF, WTF & of course the independents. If we all just worked together, without bickering, we could all grow in a positive direction. I have learned a lot in forums & even the Kukkiwon textbook. So the more we at the bottom share, the better for all. Plus we should set an example for our students & juniors, that hard feelings of the past, don't reflect on us personally, so we should not let other's fights become our own. Nuttin wrong with dreamin!




Wow, that is great that you have a copy of the KKW textbook. I agree that there are many things that could be learned from practicing w/other styles/orgs of TKD. As I have posted previously, at one point during my training I practiced with some individuals who taught me several of the ITF forms, which I must admit are more dynamic and interesting that the KKW forms.

Adding another point to the original topic of this thread (TKD losing it's face), in the KKW schools I have trained in, I have noticed a strong correlation between the emphasis on SD and realistic fighting vs. sport fighting and the relative age of the master/instructor and what "period" he grew up in. In one school I was instructed by a grandmaster who grew up during the 50s/60s, was originally schooled in the Chung Do Kwan, served in the Korean military. While he taught Olympic style sparring, there was a lot of emphasis on more "old school" techniques, incl. a lot of SD and "dirty" fighting. At other schools I've trained at where the masters were either younger Korean masters (i.e. the Yong-in graduate types) or American masters, a lot of the old school SD/fighting techniques were missing. The younger masters would focus more on Olympic sparring, while the American instructors would show a willingness to experiments with things like boxing and Brazilian Ju Jitsu to supplement the SD curriculum.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 01:27 PM

Quote:


However, many of the people who were damaged the most are gone so the ones who carry the contempt are doing it for general purpose, that always proves to be counter productive. If it is not for general purpose than there is an agenda and that would worry me to as it should anyone involved in TKD. If standards were strictly enforced it would do a great deal to stop mcdo jo"s.




I don't agree that those who were affected are gone but I agree with minimum standards
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 01:47 PM

Quote:

I don't agree that those who were affected are gone but I agree with minimum standards




Correct. This is why having more people understand the history & development of TKD can only help moving forward.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 02:03 PM

Quote:

[Wow, that is great that you have a copy of the KKW textbook. I agree that there are many things that could be learned from practicing w/other styles/orgs of TKD.




Yes it was actually given to me by a really true GM, when he saw me reaing it so intently during a research session. I was even eager to copy some pages that I found great. He just presented it to me & it is a very valuable source. I am surprised that more Kukki TKD students don't have it.

Quote:

As I have posted previously, at one point during my training I practiced with some individuals who taught me several of the ITF forms, which I must admit are more dynamic and interesting that the KKW forms.





A very high level WTF official has told me the same thing.


Quote:

Adding another point to the original topic of this thread (TKD losing it's face), in the KKW schools I have trained in, I have noticed a strong correlation between the emphasis on SD and realistic fighting vs. sport fighting and the relative age of the master/instructor and what "period" he grew up in. In one school I was instructed by a grandmaster who grew up during the 50s/60s, was originally schooled in the Chung Do Kwan, served in the Korean military. While he taught Olympic style sparring, there was a lot of emphasis on more "old school" techniques, incl. a lot of SD and "dirty" fighting. At other schools I've trained at where the masters were either younger Korean masters (i.e. the Yong-in graduate types) or American masters, a lot of the old school SD/fighting techniques were missing. The younger masters would focus more on Olympic sparring, while the American instructors would show a willingness to experiments with things like boxing and Brazilian Ju Jitsu to supplement the SD curriculum.




Yes, this is an important point. This thread has gone on for 52 pages. I think TKD is loosing face/popularity & that is happening for a number of reasons. It is not limited to any 1 way of doing TKD, ITF, WTF, Chang Hon, Kukki or independents that merely use the umbrella name.
As stated, I think these reasons are many. Among them;
insurance requirements
access to a wider student population, all & types
emphasis on sport by some
parents turning to TKD programs catering to baby sitting/ child rearing help
academic institutions turning out professional instructors
schools & organizations run for income 1st
Note: these trends are not limited to TKD!

Now I keep pointing out the history not to show how great one person or one group/organization was/is, but to show why & how it was developed & that moving from this focus has caused loss of face, even though its popularity has grown. Which BTW is a contributing factor of loosing face.

If one wants to change something, understand the problem 1st! JMHO
Posted by: matxtx

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 02:23 PM

Hello.Been busy.
MattJ,back the F off.
There is totaly no need for you come into a post with a tone like that.
Could it not have been done by PM if at all?
Yea, just come barging in like the big man
Reminds of those guys who come in kick people in the head from the crowd.
Zeolot,semantics?Just say it in an unpretentious manner.
If your so intelligent to use those words then you will see that as there are two sides to the argument it would make them 'Zealot' about their views too.
I am Not a UFC fanatic thank you.
Did I acrossthat way?Not purposely.
And im not a history geek ,no.Or a theory geek
More practical.Question everything.
The history im going on is interviews and accounts by people there,footage as close as possible and others.
More people say it was like I believe it was and have been shown than those who sayi t was this or that.
Too honest,I dont think it matters if the did or did not.
I am just as much TKD as anyone on here and train just as hard.
For me,the discussion is over.I wont even be looking at this thread again so have fun with this post.Go for it.

IMO I train as the military TKD did (a the very least in spirit) and had in mind plus the added bonus of getting proper grappling and stand up grappling to work tacticaly ,defensively and offensivly with strikes.
General Choi said to continue after him.Most top TKD I believe respect other styles and ideas and would encourage moving forward with up to date training ideas,tactics and drills.
Im doing that so im as true TKD as anyone.
I am sorry the post went such the way it did and do genuinly apologise for some behavior. Its what happens when passionate veiws collide it seems.
I learnt some things and will be researching more.

Tat-ar loosing face fred (thread)
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 03:22 PM

flynch"


I did not say that those affected are gone. What I said was that many that were affected the most are now gone, big difference.

I realize there is still a number of
original authorities left, however many of the originals are now gone or moved on.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 03:37 PM

For me I guess as long as the person I train under was directly affected by these actions it will still be in the forefront of my thoughts when I think of TKD. For good or bad.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 04:00 PM

Actually yes & no. it depends on what you mean by original. As far as founders of the original kwan, the only one that may still be alive, into his 90s is GM Ro Byung Jik. I think he is living in the States. No other kwan founders are alive, except Col. Nam Tae Hi, co-founder of the Oh Do kwan, but this may not be accepted as an original kwan, as it came in 1954, 9 years after the liberation of Korea & 10 years after the 1st 2 opened.

Now 2nd generation leaders are still numerous all around the world. In fact, some are running the Kukkiwon. In addition, many pioneers, who had their lives upset or even ruined, are very much alive. Then there are many 3rd generation like GM Sabree Saleh of Malyasia, who suffered tremndously in both a personal & finacial way, when the SK govt put pressure in 1986, forcing Malyasia to cancel the 5th ITF WCs, later re-scheduled in Greece in 1987.

So there are many, many still around. I have even been said to practice communist TKD, but never suffered for it, like so many have.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 04:25 PM

Quote:

For me I guess as long as the person I train under was directly affected by these actions it will still be in the forefront of my thoughts when I think of TKD. For good or bad.





Understood
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 04:28 PM

No argument here.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/10/08 05:26 PM

Found this and wanted to share agree or not it should make one think.

http://www.judoinfo.com/sport.htm

If you anyone is wondering why I put it on this thred it is because sport TKD has been a subject of is TKD loosing its popularity.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 12:11 AM

Quote:

Found this and wanted to share agree or not it should make one think.

http://www.judoinfo.com/sport.htm

If you anyone is wondering why I put it on this thred it is because sport TKD has been a subject of is TKD loosing its popularity.




The book _Taekwondo: The State Of The Art_ (by Masters Sung Chul Whang, Jun Chul Whang, and Dae Sung Lee) makes similar points. While recognizing the obvious limitations of sparring with rules, the authors also argue that sparring has allowed for the refinement of TKD techniques through actual application by keeping what works and discarding what doesn't.

"As competitors and coaches have sought for more effective ways to win matches, the very techniques that have been retained through the filtering process mentioned above have evolved. The turning kick is not the same kick it was twenty years ago. Nor are the back kick or the spinning hook kick. The principles of footwork have changed. All of these changes have made modern Taekwondo faster and more powerful than the methods traditionally passed on from antiquity. Indeed, one of the things that sets Taekwondo apart from more traditional martial arts is its interest in the improvement and evolution of all its techniques. While tournament rules may limit the targets one may hit as well as the kinds of techniques allowed, Taekwondo has nonetheless become even more powerful."

"Another factor to consider in this debate is that under self-defense circumstances, a trained fighter with a modest degree of self-defense training will strike to the legs and other "illegal" targets just as well as one who has forsaken competition training -- and probably a good deal faster ahd harder. Most self-defense training simply does not emphasize speed and power to the same degree that competition training does."

"Finally, competition training teaches an important lesson for any student interested in self-defense. That lesson has to do with actually being hit. Many students have a fear that being hit would somehow cripple or destroy them. But once they have been exposed to sparring, they learn that being hit is not the end; they learn that they can take a hit, and survive, and learn to strike back. In this lesson there is a tremendous sense of security and self-assurance, and it is a critical lesson in martial arts education."

(pp. 33 and 34, "Philosophy of Taekwondo")
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 01:30 AM

Good points & good reading. Thanks for posting them. In addition, to me its just common sense that your SD skills will improve if you train in these types of activities. It is just a matter of what you want in your training & how the place you pick is able to deliver it. I am happy with the SD capabilites I have had over the years. However, the much more important benefits I have gained through my training help me daily in ways that are not related to SD.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:09 AM

badachadi, unity:


Well said.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:41 AM

Quote:

badachadi, unity:


Well said.




Yes, good post.

Stuart
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:53 AM

Quote:

MattJ,back the F off.
There is totaly no need for you come into a post with a tone like that.
Could it not have been done by PM if at all?
Yea, just come barging in like the big man




If the shoe fits, brother. You don't get to tell me to back off, either.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 01:31 PM

I totally agree with the speed, the idea of being hit and the foot work.

I don't agree with the power (my personnal experience) or the evolution of the techniques. By virtue of the fact that the evolution of the techniques is based on the point system at the heart of the sport this argument falls apart. The techniques are being evolved for use within the sparring system and not for self defense. It may be better than not doing anything but I don't agree that a competition fighter can just change his mindset during a fight. JMHO
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 01:34 PM

As somebody living in a relatively free country I still can't believe the level of pressure that was put on some of these people and their families.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 02:10 PM

Quote:

I totally agree with the speed, the idea of being hit and the foot work.

I don't agree with the power (my personnal experience) or the evolution of the techniques. By virtue of the fact that the evolution of the techniques is based on the point system at the heart of the sport this argument falls apart. The techniques are being evolved for use within the sparring system and not for self defense. It may be better than not doing anything but I don't agree that a competition fighter can just change his mindset during a fight. JMHO




With respect to power, I don't what experiences have led you to form your opinion, but I can tell you that WTF/Olympic-style fighter hit HARD. Perhaps harder than they used to.

If you're talking dojang sparring or local tournaments, then I'll grant that in those environment you won't get hit that hard. I've personally sparred everywhere from dojangs, small local tournaments, larger regional events, national championships (USAT/USTU), and international opens, and can attest that at the higher levels, the fighters are strong and powerful.

It used to be that tall, skinny body types were the most favorable for WTF-style competition. The idea was that height gave you reach, so it was to your advantage to be as tall and skinny as possible. Nowadays, more fighters are eschewing that model for strength and explosiveness. It's common for fighters to include weightlifting in their training, not to build bulk and mass, but to create explosive, fast, powerful movements. So instead of the tall, skinny fighters of old, you have slightly bigger, much more powerful fighters.

With respect to evolution of technique, you have to take context into consideration. The authors wrote, for example, that todays turning kick (i.e. roundhouse kick) is not as it was 30-40 years ago. While I was not alive that long ago, I have it on good authority that the roundhouse kicks used to be delivered with a much wider arc, resulting in a much slower movement where the power relied on the swing and follow through of the hips. While this gave you a strong kick, the wide arc and lack of speed made it easier to avoid than the modern roundhouse, which has a much tighter, quicker motion. The power is still there, it's just achieved differently (via speed). I think you could make a strong argument that the fast, quick roundhouse of today would be more useful if used in SD than the slower, wider roundhouse of old.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 03:51 PM

Quote:

I totally agree with the speed, the idea of being hit and the foot work.

I don't agree with the power (my personal experience) or the evolution of the techniques. By virtue of the fact that the evolution of the techniques is based on the point system at the heart of the sport this argument falls apart. The techniques are being evolved for use within the sparring system and not for self defense. It may be better than not doing anything but I don't agree that a competition fighter can just change his mindset during a fight. JMHO




My first thought is that you have never been kicked by these people, I assure you the kicks are very powerful, and injuries, and knock outs are common.

Because of the speed that they are delivered with makes them appear less powerful and is very deceiving. And yes it is very easy to switch gears because sparing is just part of the training, the other components of training SD for many is probably not much different than your training.

This is what myself and others have been trying to expose to some of our critics. Best advice I could give is for you to enter a tourney and find out. You should try a few tourneys because as always some turn out to be more competitive than others. You win some, you loose some. As far as the point system I personally have never competed in a competition that wasn"t continuous sparing so it is not like you are just trying to get a point. Your goal is to knock that other person to oblivion, knock outs are always desired, if you cannot achieve this goal you win or lose on points. Now I cannot comment on stop point sparing as I have never participated but I assume that points may be more critical.

This will be hard to explain but I will try,

As one gains knowledge and experience from all the sparing and improves the sparing aspect things slow down and it becomes easier to think while you are fighting. Personally while I am sparing it is easy to see and think about all the techniques I could be using that are illegal for sparing. It is kind of like you are play fighting with a little brother or a child, you could hurt them but you wouldn"t. This is a mind set only after you have done it many times, early on before experience things move very fast, too fast, no time to think you are trying to survive. This is another benefit of our sparing the more we do it the slower a real fight or situation unfolds for us. Simple example, opponent comes in and it is obvious that the first thing one might do is punch, palm strike to face, chop to throat, maybe followed by a finishing kick or what not, however because of the rules I cannot palm strike or punch. I don"t believe as ITF you would be allowed to palm strike or chop to throat either but you are very aware of the option for SD, and so are we. The philosophy of WTF sparing considers hand techniques to be more instinctive and natural so our main goal is to work on and improve our kicking. This doesn"t mean we do not train hand techniques we do, you just won"t see them during competition just like you won"t see many of an ITF competitors hand techniques during one of their competitions, doesn"t mean they are not there. I guarantee that most competitors, ITF or WTF would not SD the same as they compete.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 05:02 PM

While I appreciate your opinions and your laser like focus on the negitive aspect of my response. I will state it again there are some things I find positive about WTF sparring as I indicated before and somethings I still do not understand.

I assure you I have been kicked by these people on a regular basis.

I was not commenting on point sparring but on continuous sparring with points being awarded for techniques. He who has the most points wins

I will admit that I have limited tournament experience from my youth and now I would only be compettng in the seniors division so things may have changed as you say.

Sometime it comes down to different strokes for different folks. But I do like the foot work and speed.

While I can appreciate and understand the philosophy behind it it still does not make me buy into the no hands arguement.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 05:21 PM

flynch

Maybe I have become hypersensitive to certain comments, I am working on that.
Did not mean to rile you, probably bad choice of wording on my part, not the first time I have done that, sorry

I respect the fact you do not buy into the no hands bit, this is very common and many are confused by it. I was simply trying to communicate that the sparrings main goal is to improve the most difficult aspect of TKD to master which is the kicking. You can not work on your kicking as effectively when you have a fist in your face, this is the reason for the no hands rule. As I stated we feel the hand techniques are instinctive, natural and easier to master so they are trained and perfected differently, it all comes together outside of competition.

As with any competition, he who has the most points will always win, I don"t understand that comment. When down on points one really needs to go for knock out!
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 05:30 PM

Quote:


I respect the fact you do not buy into the no hands bit, this is very common and many are confused by it. I was simply trying to communicate that the sparrings main goal is to improve the most difficult aspect of TKD to master which is the kicking. You can not work on your kicking as effectively when you have a fist in your face, this is the reason for the no hands rule. As I stated we feel the hand techniques are instinctive, natural and easier to master so they are trained and perfected differently, it all comes together outside of competition.




I can't accept that as a reason. Surely one of the most important aspects of an effective kick is knowing when to throw them, and when not to throw them. When TKD guys have no danger of a punch to their head, they cannot learn this vital skill.

I have no problem with practicing just kicking in sparring, but that is all it is- practice for a more relaxed rules set. I simply cannot understand how you can spar without punches to the head, which is afterall the most common attack in most kickboxing styles and in self defense generally.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 05:36 PM

While that maybe the theory or philosophy I can guarantee you that hands are not instinctual for everyone and there are many even at black belt level that are not able to use their hands
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 06:01 PM

Quote:

Quote:


I respect the fact you do not buy into the no hands bit, this is very common and many are confused by it. I was simply trying to communicate that the sparring main goal is to improve the most difficult aspect of TKD to master which is the kicking. You can not work on your kicking as effectively when you have a fist in your face, this is the reason for the no hands rule. As I stated we feel the hand techniques are instinctive, natural and easier to master so they are trained and perfected differently, it all comes together outside of competition.




I can't accept that as a reason. Surely one of the most important aspects of an effective kick is knowing when to throw them, and when not to throw them. When TKD guys have no danger of a punch to their head, they cannot learn this vital skill.

I have no problem with practicing just kicking in sparring, but that is all it is- practice for a more relaxed rules set. I simply cannot understand how you can spar without punches to the head, which is after all the most common attack in most kickboxing styles and in self defense generally.





I don"t think I am communicating this properly. You need to keep in mind that the sparing is not suppose to be real fighting, it is only a tool, a tool to perfect kicking, foot work, timing, speed, distance, power, stamina, ect. I am not talking about the 1% that are training to compete in Olympics.

The real life SD or fight training is done outside of competition putting the hand techniques together with kicking just like you do. The sparing rules serve to isolated an aspect of our training to become better kickers than we would have been if we had to worry about being punched while working on kicking. We train probably just like you do hands and all we just compete using different rules to isolate the kicking part. This is where the confusion is, people do not understand that we also train hands up when not competing.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 06:13 PM

Quote:

While that maybe the theory or philosophy I can guarantee you that hands are not instinctual for everyone and there are many even at black belt level that are not able to use their hands





I would not think this to be very common, and if one reaches BB level with inferior hand skills they are certainly struggling and there is more going on than training. These individuals may have coordination, or motor skill problems. If you throw your hands up or at any one the first thing most will do is attempt to block, even the untrained Will reflex this way. Now the trained will effectively block and counter, and many are very good at this even with out training.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 09:24 PM

Quote:

As somebody living in a relatively free country I still can't believe the level of pressure that was put on some of these people and their families.




It is deplorable!
Hopefully it will start to be rectified next year. If not, rest assurred that history, over time tends to sort these things out.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 09:40 PM

Quote:

My first thought is that you have never been kicked by these people, I assure you the kicks are very powerful, and injuries, and knock outs are common.
Because of the speed that they are delivered with makes them appear less powerful and is very deceiving. And yes it is very easy to switch gears because sparing is just part of the training, the other components of training SD for many is probably not much different than your training.
This is what myself and others have been trying to expose to some of our critics.




I agree with you & Badachagi. The rules have, maybe without them realizing it, mandated evolution in their Art. No doubt about it. In addition, I think anyone who trains in kicking & punching is in a better position to defend themselves, as compared to if they did not do anything. Now if you want to get the best SD possible, you must find the school that will cater to you & your needs & best deliver you to your goals. I also think weight lifters also have an advantage over themselves, if they were just couch potatos, as they have built strenght. How can having strength not put you in a position to better defend yourself. Likewise with fast, explosive & powerful kicks, plus that fact that you are in the ring. I have seen people in training that were never hit. Once they were, they fell apart. In the ring, also affords one the opportunity to feel combat & even smell it. How can that not help? Again, there may be better ways, but it has to help. JMHO

Quote:

I personally have never competed in a competition that wasn"t continuous sparing so it is not like you are just trying to get a point.




ITF sparring rules are continuous, with no stopping for calling points. They use 4 corner judges with score sheets.

Quote:

I don"t believe as ITF you would be allowed to palm strike or chop to throat either but you are very aware of the option for SD, and so are we.




Actually ITF rules allow all hand techniques. However, back fist, forefist punch & knife hand are the ones most commonly used.
Posted by: Dedicated1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 09:54 PM

matxtx and Mattj let's keep this civil please.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:21 PM

ITFUNITY


Quote
Actually ITF rules allow all hand techniques. However, back fist, forefist punch & knife hand are the ones most commonly used.

This is news to me. So you can chop or knife hand the throat? with full power? How would competitors survive? no offence but I am having difficulty buying this and have never witnessed this in any competitions, regardless of the organization or art.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:26 PM

Quote:

Maybe I have become hypersensitive to certain comments, I am working on that.




Okay, feel free to kick me for this unsolicited advice.

I have always been a proud member of the ITF. For many years, I listened to the hard feelings that many ITF leaders, including the founder had towards the brutal SK dictatorships, the KTA, the Kukkiwon, the WTF & Dr. Kim Un Yong. I came to hold resentment, without knowing the whole story. I still don't, but have educated myself through extensive research & am finally getting a grasp on this very complicated situation.
Now over the years there has been so much mud slinging by both sides that it has started to look like opposite political parties fighting for elective office. As a result, the already complicated situation is made worse by the accumulation of tons of mud. Now what we often see is that the ITF is always right or wrong or the WTF is always right or wrong. Of course depending on your personal perspective. Now with TKD, like most everything in life, the truth usually lies somewhere in between. I think much of this will be helped along when Dr. Kimm He Young releases his long awaited book on TKD history which has been years in the making. You will see that he documents much of what Ambassador Choi says, but also corrects claims that are not supported by verifiable facts. Now Dr. Kimm is an an academic scholar, with an earned PhD in history. This college professor is a neutral historian who has traveled extensively to research his work. He backs up his assertions with evidence. However the political climate has changed in SK. They (KCIA) once tried to prevent his doctoral dissertation from being published, because of its connection he drew to Japan for KMAs. WOW! Vol 1, is available, but it deals with hapkido. Vol 2 on TKD is due out by the end of 2009.

Now why do I say this? We must put aside our natural inclinations & look for the truth. That is all that matters. BTW, none of it will affect our training, but it will allow for going forward in a more positive way, which we can hope will benefit all, regardless of affiliation.

Now you Von1, I think have been very fair in the give & take. You have certainly made me aware of things I was weak in. You seem to be open to listening. I thank you for reading my long winded posts. So you may be a bit sensitive & that is natural, given all the bickering & complaining by ITF KoolAide drinkers. They often don't have it right & just add fuel to the fire.

Now when I enjoyed my cold glasses of that KoolAide, I thought WTF or the Kukkiwon were karate, not TKD. Why? The founder said so. It was clear to me that we were doing TKD. Since they were not doing what we were doing, how could they be TKD?

Here is what happened. My research, with nuetral sources as well as from both sides led me to understand the WTF is not Karate. They took rules developed in the early 60s by primarily the JiDo Kwan, which promoted kicking, to make a link to TaeKyon & disallowed in the rules techniques associated with Japanese karate. This brillance led to a revolutionary kicking style, so different from karate. Now did they have things in common with karate? yes! But so does the ITF. In fact all MAs have things in common. The base or roots of TKD come mostly from karate. However, it is ridiculous for anyone to say that the WTF is karate & not TKD, when millions, the largest group calls it that & the IOC agrees.

So, continue with your open mind. It only leads to learning, often providing support for your arguement, as well as allowing you additional information to consider when rendering your decision or opinion.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:36 PM

Quote:

I don"t think I am communicating this properly. You need to keep in mind that the sparing is not suppose to be real fighting, it is only a tool, a tool to perfect kicking, foot work, timing, speed, distance, power, stamina, ect. I am not talking about the 1% that are training to compete in Olympics.
The real life SD or fight training is done outside of competition putting the hand techniques together with kicking just like you do. The sparing rules serve to isolated an aspect of our training to become better kickers than we would have been if we had to worry about being punched while working on kicking. We train probably just like you do hands and all we just compete using different rules to isolate the kicking part. This is where the confusion is, people do not understand that we also train hands up when not competing.




I agree & think our (ITF) process or rules are similiar & present similiar disadvantages. It is up to the rest of the training to supplement any weaknesses from tournament rules sparring may bring.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:41 PM

ITFUNITY



As always, I enjoy communicating with you and as always, I learn more with every exchange. I especially got a kick out of the reference to kool aid drinkers and the history lesson was nice too.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:44 PM

Quote:

This is news to me. So you can chop or knife hand the throat? with full power? How would competitors survive? no offence but I am having difficulty buying this and have never witnessed this in any competitions, regardless of the organization or art.




Yes & no. Yes, target area is the head & neck at the front & sides, but not the back. All hand attacks are allowed, but full contact is not. The technique must be executed properly with power, speed & focus, but must be controlled on the target. Now what does controlled mean? Who knows & from my experience it is usually defined by the host & in the case of WCs, the ITF UMpire & Tournament Committees. I have seen almost anything goes blood baths, to very strict attention to the level of contact.

Now obviously any limitations of rules can have an adverse affect on real street SD skills, as the training is different. I have seen many ITF schools just do tournament rules sparring & fake come along hoosinsul routines. How can that help? A bit I am sure, but with many downsides which can build false security & many more bad habits.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 10:57 PM

ITFUNITY


This last explanation makes more sense. The problem with us using hand techniques for competition is that we sparr full contact so if hands were allowed people might die, can you imagine if the rules stated full contact kicking but minimal contact hands? what a nightmare for competitor trying stay aware of all that so they don"t kill people. And we can punch full power just not to head. Some of these punches hurt and can darn near knock the wind out of you even with the protective gear. This would be just too much to control.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/11/08 11:35 PM


ITFUNITY

quote
I agree & think our (ITF) process or rules are similar & present similar disadvantages. It is up to the rest of the training to supplement any weaknesses from tournament rules sparring may bring.

thank you! this is all I am trying to say but obviously not doing a very good job of it.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/12/08 03:42 AM

Wow, this thread is blossoming since the MMA business died down. Keep it coming guys, this is great.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/12/08 12:27 PM

ITFUNITY

quote
I agree & think our (ITF) process or rules are similar & present similar disadvantages. It is up to the rest of the training to supplement any weaknesses from tournament rules sparring may bring.


I do not wish to leave the impression that I do not see problems and/or weaknesses in our methods. I am only attempting to share another side that frankly is not discussed enough on this forum.

If one still does not see the value in what we do that is just fine. To be honest there were many times I questioned these methods myself, I stuck with it, learned more about it, began to notice incredible improvement in all areas, and was sold.

Now me personally, I am lucky because where I train sparring is not about winning it is about improving. As I have previously stated the hand skills are trained out side of competition so this is not an issue for me as it is to so many others that do not realize that we train the hands.

My instructor is very persistent on having his students compete, even pushes the older students to compete for the reasons stated above, however, he is addamate that win or lose doesn"t madder. It took a while to understand why he thinks this competing is so important but now I understand even though I am at the age where that competitive spirit is just not there anymore. Ad to that the worry of being injured, which has happened, I really have to push myself to get the nerve up and there are not many opponents for me to compete against any more so I end up fighting someone 10 years younger, 80 pounds heavier, but when it"s over, there is this incredible feeling of accomplishment.

I must toot my own horn though, I normally do quite well at these events.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/12/08 12:39 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY


This last explanation makes more sense. The problem with us using hand techniques for competition is that we sparr full contact so if hands were allowed people might die, can you imagine if the rules stated full contact kicking but minimal contact hands? what a nightmare for competitor trying stay aware of all that so they don"t kill people. And we can punch full power just not to head. Some of these punches hurt and can darn near knock the wind out of you even with the protective gear. This would be just too much to control.




FWIW, Olympic TKD is not the only martial art with rules that prohibit punches to the head. Kyokushin Karate and Pankration also do not allow punches to the head in tournament rules. But for some reason, Olympic TKD is the only one that gets criticized for it.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwonddiscussio loosing it's face/popularity - 03/12/08 12:41 PM

Quote:

ITFUNITY quote I agree & think our (ITF) process or rules are similar & present similar disadvantages. It is up to the rest of the training to supplement any weaknesses from tournament rules sparring may bring. end quote


I do not wish to leave the impression that I do not see problems and/or weaknesses in our methods. I am only attempting to share another side that frankly is not discussed enough on this forum.
If one still does not see the value in what we do that is just fine. To be honest there were many times I questioned these methods myself, I stuck with it, learned more about it, began to notice incredible improvement in many areas and was sold.




Absolutely! That is why I led with the weaknesses of my system. Rest assurred that any system falls short no matter how hard they try to maximize realsim, even the highly thought of MMAs, as provisions always have to be adhered to for obvious safety, health & legal limits.

IMHO the thing to do, is realize where shortcomings are, deal with them, so you not only improve, but don't lull oneself with a false sense of security.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/12/08 12:46 PM

Badachagi:
You are right again. IMHO the main reason why TKD gets attacked so much is simply because it is the world's most popular MA. So they have more targets. Combine that with the McDojangs, who BTW are not limited to any 1 type of TKD & that fact that SK educates teachers in an academic setting, which for many goes against the grain, you just have a lot of targets. But you make a great point.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/12/08 12:50 PM


badachagi



Yes this is a sore spot for me that is why I have been so vocal, probably boarding on obnoxiously vocal. I appreciate your comments on the subject because you are very informed and a great key board communicator which I am not.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 09:33 AM





OK, It is time for me to shut up and practice more put up.

We as TKD practitioners need to realize that have more in common than we don"t. Would like to share a small tidbit of what I mean.

While reading this just substitute the word of sport for fight or SD you will see what I mean. This is just one small example of what I mean by things in common, there are many more.


http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showexcerpt.cfm?excerpt_id=4042
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 09:52 AM

Absolutely I agree on the close relationship between sport, fighting and self defense. I think I have stated many times on the forum that in my mind, the mental processes involved in ANY sport are extremely similar to those involved in fighting.

I will try and make myself clearer: In theory, I have no problem with Olympic sparring rules- I don't think they are a bad thing per se. However, I do think that the rules are restrictive to such an extent that the sparring is much less useful than other types of sparring. Honestly, I think the simple addition of punches to the head would improve the sparring no end and I would be happy to do it. So, it is a small criticism that I have, but I think it damages my enjoyment of WTF TKD, when I have trained it(and yes I have done at 2 clubs for short periods), almost completely.

But certainly I think all TKD practitioners share much in common, although even different TKD schools under the same style have many differences.

Actually, a very interesting experience for me has been to train ITF TKD in Poland (Warsaw), I was amazed at how similar the training was, even though my previous training was in England. I was actually really pleased to see that even in a completely different country where I am honestly not brilliant at the language, the training was similar enough for me to instantly feel right at home.

I wonder if this is the case for WTF practitioners moving to a different school, is there more variance? The two schools I have trained at were very similar indeed, but they both were very upfront about the fact that they were training purely for sport reasons.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 11:03 AM

Quoat
I will try and make myself clearer: In theory, I have no problem with Olympic sparring rules- I don't think they are a bad thing per se. However, I do think that the rules are restrictive to such an extent that the sparring is much less useful than other types of sparring. Honestly, I think the simple addition of punches to the head would improve the sparring no end and I would be happy to do it. So, it is a small criticism that I have, but I think it damages my enjoyment of WTF TKD, when I have trained it(and yes I have done at 2 clubs for short periods), almost completely

End quote


I agree that adding punches would make for better spectatorship most definitely, but I can not see this working due to the fact that we spare full contact. Just add take downs and your left with MMA. Not to mention that the majority of people who train with WTF affiliated clubs use the sparing as a training tool, they do not plan on competing in the Olympic"s
I have never trained at a pure sport facility I couldn't even tell you where one is, though I know they are out there. A valid argument can be made for adding punches to the head this is where your individual club training should kick in and I hope instructors are training for this because this is where it all comes together. If instructors are not training their student to put it together shame on them! shame on them! shame on them!

I would most definitely agree watching many of these matches is monotones, however I really am not convinced that for the majority, the goal is entertainment other than the olympics, and it fails miserably as entertainment.

This I feel causes many non WTF to be embarrassed and resentful to be associated with it.

I would even concede that personally I have mixed feelings as to TKD sparring being in the Olympics because this has caused much confusion as to what TKD is really about even among us that do it.

The Olympics has had a dual affect on TKD. It has exposed it to the world helping to raise awareness, and it has confused and divided TKD practitioners. The sparing has really confused people, and the only people who understand and appreciate the value of it are the ones that do it. Most every one else spectators and non WTF are going, whaaaaaa! This is understandable.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 12:30 PM

Quote:

We as TKD practitioners need to realize that have more in common than we don"t. Would like to share a small tidbit of what I mean. While reading this just substitute the word of sport for fight or SD you will see what I mean. This is just one small example of what I mean by things in common, there are many more.




I could not agree more. I have been saying this for so long & get so frustrated when I see all the bickering back & forth by students who really have in common then that which seperates them. I will go my usually 1 step further, we have more things in common with even other MAs, than that which makes us different.

Now since we are not the general public, in the sense that we are martial artists, we tend to see the differences, as that is what makes us unique in the training we have chosen. So we highlight the differences to show we are different, maybe some saying better or whatever. Just remember that when pointing your finger at others, 4 of your fingers are pointing back at you.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 12:37 PM

Quote:

Honestly, I think the simple addition of punches to the head would improve the sparring no end and I would be happy to do it. So, it is a small criticism that I have,




I see your point & share your concern somewhat. However, please keep in mind that if they never outlawed punching, the dynamic kicking & revolutionary speed, stepping etc probably never would have developed or evolved to today. Most think this advancement in kicking is benefical in adding to the arsenal of fighters. The key probably is to supplement your training as I am sure most of us do with any shortcoming our sparring rules have, as they all we have them.


Quote:

But certainly I think all TKD practitioners share much in common, although even different TKD schools under the same style have many differences.




Exactly!
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 01:02 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Honestly, I think the simple addition of punches to the head would improve the sparring no end and I would be happy to do it. So, it is a small criticism that I have,




I see your point & share your concern somewhat. However, please keep in mind that if they never outlawed punching, the dynamic kicking & revolutionary speed, stepping etc probably never would have developed or evolved to today. Most think this advancement in kicking is benefical in adding to the arsenal of fighters. The key probably is to supplement your training as I am sure most of us do with any shortcoming our sparring rules have, as they all we have them.


Quote:

But certainly I think all TKD practitioners share much in common, although even different TKD schools under the same style have many differences.




Exactly!




With respect to MAs having much in common, over the years I've noticed that when MAs engage in fighting/sparring, the less restrictive the rule sets, the more variety of techniques (i.e. striking, clinch fighting, takedowns and ground fighting) are used, and one begins to notice that the arts begin to look more similar that not.

For example, there are certain techniques you see in many different arts. I've seen the arm bar that was popularized in BJJ also used in judo, hapkido, and sambo. Many of the throws in judo I've seen in hapkido and sanda/sanshou. And just about every striking art has something like the roundhouse kick.

When it comes down to defending your life, I honestly think that we should not be too dogmatic about whether this is a TKD move, or a Kenpo move, or a BJJ move. If it works, if it lets you escape, protect yourself, and get home in one piece, then shouldn't that be all that really matters?
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 01:24 PM

Quote:

Quoat
I will try and make myself clearer: In theory, I have no problem with Olympic sparring rules- I don't think they are a bad thing per se. However, I do think that the rules are restrictive to such an extent that the sparring is much less useful than other types of sparring. Honestly, I think the simple addition of punches to the head would improve the sparring no end and I would be happy to do it. So, it is a small criticism that I have, but I think it damages my enjoyment of WTF TKD, when I have trained it(and yes I have done at 2 clubs for short periods), almost completely

End quote


I agree that adding punches would make for better spectatorship most definitely, but I can not see this working due to the fact that we spare full contact. Just add take downs and your left with MMA. Not to mention that the majority of people who train with WTF affiliated clubs use the sparing as a training tool, they do not plan on competing in the Olympic"s
I have never trained at a pure sport facility I couldn't even tell you where one is, though I know they are out there. A valid argument can be made for adding punches to the head this is where your individual club training should kick in and I hope instructors are training for this because this is where it all comes together. If instructors are not training their student to put it together shame on them! shame on them! shame on them!

I would most definitely agree watching many of these matches is monotones, however I really am not convinced that for the majority, the goal is entertainment other than the olympics, and it fails miserably as entertainment.

This I feel causes many non WTF to be embarrassed and resentful to be associated with it.

I would even concede that personally I have mixed feelings as to TKD sparring being in the Olympics because this has caused much confusion as to what TKD is really about even among us that do it.

The Olympics has had a dual affect on TKD. It has exposed it to the world helping to raise awareness, and it has confused and divided TKD practitioners. The sparing has really confused people, and the only people who understand and appreciate the value of it are the ones that do it. Most every one else spectators and non WTF are going, whaaaaaa! This is understandable.




Regarding Olympic TKD as a spectator sport, I think the WTF has actually made great strides in making competition more viewer friendly. Some specific examples:

1) Fewer and simpler referee hand signals and gestures
2) Electronic scoreboards so points can be seen in real time
3) Increased penalties for stalling tactics (falling, avoiding fighting, going out of bounds)
4) Differential scoring that gives more points for head kicks and standing eight counts.

In addition, various "pro" leagues have experiments with additional rules to keep the action going, such as a "kick clock" (similar to the shot clock in basketball), and additional points for jumping, flying, or spinning kicks to encourage more dynamic techniques.

There is also talk of moving to electronic chest protectors and head gear, so that subjective human judging is taken out of the picture completely. One of the consequences that has been implied is that with an electronic chest protector, punches to the body will be scored with much more frequency (since the hardware only registers points based on force, and won't be able to discern what kind of technique results in the force).

Now having said all this, I will agree that I've witnessed many matches where the fighters do nothing but bounce for a minute, throw a couple of kicks, clinch, and bounce some more. Having been a competitor, a coach, and a spectator, I can understand the frustration due to the apparent lack of action.

However, there's a different perspective as a fighter. First, I should point out that you're more likely to see more "action" at the lower levels of competition (i.e. color belts, novice players, young children, local tournaments, etc), where the fighters will tend to attack indiscriminately, and try to win the match based on sheer volume of kicks thrown. However, high level Olympic TKD fighters have mastered the art of the counterattack like no other MA that I know of. If you attack indisciminately or with poor timing in O-TKD, a good fighter will make you pay for it dearly. Additionally, subjective judging sometimes results in exchanges where both fighters should have scored, but only one actually is awarded the point (because things moved too fast, because the judge didn't see, etc). So given these things, from a strategic point of view, you want to avoid attacking unless 1) you know you are going to score, and 2) you know you won't get scored on. So while it can be frustrating to spectators that O-TKD fighters aren't more active, from the perspective of the fighter there's good warrant to be picky about your shots.

The reason why this is less of an issue in other combative sports such as boxing or MMA is because points aren't an issue. In boxing, MMA, Muay Thai, or Kyokushin, it doesn't matter if you take hits as long as you can remain standing. These are games of attrition -- can you make your oppoent fall before you do? So rather than avoiding getting hit and emphasizing counters, these sports teach you to take as much punishment as you can while dishing out some of your own.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 01:25 PM

Quote:

I agree that adding punches would make for better spectatorship most definitely, but I can not see this working due to the fact that we spare full contact. Just add take downs and your left with MMA.......A valid argument can be made for adding punches to the head this is where your individual club training should kick in and I hope instructors are training for this because this is where it all comes together. If instructors are not training their student to put it together shame on them!




1st I'll leave the spectator aspect out of it. Now we again must look to history to see why this happened. They made any hand techniques to the head against the rules so they could be distinguished from the hated Japanese & their Karate. This resulted in the development of revolutionary kicking/stepping which can now be added to a fighters arsenal.
Now we could add hand technique strikes above the shoulders. But that would change the dynamics. We could require that the hands not be full contact. We could allow sweeps, which were, before the JiDoKwan changed it, as well as takedowns. We could give points for takedowns or sweeps, successful mounting etc. All this would create a different dynamic. This in turn would result in a new direction & emphasis on training & developing. IMHO a good teacher will look the individual student, their strengths & weaknesses, looking to build & correct using all aspects of their Art, but also realizing the inherent shortcomings of their Art &/or training methods.

Quote:

I would even concede that personally I have mixed feelings as to TKD sparring being in the Olympics because this has caused much confusion as to what TKD is really about even among us that do it.
The Olympics has had a dual affect on TKD. It has exposed it to the world helping to raise awareness, and it has confused and divided TKD practitioners.




I agree, as I have always had mixed feelings as well. There are certain advantages for both style & player, funding, attention etc. We, the ITF have tried hard to get into the Olympics & have basically failed. I think that when we failed, we started badmouthing the same thing we fought so hard to gain. I see how a MA or how SD aspects can suffer, as a consequence of earning Olympic status. Now, as I see 1 of the ITFs(NK) is making strides towards merging or Olympic access, I am concerned. As a purist I am torn. NOTE: The fact that these merger & inculsion talks are progressing is due to politics. The reason the ITF-NK is having success now & the ITF in the past did not, is due to the support of the NK govt, to counter the support the SK govt gave to the WTF AND the must changed geo-political climate in Korea. That is another reason why we must look at history if we are to gain a better sense of where we are, how we got here & how can we best move forward.
This causes me more concern, as I think the NK govt has less concerns than do with having my beloved Art maintained.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 01:28 PM

Quote:

When it comes down to defending your life, I honestly think that we should not be too dogmatic about whether this is a TKD move, or a Kenpo move, or a BJJ move. If it works, if it lets you escape, protect yourself, and get home in one piece, then shouldn't that be all that really matters?




Yes & the history of fighting arts is fuzzy, so who even gets credit for development, where & when, makes the point of arguing it, silly.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 01:36 PM

Quote:

Now having said all this, I will agree that I've witnessed many matches where the fighters do nothing but bounce for a minute, throw a couple of kicks, clinch, and bounce some more. Having been a competitor, a coach, and a spectator, I can understand the frustration due to the apparent lack of action.
However, there's a different perspective as a fighter. First, I should point out that you're more likely to see more "action" at the lower levels of competition (i.e. color belts, novice players, young children, local tournaments, etc), where the fighters will tend to attack indiscriminately, and try to win the match based on sheer volume of kicks thrown. However, high level Olympic TKD fighters have mastered the art of the counterattack like no other MA that I know of. If you attack indisciminately or with poor timing in O-TKD, a good fighter will make you pay for it dearly. So while it can be frustrating to spectators that O-TKD fighters aren't more active, from the perspective of the fighter there's good warrant to be picky about your shots.
The reason why this is less of an issue in other combative sports such as boxing or MMA is because points aren't an issue. In boxing, MMA, Muay Thai, or Kyokushin, it doesn't matter if you take hits as long as you can remain standing. These are games of attrition -- can you make your oppoent fall before you do? So rather than avoiding getting hit and emphasizing counters, these sports teach you to take as much punishment as you can while dishing out some of your own.




Great points, very much worthy of repeating & something I am not sure that everyone realizes. I didn't & do now, in part to forums such as these & keeping an open mind.

The dynamics of what & why you do something. Strange, it closely reflects the 2nd training secret of TKD as laid down by our founder:
undertand the purpose & method
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 03:09 PM

Interesting discussion on the sport aspects from the original post by badachagi.. I can see both sides of the coin in that all the extras that training this ways brings has immense benefits (stong kicks, fitness etc), but others also have a major point as well, in that "you fight how you train" .. these are the instinctive reactions that kick in when under pressure and even though many clubs do hosinsul or similar techniques, its different to fighting when instinctualness would kick in.

Just my 2 cents worth as Im a strong beliver in the fight as you train motto.

Stuart
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 03:41 PM

Quote:

Interesting discussion on the sport aspects from the original post by badachagi.. I can see both sides of the coin in that all the extras that training this ways brings has immense benefits (stong kicks, fitness etc), but others also have a major point as well, in that "you fight how you train" .. these are the instinctive reactions that kick in when under pressure and even though many clubs do hosinsul or similar techniques, its different to fighting when instinctualness would kick in.

Just my 2 cents worth as Im a strong beliver in the fight as you train motto.

Stuart




Yes, but if by "fight" you mean SD, then really, NOBODY trains as they would really fight, because your training partners would all be dead or maimed. When you think about it, all SD training in most schools takes place in a controlled environment (padded floors, instructor/referee/coach supervision, limited set of rules and compliance -- i.e. if I tap, you'll get go, I won't hit you full force in the throat, etc). Real SD situations are inherently unpredictable and uncontrolled.

I don't know any O-TKD coach or competitor who claims that what they do is how you should fight to defend yourself. We recognize that O-TKD is a sport. So if O-TKD training is all you have, then yes, you will be limited when it comes to SD. But the reality is that few O-TKD fighters know ONLY O-TKD. The top athletes in the USA, even though now may specialize and train exclusively for sport, at some point originally came from a traditional school that taught forms, basics, SD, etc.

Now with regards to "instincts" kicking in during SD, I would argue that that is precisely the reason why a sport TKD fighter would NOT fight like the way they compete. Yes, reaction and speed is important in O-TKD, but there's also a tremendous amount of strategy and thinking going on. In a real SD situation, I don't think most O-TKD fighters would be playing the chess match in their heads.

I've seen TKDists trained in Olympic fighting get into real fights. I can assure you that they do not fight like they do in the ring.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 03:48 PM

I was going to reply along similiar lines. Recently I had some blue & above practice throwing with the mats out as well always do. Then I added that they person being thrown should not assume the position, but rather try & punch the thrower 1st. The thrower had to block or get hit & then position the attacker in order to throw. Next I told the attacker that after the initial punch, do not comply or go along, fight the throw as best you can.
RESULT: Not one could throw the person. Some managed to get the attacker to the ground, but that is because of either their size or grapple/wrestling skills, as we do fight from stand up to the floor already when FREE sparring.

So I think there is truth to both sides of the debate. However what is more important is to be open AND train under realistic conditions, which of course was the direction given by the founder that was often not heard or rarely followed. So in the end, it goes down to the school & teacher.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 04:09 PM

Quote:

Interesting discussion on the sport aspects from the original post by badachagi.. I can see both sides of the coin in that all the extras that training this ways brings has immense benefits (stong kicks, fitness etc), but others also have a major point as well, in that "you fight how you train" .. these are the instinctive reactions that kick in when under pressure and even though many clubs do hosinsul or similar techniques, its different to fighting when instinctualness would kick in.

Just my 2 cents worth as Im a strong beliver in the fight as you train motto.

Stuart




Stuart



With respect (my 2 cents) you are correct fight like you train,

however, your mistake is in the fact that competition is not the complete training package, it is only a piece of the training package. This is where the conflict arises. You assume that competitors only train to compete. Most WTF people will only compete at the lower levels, out side of competition our training is no different than yours, we compete different we train similar. I assume you are referring to the very small percentage of schools that only train for sport.
Most participating WTF schools do not fit this bill, our training is much more dynamic, involving SD, 1,2, and 3 step sparring, forms, weapons etc. On top of that normally the fighters that rise to Olympic status fighting have already had much of this training probably at a very young age. For one reason or another they are drawn to compete. This is why it is ridiculas for people to say that Olympic competitors lack SD, most already have trained and still train in it to some degree, plus now they have these incredible other skills.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 04:55 PM

Stuart A



I offer an example
Here is what I mean by many Olympic competitors already had the training plus these incredible other skills, Olympic training.

This man was the Korean national champ between 1965 and 1968 and a U.S. combative instructor for 18 years. He was a combative instructor befor he was champ. He did not just train for competition like soooo many others do not just train for competition. The competition is only one component of training.

http://www.kilstkdonline.com/grandmaster1.html
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 08:35 PM

Quote:

Yes, but if by "fight" you mean SD, then really, NOBODY trains as they would really fight, because your training partners would all be dead or maimed.



Actually, I class SD as the phase before fighting.. however, there is a reason I said I can see both sides and that is because I know of a famous UK guy.. a points fighter no less, who when attacked used what came naturally to defend himself.. mainly his superfast reactions.. those of a certain time training in the UK might well remmber the news, as he struck the first guy (there were 2 or 3) and KO'd him. Now, that one reason why I see value in the original post, but also why I said "you fight like you train".. see he trained with punches, hands up, punches with speed and when he reacted he did what he did naturally and simply got the target spot on & KO'd the guy. When I was refering to "instinctually" my point was really concerning the placement of the arms.. would they go up or down.. now I know the point is debatable.. but I hope you see where Im coming from.

I know many WTF schools, and though many state here they do SD this and that etc. (which I agree with) I know just as many that dont.. more in fact. But, the shoe fits both camps, as I know just as many ITF based schools that dont either.. so Im not having a go at WTF'ers or anything.


Quote:

I don't know any O-TKD coach or competitor who claims that what they do is how you should fight to defend yourself.



Im not saying they do, only that habits form.

Quote:

The top athletes in the USA, even though now may specialize and train exclusively for sport, at some point originally came from a traditional school that taught forms, basics, SD, etc.



TBH, it makes no difference, unless you are actively training it.. skills are lost and replaced with others.

Quote:

Now with regards to "instincts" kicking in during SD, I would argue that that is precisely the reason why a sport TKD fighter would NOT fight like the way they compete. Yes, reaction and speed is important in O-TKD, but there's also a tremendous amount of strategy and thinking going on. In a real SD situation, I don't think most O-TKD fighters would be playing the chess match in their heads.



Sorry, that doesnt quite make sense.. if we instinctively do what we do most.. then in the heat of the moment instincts will make us fight how we fight most.

Quote:

I've seen TKDists trained in Olympic fighting get into real fights. I can assure you that they do not fight like they do in the ring.



Well I dont actually believe they would, what Im saying is the habits formed would take charge.. so in effect they would (likely) kick first and the defence may go down.. I say "may" as of course Im generalizing..

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 08:38 PM

Quote:

I was going to reply along similiar lines. Recently I had some blue & above practice throwing with the mats out as well always do. Then I added that they person being thrown should not assume the position, but rather try & punch the thrower 1st. The thrower had to block or get hit & then position the attacker in order to throw. Next I told the attacker that after the initial punch, do not comply or go along, fight the throw as best you can.
RESULT: Not one could throw the person. Some managed to get the attacker to the ground, but that is because of either their size or grapple/wrestling skills, as we do fight from stand up to the floor already when FREE sparring.

So I think there is truth to both sides of the debate. However what is more important is to be open AND train under realistic conditions, which of course was the direction given by the founder that was often not heard or rarely followed. So in the end, it goes down to the school & teacher.




Theres a few flaws in that type of training.. firstly the attacker has full knowledge what the defender is trying to achieve - anyone with a little knowledge of throws can stop the average student throwing them even without punching, secondly the defender is limited to only being allowed to throw.. i bet if you evened up the odds and said botyh can punch & throw.. people will topple!

No offence meant, I just felt its a bad example of reacting under pressure when the rules are stil stacked in one persons favour and hence doesnt prove what its meant to.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 08:43 PM

Quote:

however, your mistake is in the fact that competition is not the complete training package, it is only a piece of the training package.



Well I may well be wrong.. but from what ive seen in the UK and abroad, for many its the largest piece of the training package!

Quote:

This is where the conflict arises. You assume that competitors only train to compete. Most WTF people will only compete at the lower levels, out side of competition our training is no different than yours, we compete different we train similar.



No.. I know WTF schools that vary their syllabus.. so do not assume that, the post was in reference to the benefits that WTF sport sparring can provide.. I simply agreed and have pointed out some negatives that it may also provide. The post talked of superfast and powerful kicks gained from Olympic type training to a reasonibly high level, therefore it stands to reason most of the training time is devoted to this.. which includes ingraining the bad habits I have pointed out.

Quote:

I assume you are referring to the very small percentage of schools that only train for sport.



No.. not really, it was basically in reference to the post as I said.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 08:53 PM

Quote:

Here is what I mean by many Olympic competitors already had the training plus these incredible other skills, Olympic training.



And the modern day equivilant would be?? (Meaning someone competing at high/Olympic level WTF today).. perhaps a national team member like Steven Lopez.. has he got 18 years combative experince to work against any habits formed from concentrating on a certain type of training!

Quote:

This man was the Korean national champ between 1965 and 1968 and a U.S. combative instructor for 18 years. He was a combative instructor befor he was champ. He did not just train for competition like soooo many others do not just train for competition. The competition is only one component of training.

http://www.kilstkdonline.com/grandmaster1.html



Im not doubting his skills, but you are talking 40+ years ago.. hence my genuine interest above.

Cheers,

Stuart
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 09:24 PM

Quote:

Theres a few flaws in that type of training.. firstly the attacker has full knowledge what the defender is trying to achieve - anyone with a little knowledge of throws can stop the average student throwing them even without punching, secondly the defender is limited to only being allowed to throw.. i bet if you evened up the odds and said botyh can punch & throw.. people will topple!
No offence meant, I just felt its a bad example of reacting under pressure when the rules are stil stacked in one persons favour and hence doesnt prove what its meant to.
Stuart




No offence taken. What i was trying to do was get a point across that drills, like throwing have limitations. They may be a fine way to help one understand technique, but a drill can also be counter productive, as they can lead to a false sense of security & like you say, they do what they train. I was trying to get students to realize going through the motions is just not enough. As stated, once I removed the restrictions, some were able to get their opponents to the floor, I think as a result of other training, not just a throwing drill.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/13/08 09:47 PM












quote
No.. I know WTF schools that vary their syllabus.. so do not assume that, the post was in reference to the benefits that WTF sport sparring can provide.. I simply agreed and have pointed out some negatives that it may also provide. The post talked of superfast and powerful kicks gained from Olympic type training to a reasonibly high level, therefore it stands to reason most of the training time is devoted to this.. which includes ingraining the bad habits I have pointed out. end quote


I guess if you want to call super fast powerful kicks that these people could pull off before 99% of the average bullies could punch them, not to mention all their other training, is bad habit you are right. No hard feelings we simply view a few things from competing views.

cheers to you too.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 12:51 AM

If you want to talk about "instincts" taking over in a real fight, then watch this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05RzWrSRngc

It's supposed to be a fight between two Wing Chun masters. I don't see much Wing Chun going on. ;-)

The previous example was meant to be semi-facetious, but I did actually have a serious point. The point was that I think you may be overestimating how much people's training will dictate their responses during a real SD situation.

To an extent, I would agree w/you in that if you are in a SD situation, there is strong likelihood that habits and muscle memory formed in practice will carry over. Having said that, I will also couch this by saying that from my observations, most untrained people's instincts, when pressed to fight, will be to 1) flail and swing wildly with their hands, and or 2) grab, tackle, or wrestle to the ground.

Ideally for the martial artist, training should slowly condition them away from wildly swinging/tackling, so that when pressed to fight, they will be able to respond more coherently. However, the "flight or fight" response will still kick in if you genuinely feel that you are threatened. Our natural inclination is to react with aggression, but the habits and muscle memories formed will channel that aggression into more effective techniques.

So what does this mean for the sport TKD fighter? Despite the popular misconception, sport TKD fighters will not immediately drop their hands at their side and start bouncing if they get attacked. I think that a sport TKD fighter will probably kick if he sees an opening, but given human instincts as I've stated, I think it far more likely that he would unleash a barrage of punches and elbows which come far more naturally than kicking. I also think he would probably work in some takedowns and ground and pound if afforded the opportunity. Which brings me back to my previous point. If that TKD athlete is fast, strong, and in good shape, I think those punches and elbows will wreak havoc on the attacker.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 01:17 AM

Quote:


And the modern day equivilant would be?? (Meaning someone competing at high/Olympic level WTF today).. perhaps a national team member like Steven Lopez.. has he got 18 years combative experince to work against any habits formed from concentrating on a certain type of training!






I can't comment on Steven Lopez himself, but the dojang that his family runs does appear to include a healthy dose of SD in their regular TKD program:

http://www.elitetaekwondo.com/information.php?info_id=69&osCsid=240b2de47c7162832127f2c81ab3388b
http://www.elitetaekwondo.com/information.php?info_id=64&osCsid=240b2de47c7162832127f2c81ab3388b

According to these links, the SD class is taught by Chris Martinez, who is an top level TKD athlete and currently a contender for the US Olympic team to Beijing. Additionally, their website says that the adult TKD class is primarily geared towards conditioning and SD.

This school is also responsible for producing most of the medals that the US has won in international WTF competition, including three World Champions, and a two-time Olympic gold medalist.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 08:15 AM


badachagi


Nice information.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 11:20 AM

Yes this is all good information. I think we may be arguing absolutes, with a bit of my father is tougher than your father. I think & see from what has been posted here, that it is fairly obvious that if one trains in any Art, certain strengths are developed. I also think that it is obvious that all training methods have their limitations & shortfalls with their respective ways, including their tournament rules, if any. So if it is pure street SD that you want, it makes common sense to train at a center that emphasizes that & offers as realistic conditions as possible, because even then, there are limitations.

Then there seems to be a tendency to not refer to any possible shortcomings one's training may have & they all have it AND to highlight the shortcomings of another's training or group.

TKD & MAs can have the capacity to offer many benefits to its students, including making money, SD, sport, fitness, discipline, ettiquite & more. As long as an individual student is happy that they are having their needs met AND are aware of its limitations, then all is ok. TKD can offer so much more than SD. As aready stated, if it is street SD you need, seek a school that emphasizes that. Even McDojangs & McDoJos offer something benefical to some. However the vast amount of these types of schools that seem to prop up, does in fact have a part in portraying TKD's reputation. Therefore this & other reasons contribute to TKD loosing face.

Another point:
I went to the Elite TKD website. Of course I was most intrested in the history section. If you check it out, it says TKD goes back 1,000+ years , that the K Taekwon-Do Assoc was formed in 1961, when that WAS the K Tae Soo Do Assoc. There were 2 K TKD Assocs before that! Then they go on to say that TKD was registered in 1962 when it was Tae Soo Do & that they held the 1st TKD championship in 1963, when it was, yes you figured it out, it was Tae Soo Do.
These are the things that drive history buffs & ITF members crazy The KTA did not become TKD till 1965/6 when Ambassador Choi returned to Korea from his diplomatic assignment & was elected 3rd president & he fought tooth & nail to change it & he was successful. This is why he & many are adamant that they, he & his followers, basically OhDo Kwan, were doing TKD, as they had a different training & others were not. Readers should understand this.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 01:29 PM

Quote:

Yes this is all good information. I think we may be arguing absolutes, with a bit of my father is tougher than your father. I think & see from what has been posted here, that it is fairly obvious that if one trains in any Art, certain strengths are developed. I also think that it is obvious that all training methods have their limitations & shortfalls with their respective ways, including their tournament rules, if any. So if it is pure street SD that you want, it makes common sense to train at a center that emphasizes that & offers as realistic conditions as possible, because even then, there are limitations.

Then there seems to be a tendency to not refer to any possible shortcomings one's training may have & they all have it AND to highlight the shortcomings of another's training or group.

TKD & MAs can have the capacity to offer many benefits to its students, including making money, SD, sport, fitness, discipline, ettiquite & more. As long as an individual student is happy that they are having their needs met AND are aware of its limitations, then all is ok. TKD can offer so much more than SD. As aready stated, if it is street SD you need, seek a school that emphasizes that. Even McDojangs & McDoJos offer something benefical to some. However the vast amount of these types of schools that seem to prop up, does in fact have a part in portraying TKD's reputation. Therefore this & other reasons contribute to TKD loosing face.

Another point:
I went to the Elite TKD website. Of course I was most intrested in the history section. If you check it out, it says TKD goes back 1,000+ years , that the K Taekwon-Do Assoc was formed in 1961, when that WAS the K Tae Soo Do Assoc. There were 2 K TKD Assocs before that! Then they go on to say that TKD was registered in 1962 when it was Tae Soo Do & that they held the 1st TKD championship in 1963, when it was, yes you figured it out, it was Tae Soo Do.
These are the things that drive history buffs & ITF members crazy The KTA did not become TKD till 1965/6 when Ambassador Choi returned to Korea from his diplomatic assignment & was elected 3rd president & he fought tooth & nail to change it & he was successful. This is why he & many are adamant that they, he & his followers, basically OhDo Kwan, were doing TKD, as they had a different training & others were not. Readers should understand this.






1) Ok, absolutely we are back to arguing absolutes.
2) I see severe short comings in both methods of training but the short comings are mainly limited to the sparing rules of both.
I do not see many differences in the other aspects of training, they are pretty much the same for most of us from what people convey on this forum. Back to the sparing short comings, WTF lacks hands, ITF lacks commitment of power/ settled! Both are incomplete training methods by them selves.

Now to the, another point part to your post,
I understand yours and others frustration with being taken seriously regarding history, I am incapable of feeling it as you do because it has not been ingrained into me or other WTF affiliated people as it has by your organization.
Not saying that knowing history is not a good thing I personally find it very interesting but to most WTF affiliated organizations it is kind of a non factor. This must be very frustrating for you and I understand.
I started TKD course that was ITF years ago and I still remember posters of the general hanging every where and even though I did not continue my training at this particular place I still remember the importance that was given to this man by the members of this place. I was not there long so I never really learned why, you have given me insight into this.

I am a little Leary to post this next part because I am worried as to how it will be interpreted in print. I assure you if we were sitting across one another you would be able to tell that I mean no disrespect and am genuinely curious.

What if history could be substantiated as you say it was and the world suddenly agrees that every thing the general and his members have been saying is absolutely correct, how would this change TKD as we know it? How would this help ITF? would this hurt WTF affiliates? Would it restore those that may have been hurt? and most important, would TKD be improved? and if so, how?

Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 02:18 PM

Quote:

What if history could be substantiated as you say it was and the world suddenly agrees that every thing the general and his members have been saying is absolutely correct, how would this change TKD as we know it? How would this help ITF? would this hurt WTF affiliates? Would it restore those that may have been hurt? and most important, would TKD be improved? and if so, how?




No, please move away from that arguement, as this is not what is important. Now I will state that history has nothing or very, very little to do with what one does today with respect to their physical training. Now it can help a bit with respect to understanding where & how something can into being, so one can move forward, as is true with this topic. If TKD is losing face/popularity, one must understand history so we can track development in hopes of improving or adjusting in some way. period, end of story, not really important for physical training

Now why history is important:
History is of course the recording of events, allowing a look back into times long gone. There may be some benefit to that & it has been done, this recording, since recorded history began

Now history in the short term is usually written by those in power. In this case the SK govt & its agencies. There are various reasons that contribute to why certain facts are downplayed, eliminated & others unduly highlighted. They do not only relate to discrediting Ambassador Choi. History usually sorts itself out over time. I think you & others will start to see that, as the geo-political clmate has changed in Korea. There are several projects in the works that will help this process along, including internet discussion forums such as this & the overall power & reach of the world wide web as a communication tool beyond control.

Why is this important?
Simple answer. Many great men left a poor developing country & spread not only a MA, but the customs & culture of a proud country. They introduced Korea to the world, via their MA. To simply credit them with this the least we can & should do. Now couple with the fact, that this accurate potrayal of history will not only rightfully give credit where it is due, but will also help pay back the great harm caused to them over the years by a brutual dictatorial regime, that blacklisted communsit sympathizers & traitors.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 03:20 PM


No, please move away from that arguement, as this is not what is important. Now I will state that history has nothing or very, very little to do with what one does today with respect to their physical training. Now it can help a bit with respect to understanding where & how something can into being, so one can move forward, as is true with this topic. If TKD is losing face/popularity, one must understand history so we can track development in hopes of improving or adjusting in some way. period, end of story, not really important for physical training

Now why history is important:
History is of course the recording of events, allowing a look back into times long gone. There may be some benefit to that & it has been done, this recording, since recorded history began

Now history in the short term is usually written by those in power. In this case the SK govt & its agencies. There are various reasons that contribute to why certain facts are downplayed, eliminated & others unduly highlighted. They do not only relate to discrediting Ambassador Choi. History usually sorts itself out over time. I think you & others will start to see that, as the geo-political clmate has changed in Korea. There are several projects in the works that will help this process along, including internet discussion forums such as this & the overall power & reach of the world wide web as a communication tool beyond control.

Why is this important?
Simple answer. Many great men left a poor developing country & spread not only a MA, but the customs & culture of a proud country. They introduced Korea to the world, via their MA. To simply credit them with this the least we can & should do. Now couple with the fact, that this accurate potrayal of history will not only rightfully give credit where it is due, but will also help pay back the great harm caused to them over the years by a brutual dictatorial regime, that blacklisted communsit sympathizers & traitors.


(end quote)







Surely some where one wants history to be recorded accurately and as you said give credit to where credit is due. I am all for this. I still must ask the question as to where this is going to benefit us that are not yet a record of history? How is this going to benefit TKD and the various groups that make up TKD? could this harm some of these groups? How is this going to help TKD move forward? Will it vastly improve TKD"s popularity and how? If there is no answers to these questions than history is some what insignificant and I do not believe that you, or I, feel that way. I can not answer these questions because I lack historical knowledge but I am all for moving forward and improvement.

So where and how is acknowledging and/or rectifying this going to take us? How will it improve the various governing powers and organizations of TKD or is this a one sided mission to rectify a terrible wrong doing? I don"t care if it is the ladder, if it"s wrong it is wrong, and should be rectified, but I would like to know how this is going to benefit TKD as a whole.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 07:16 PM

Quote:

I guess if you want to call super fast powerful kicks that these people could pull off before 99% of the average bullies could punch them,



No.. I would put that in the asset box..unless they dropped their guard :-/

-------------
Quote:

It's supposed to be a fight between two Wing Chun masters. I don't see much Wing Chun going on. ;-)



Actually, one jumped the other whilst he was teaching a seminar.. old news :-)

Quote:

The point was that I think you may be overestimating how much people's training will dictate their responses during a real SD situation.



I dont think so.. why do you think military etc drill over and over and over!!

Now, just to clarify.. I agreed with the sport TKD post, as it adds benefits as stated, I am also not lumping all WTF students as having no SD skills, I am simply saying the way you train is usually the way you fight.. sport fighting (WTf and others) create bad habits.. which unlike you guys, many do not realsie so cannot/ do not.. rectify.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 07:20 PM

Quote:

I can't comment on Steven Lopez himself, but the dojang that his family runs does appear to include a healthy dose of SD in their regular TKD program:



From what I read its a seperate course to TKD and by your own admission.. someone else runs it (ie. not Mr Lopez).. Question: why is that?.. as in, why isnt it part of a regular class and why does it require a seperate course if its taught as standard in WTF!

Anyway, this isnt what I asked really! Perhaps the guy that runs it has experience like the other one that was posted.. all good and good to see the school has this program.. many do not (at least in the UK anyway)


Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 07:22 PM

Quote:

I think we may be arguing absolutes, with a bit of my father is tougher than your father.



Not at all, for me anyway, i appreciate the information everyone (Von, Badachagi etc.) is posting.


Bottom line is, we are all TKD.. just different systems.. and we can all elarn off each other.

Stuart
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 09:08 PM

Quote:

I went to the Elite TKD website. Of course I was most intrested in the history section. If you check it out, it says TKD goes back 1,000+ years , that the K Taekwon-Do Assoc was formed in 1961, when that WAS the K Tae Soo Do Assoc. There were 2 K TKD Assocs before that! Then they go on to say that TKD was registered in 1962 when it was Tae Soo Do & that they held the 1st TKD championship in 1963, when it was, yes you figured it out, it was Tae Soo Do.
These are the things that drive history buffs & ITF members crazy The KTA did not become TKD till 1965/6 when Ambassador Choi returned to Korea from his diplomatic assignment & was elected 3rd president & he fought tooth & nail to change it & he was successful. This is why he & many are adamant that they, he & his followers, basically OhDo Kwan, were doing TKD, as they had a different training & others were not. Readers should understand this.




Additionally GM CK Choi actually won the first even Tae Kwon Do championship (heavy weight) in 1962 and then won the first Tae Soo Do championship in 1963.

Interestingly the TSD rules were full contact but no hitting to the face with the hands.

TSD was a name choosen to attempt to unify korean martial arts it was made up of Tae Kwon Do, Kong Soo Do and Tang Soo Do. The had to choose a different name because the Kong Soo Do and Tang Soo Do people refused to use Tae Kwon Do.
Posted by: flynch

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 09:18 PM

Quote:


2) I see severe short comings in both methods of training but the short comings are mainly limited to the sparing rules of both.
I do not see many differences in the other aspects of training, they are pretty much the same for most of us from what people convey on this forum. Back to the sparing short comings, WTF lacks hands, ITF lacks commitment of power/ settled! Both are incomplete training methods by them selves.





I agree they both lack in the sparring I am as concerned about ITF style sparring where we stop or hold our punches. I think at some point maybe not every day you have to hit and be hit.

I do believe in the motto you fight as you train.

As far as other differnces like patterns this is of little concern as they are exercises and alot of ITF Masters teach them as simply the ART side of the Martial Art. So as such it really breaks down to individual preference and aesthetics
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 11:12 PM

Quote:

I still must ask the question as to where this is going to benefit us that are not yet a record of history? How is this going to benefit TKD and the various groups that make up TKD? could this harm some of these groups? How is this going to help TKD move forward? Will it vastly improve TKD"s popularity and how? If there is no answers to these questions than history is some what insignificant and I do not believe that you, or I, feel that way. I can not answer these questions because I lack historical knowledge but I am all for moving forward and improvement.
So where and how is acknowledging and/or rectifying this going to take us? How will it improve the various governing powers and organizations of TKD or is this a one sided mission to rectify a terrible wrong doing? I don"t care if it is the ladder, if it"s wrong it is wrong, and should be rectified, but I would like to know how this is going to benefit TKD as a whole.




Sorry I don't know the answer to that. I don't have a TKD crystal ball.
I can say that acknowledging the truth is an important 1st step in many healing processes, be it an addiction problem, friend with neighbor, mistake by worker etc. So apart from the all important historical reason & proper credit, that hopefully will help heal pain by many who were trashed, it may help move 2 major orgs closer. Possible cooperation can & should be better than the current harsh feelings.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 11:21 PM

Quote:

Interestingly the TSD rules were full contact but no hitting to the face with the hands.




Yes, established mainly by the JiDo kwan.

Quote:

TSD was a name choosen to attempt to unify korean martial arts it was made up of Tae Kwon Do, Kong Soo Do and Tang Soo Do. The had to choose a different name because the Kong Soo Do and Tang Soo Do people refused to use Tae Kwon Do.




Yes, a very important point & one that maybe you can expand on. This is exactly why the original TKD pioneers feel that others were not doing TKD & later just took or used the name TKD that they made popular.
Posted by: oldman

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/14/08 11:33 PM

ITFunity,
I believe that some of the Gererals earlier published materials reflected their practice of the Pinans. Can you tell me what year they discontinued using them?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 12:19 AM

Yes Sir, the 1st 3 Tuls were HwaRang, ChungMu & UlJi devised in the Oh Do kwan, circa 1954-56. Followed by gae baek in 1961. Now Ambassador Choi's 1st English book came out in 1965, with a new reprint now available. This book contained the 20 Chang Hon or ChonJi Tuls, that were finalized while he was assigned to his diplomatic post on Malyasia & the earlier Pihon Japanese forms. However, the ITF was formed in 1966, March 22 & these new Korean Tuls became part of the syllabus. In the 1972 text, commonly referred to as the bible of TKD, the full 24 Tuls were finally published. Some Koreans still continued to use the old forms & many still do use them today.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 05:46 AM

Quote:


I do not see many differences in the other aspects of training, they are pretty much the same for most of us from what people convey on this forum. Back to the sparing short comings, WTF lacks hands, ITF lacks commitment of power/ settled!




But I honestly don't think it is settled, and I'm not just trying to be difficult. I think there is something here which is lost through lack of experience of actual ITF tournaments.

TKD rules state that tournaments should be carried out with semi-contact, however, I think that any of us who has witnessed more than a couple different tournaments, maybe organised under different groups, will know that this term "semi-contact" is not as clear-cut as you think. I have seen tournaments where refs gave warnings for the smallest signs of force; I have seen the median if you like where competitors getting hit is no problem except where techniques are wild; and I've also seen what ITFUnity has called the Bloodbaths- for instance I remember watching one black belt grading where one guy got KOd with a kick to the throat and almost every student came out with a bleeding nose.

So this is my point- in ITF competitions, people interpret the rules on contact pretty much how they see fit. Unfortunately in the WTF, there is no way of reinterpreting no hands to the head. There are parts of the ITF who are right now competing with rules that are not far from full-contact.

BTW, good debate- for a moment there I thought we were all going to agree
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 10:35 AM

Quote:

Quote:


I do not see many differences in the other aspects of training, they are pretty much the same for most of us from what people convey on this forum. Back to the sparing short comings, WTF lacks hands, ITF lacks commitment of power/ settled!




(quoat)
But I honestly don't think it is settled, and I'm not just trying to be difficult. I think there is something here which is lost through lack of experience of actual ITF tournaments.

TKD rules state that tournaments should be carried out with semi-contact, however, I think that any of us who has witnessed more than a couple different tournaments, maybe organised under different groups, will know that this term "semi-contact" is not as clear-cut as you think. I have seen tournaments where refs gave warnings for the smallest signs of force; I have seen the median if you like where competitors getting hit is no problem except where techniques are wild; and I've also seen what ITFUnity has called the Bloodbaths- for instance I remember watching one black belt grading where one guy got KOd with a kick to the throat and almost every student came out with a bleeding nose.

So this is my point- in ITF competitions, people interpret the rules on contact pretty much how they see fit. Unfortunately in the WTF, there is no way of reinterpreting no hands to the head. There are parts of the ITF who are right now competing with rules that are not far from full-contact.

BTW, good debate- for a moment there I thought we were all going to agree




(end quote)

The following is not a WTF is better than ITF, it has already been established that both have weaknesses. I am simply responding to your comments.



1) I am sure that there are some decent shots delivered now and then in an ITF competition, you get no argument on that but I have witnesses many ITF competitions too and it is seldom that real aggressive force is applied and one can not argue that it can prove to be counterproductive to pull shots.

2.) It is very easy to bloody a nose for someone so that is a mute point and not that impressive.

3.) If you compare the amounts of knock outs of the two styles there are many more in lower level WTF competitions due to the full contact to the head, these kicks are very powerful. Not to many knock outs at higher levels because these competitors have mastered many defencive and avoidance strategies. They are also more cautious in attacking and have paid there dues at the lower levels and learned many lessons.


4.) I have to admit that competing in an ITF competition is a little intriguing to me. Would like to experience it and still may some day.


5.) Would like to see it mandatory for all to have to compete in both styles 2-4 times for one to obtain BB. This would expose students to the various advantages that both offer. It would also serve to settle many misconceptions that many people have of the various sparring styles.


I doubt this will settle anything, just couldn"t resist responding. Grin, grin
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 10:37 AM

arrrgh,those long quotes are creeping back!!!!!!
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 10:46 AM

Must be my passive aggressive side coming out sorry. Would like to see you jump in more you always seem to have interesting perspective.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 11:28 AM

Quote:

I have witnesses many ITF competitions too and it is seldom that real aggressive force is applied




I respectfully disagree. Indeed, I think often the problem is too much uncontrolled aggression in the kind of punching flurries that you see in many ITF competitions.

Quote:


3.) If you compare the amounts of knock outs of the two styles there are many more in lower level WTF competitions due to the full contact to the head, these kicks are very powerful.




I agree there are more knockouts in WTF competitions, but personally I think this is mainly down to the hands being kept at the waist. If you throw a hard kick, and there's no dispute from me that WTF guys kick very hard, and it hits someone in the head without impediment then you are going to knock them out. However, having the hands up will stop 90% of these shots from connecting with the head.

Quote:


5.) Would like to see it mandatory for all to have to compete in both styles 2-4 times for one to obtain BB. This would expose students to the various advantages that both offer. It would also serve to settle many misconceptions that many people have of the various sparring styles.






It's a nice idea, but as always it is up to the instructor how he wants to run things. An individual can always enter an open tournament if he/she wants, it can't be a bad idea.

Quote:


I doubt this will settle anything, just couldn"t resist responding. Grin, grin




Well if it doesn't settle anything, then so what. I find it interesting to hear the other side of the debate, and maybe we will never agree about some things but there is no menace intended in my arguments.
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 11:59 AM

Quote:

I doubt this will settle anything, just couldn"t resist responding. Grin, grin




Having tried WTF style sparring myself, I can say its a lot more difficult than it looks as technically you have less tools to target than in ITF. I really enjoyed the experience btw.

Stuart
Posted by: StuartA

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 12:01 PM

Quote:

I respectfully disagree. Indeed, I think often the problem is too much uncontrolled aggression in the kind of punching flurries that you see in many ITF competitions.



Yup, quite agree. ITF sparring is very much about controlled skill.. many forget that or cant do that so "bulldog" in!

Quote:

I agree there are more knockouts in WTF competitions, but personally I think this is mainly down to the hands being kept at the waist.



Gotta admit Von.. thats a very good point. In fact, the WTF club I trained at when in the USA sparre hands up and only dropped them for comps to avoid this!

Quote:

Well if it doesn't settle anything, then so what. I find it interesting to hear the other side of the debate, and maybe we will never agree about some things but there is no menace intended in my arguments.



Me too and I appreciate the focused discussions.

Stuart
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 12:03 PM

(quote
I respectfully disagree. Indeed, I think often the problem is too much uncontrolled aggression in the kind of punching flurries that you see in many ITF competitions.
(end quote)


What I was referring to was all out full force going to knock you out aggression.

(quote)
I agree there are more knockouts in WTF competitions, but personally I think this is mainly down to the hands being kept at the waist. If you throw a hard kick, and there's no dispute from me that WTF guys kick very hard, and it hits someone in the head without impediment then you are going to knock them out. However, having the hands up will stop 90% of these shots from connecting with the head.
(end quote)


1. This is a very common misconception that all WTF fighters fight with hands down and simply is not true. Yes you see this in Olympics but there are many reasons for this that I will not go into at this time.

2. First off, most of us are trained to defend with hands up and many compete this way, hands up , I am one who does this. It is still not uncommon to get caught in the head by competent opponent because many of these kicks are powerful and deflect off some blocks right into your face, obviously one has missed the block when this happens but sooner or later it happens. Blocking helps but no guarantees. You will see many attacks dispelled by blocking so why do so many people think that WTF competitors do not block, we are taught to block using blocking techniques to block powerful kicks with out getting our arms broke.

I think the problem is that most of the matches people are exposed to is the higher level Olympic type where many competitors do compete with their hands down. I have participated in my share of WTF competitions and can honestly say to you that most posture with hands up and ready.



I to enjoy these exchanges of information. Cheers! Oh and I have to keep my quotes to a minimum or trevek will scold me.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 12:34 PM

Quote:

Quote:

I doubt this will settle anything, just couldn"t resist responding. Grin, grin




Having tried WTF style sparring myself, I can say its a lot more difficult than it looks as technically you have less tools to target than in ITF. I really enjoyed the experience btw.

Stuart





Got to ask the question stuart, did you keep your hands up? I hope so.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 12:49 PM

Quote:



1. This is a very common misconception that all WTF fighters fight with hands down and simply is not true. Yes you see this in Olympics but there are many reasons for this that I will not go into at this time...

I think the problem is that most of the matches people are exposed to is the higher level Olympic type where many competitors do compete with their hands down. I have participated in my share of WTF competitions and can honestly say to you that most posture with hands up and ready.





You are right that most of my exposure to WTF sparring has been through the olympics and world championships. But I am happy to take your word for it that this is different in lower level tournaments. The problem comes though, when lower level competitors try to emulate the olympians which is only natural given that they are the best in the world at the sport. Have you noticed this?
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 03:05 PM

quote

You are right that most of my exposure to WTF sparring has been through the olympics and world championships. But I am happy to take your word for it that this is different in lower level tournaments. The problem comes though, when lower level competitors try to emulate the olympians which is only natural given that they are the best in the world at the sport. Have you noticed this?
end quote


Yes I would sound very foolish if I tried to say that I have never witnessed this, but it is far less common than many think. Often times the hands come down for reasons that many people do not understand.

I would like to share an example with you. Believe me this is not easy, it is not my nature, but in the realm of sharing OK. That is what this forum is all about and I hope to communicate that we are not as crazy and untrained as many think, but how would one know unless they begin to understand a few things about us.

I will use the high snap kick and push kick as example, if you don"t believe me try it yourself on a heavy bag, paddle or a protected partner. Heck you may even be aware of my example, but I assure you many are not and I hope this helps.

Opponent is in front of you getting ready to attack, you scenes this from your training, could be a flinch, his eyes, what ever. As soon as they make their move, I don"t care if it is punch or kick, you launch a high snap kick or a push kick to face or upper chest ( snap to face, push to chest) Your hands are still up and ready before the kick. As the kick rises your hands are thrust downward this adds tremendous power and height to the kick. Now, one may say, but you could/would be punched in the face. No, you would not because you learn to time this, yes always that possibility that you have made a mistake but in that case you probably would have been late in executing an effective block anyway due to timming issues and still end up being clocked. The key is in the timing and your defence is your offence! As you return to ready stance the kick comes back and the hands are thrust back up again adding speed and power to recovery. The untrained or non WTF are going, look he drops his hands, and they are wright! but hopefully one has a better understanding of why.

Any way I hope this sheds light on a controversial training/fighting method. Not a better method, that depends on the practitioner and what one is comfortable with, not an inferior method, it is a different method that many do not comprehend, or do not wish to comprehend, and that is OK too. The point is there are reasons for most of what one observes. There are many more examples and probably better ones, I chose the high front snap kick because even a non TKD practitioner would understand.

Hope I didn"t come across as know it all I can tell you are very competent in TKD by the information I learn from your postings, just want more people to understand another aspect of our art.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 03:28 PM

Thanks for the answer.

Quote:


Hope I didn"t come across as know it all I can tell you are very competent in TKD by the information I learn from your postings, just want more people to understand another aspect of our art.




Ah, flattery! That's the kind of person I like to debate with.
Posted by: badachagi

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 04:02 PM

Regarding sport TKD and the use of hands (or lack thereof):

I don't know what the "official" reason is as to why WTF rules prohibit punches to the head, but allow kicks, if there even is an "official" reason. It may be one of those things that will be lost in the annals of history. Over the years, I've heard many anecdotal reasons and personal theories. These are the ones that I know of that seem to be the most plausible.

1) Punches to the head were forbidden in order to encourage greater development of kicking technique.

2) Punches to the head were forbidden to differentiate the sport of TKD from boxing and karate.

3) Punches to the head were forbidden for safety reasons.

Someone mentioned earlier that they have witnessed ITF matches that turned into slugfests. While I'm sure that's not universally true in all ITF competition, I am surprised that it doesn't happen more often. If punches to the head and body are scored, and if punches are easier to throw, have a higher probability of connecting, and require less commitment than a kick, then from a tactical point of view, it makes perfect sense to throw lots of punches. So based on that rule set, it shouldn't be surprising to see people essentially boxing, with the occasional kick thrown.

Also with regards to safety, it may seem counterintuitive to allow kicks to the head (and KO's), but not punches. However, in practice, kicks to the head require much greater commitment, and have a much lower probability of connecting. So you're less likely to get hit by one. Additionaly, most head kicks thrown in competition end up hitting the sides (spin hook, high roundhouse), where there's padding to absorb shock. In the 20 years I've done TKD, I've seen my share of KOs, but believe it or not, I have seen very, very few instances of bruised faces, black eyes, bloody/broken noses, etc. This is because, whereas most head kick will hit the headgear covering the sides of the head, punches to the head are almost always aimed at the FACE -- eyes, nose, chin, cheeks, etc. So in any sport that allows punches to the face, you have to be prepared to have many more people get their faces messed up.

Now as for sport TKD fighters not holding their hands up. In a sport with as much kicking as sport TKD, and with the kinds of kicks thrown, it's actually advantageous to not hold your hands up by your face all the time. Watch a kickboxing or karate match and see what happens when someone throws a strong kick with full commitment (not push kicks, leg kick, or leg checks) -- their hands *drop* from their face. This is to aid balance, and help the body turn. Since TKD athletes kick ALL the time, it's more advantageous to their movement to leave their hands lowered.

Now having said this, in actual competitions you'll actually see a large degree of variation in how high/low people hold their hands, and other factors will come into play. For example, many shorter fighter will hold their hands up higher when fighting taller opponents because of the tendancy for taller guys to go "headhunting".

As for hands being up protecting against KOs, that makes sense in theory but in practice is not as beneficial as you may think. While hands up may prevent getting scored in the head (although it would be better to move and counter than block), it's not likely to protect against KO blows. TKD athletes rely on their footwork to move and evade. High section kicks off the offense are usually easy to evade because they are telegraphed and require lots of commitment. I can tell you that most of the KOs I've seen come off a single technique -- jump spin hook kick to the head off the opponents offensive motion. In that scenario, with the speed/power of the kick coupled with the opponent basically walking into it, I doubt having hands up will help, as the kicker will basically kick through your arms. The way to avoid getting hit with something like that is to fake/check, draw the attack, and evade, or stay out of range completely.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 04:54 PM

quote

1) Punches to the head were forbidden in order to encourage greater development of kicking technique.
I can tell you that most of the KOs I've seen come off a single technique -- jump spin hook kick to the head off the opponents offensive motion. In that scenario, with the speed/power of the kick coupled with the opponent basically walking into it, I doubt having hands up will help, as the kicker will basically kick through your arms. The way to avoid getting hit with something like that is to fake/check, draw the attack, and evade, or stay out of range completely
2) Punches to the head were forbidden to differentiate the sport of TKD from boxing and karate.

3) Punches to the head were forbidden for safety reasons.

end quote




Yes I have herd all of these. As far as not allowing punches to head for safety I personally think that the full contact aspect has helped to also discourage punches to head.

I think it is possible that all of these reasons are responsible for the rules being are what they are.




quote


So based on that rule set, it shouldn't be surprising to see people essentially boxing, with the occasional kick thrown.


end quote



Yes I have also herd that the governing bodies did not want to see boxing matches.


quote

Now having said this, in actual competitions you'll actually see a large degree of variation in how high/low people hold their hands, and other factors will come into play. For example, many shorter fighter will hold their hands up higher when fighting taller opponents because of the tendency for taller guys to go "headhunting".


end quote



This would be what I would do if I was the shorter guy along with staying in close to them. Personally I hold them up from habit and it is always stressed in training for a number of reasons, some of what were previously stated in my last post. Most of the knock outs I have seen were to the side of head too.


quote

I can tell you that most of the KOs I've seen come off a single technique -- jump spin hook kick to the head off the opponents offensive motion. In that scenario, with the speed/power of the kick coupled with the opponent basically walking into it, I doubt having hands up will help, as the kicker will basically kick through your arms. The way to avoid getting hit with something like that is to fake/check, draw the attack, and evade, or stay out of range completely

end quote


Yes agree, and this countering can be a real advantage if one gets good at it. This accounts for much of the lull at the higher levels as you have stated in one of your other posts.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/15/08 05:15 PM

Quote:


Someone mentioned earlier that they have witnessed ITF matches that turned into slugfests. While I'm sure that's not universally true in all ITF competition, I am surprised that it doesn't happen more often. If punches to the head and body are scored, and if punches are easier to throw, have a higher probability of connecting, and require less commitment than a kick, then from a tactical point of view, it makes perfect sense to throw lots of punches. So based on that rule set, it shouldn't be surprising to see people essentially boxing, with the occasional kick thrown.




Why? No fighter wants to put themselves in more danger than they have to be. Kicks are a useful way to control range and score points with less risk of being hit back. Anyway, if you want to box with your opponent, you have to get close enough, and many competitors are simply too good at keeping bullrushers back with straight kicks. I don't understand why you think a punch requires less commitment than a kick? Maybe it requires less energy, but I would think there is usually a much higher risk of getting hit back.

Quote:

I can tell you that most of the KOs I've seen come off a single technique -- jump spin hook kick to the head off the opponents offensive motion. In that scenario, with the speed/power of the kick coupled with the opponent basically walking into it, I doubt having hands up will help, as the kicker will basically kick through your arms




I have no doubt that this kick has the potential to knock someone out, even with their hands up, but I think it is much less likely. The guard remember, rarely protects the competitor from all the power of the kick, but it does make the attacking leg decelerate enough to protect the head from KOs. Look at it like a crumple zone on a car, it may not lesson the impact an awful lot, but it can still often mean the difference between life and death for the passangers.

I don't know if I'm in a minority here, but I have actually been hit full on by a flying reverse turning kick with the heel. It was not even during sparring, I was actually holding a pad for a student to kick, and they were far too close and ended up clobbering me smack in the forehead. Luckily I wasn't knocked out, I just had a dizzy fit. I was lucky that it hit me in the forehead and not at the side of the head or the nose.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/16/08 10:32 AM

Just for conversation, and somthing else for all to think about, I didn"t say agree.


http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=576
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/16/08 11:49 AM

Quote:

I don't know what the "official" reason is as to why WTF rules prohibit punches to the head, but allow kicks, if there even is an "official" reason. It may be one of those things that will be lost in the annals of history. Over the years, I've heard many anecdotal reasons and personal theories. These are the ones that I know of that seem to be the most plausible.
1) Punches to the head were forbidden in order to encourage greater development of kicking technique.
2) Punches to the head were forbidden to differentiate the sport of TKD from boxing and karate.
3) Punches to the head were forbidden for safety reasons.





Now please understand these rules were not made by the WTF, but the Jido Kwan, led by their 2nd generation leaders who would eventually become major players in the Kukkiwon & WTF. This took place in the early 60s, much earlier than the Kukkiwon (72) & WTF (73) were even formed.

Reasons #1 & #3 were sort of by-products from the main reason #2.

Quote:

.......I am surprised that it doesn't happen more often. If punches to the head and body are scored, and if punches are easier to throw, have a higher probability of connecting, and require less commitment than a kick, then from a tactical point of view, it makes perfect sense to throw lots of punches. So based on that rule set, it shouldn't be surprising to see people essentially boxing, with the occasional kick thrown.





Very true & is often the case. It is up to the center ref to control the match & emphasize that hand techniques, note not only punches, as all hand techniques are allowed, do not get out of hand. Remember attacks in order to score must be focused, controled & delivered correctly.
In addition, 3 pts are given for kicks to the head. 2 pts for kicks to the body & 1 pt for hands (ITF-V). In the past the ITF rules had & still do award points for techniques with a greater degree of difficulty, ie jump kick to head 3pts, jump kick to body 2pts, standing kick to head 2 pts. The ITF-NK in an apparent attempt to further jazz up the scoring & techniques used have added 5 pt 360 degree kicks to head, 4 pt 180 kicks etc. They have also placed limits on the amount of consecutive punches without a kick in between to 3.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/16/08 11:53 AM

Hands down in WTF type sparring is often the tactic to lure an opponent in. I think it has less downside to other sport sparring rules as hands are against the rules. IMHO whether that bleeds over into real fighting as a flaw, depends on the person, the rest of the training & how much focus is put on the sport fighting. No different from any other sport rules vs SD debate.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/16/08 12:15 PM

Quote:

It is up to the center ref to control the match & emphasize that hand techniques, note not only punches, as all hand techniques are allowed, do not get out of hand.




Although all hand techniques may be allowed, I think I have only ever seen forefist and backfist attacks used in competition. The use of the glove makes it impossible to determine a knifehand strike. As for refs emphasising "hand techniques do not get out of hand," I don't think it is up to the ref, it is up to the other competitor to neutralise the use of the hands.

I have seen tournaments where a competitor has literally tried to box his way through. I have to say they are not often successful, because sooner or later they face an opponent who is able to control the range effectively and make it difficult for the puncher to set himself. I remember one Polish guy a few years ago at the European Championships who punched like a brick wall and had his first opponent completely overwhelmed. But the next guy he fought was able to use his sidekick effectively to stop him from being able to use his hands.

Quote:

In addition, 3 pts are given for kicks to the head. 2 pts for kicks to the body & 1 pt for hands (ITF-V).




I really like the new rules adopted by ITF-V (my association actually). I hated how extra points were given for techniques simply because they were done jumping. Recognising that it is not "which" technique that is important, but its power and target, has been a big step forward IMO. It also I think addresses one of the weaknesses many people ascribe to TKD, that it is more for entertainment than fighting. Making sure that simple techniques are given equal weight to complicated ones shows a commitment to effectiveness over show.

The ITF-NK rules frankly sound stupid. I can understand the 3 consecutive punch rule, but honestly I don't think it's necessary. If you have ever officiated at an ITF tournament, you will probably notice, that we tend not to score many points when competitors stand and hurl punches at each other, because it is too difficult to see who has won the exchange. The times I do score these flurries, is when one of the competitors clearly has the advantage in the exchange, and even then he may only get 1-2 points for his trouble. The bottom line is that generally controlled punches woo the judges in competition, but messy scraps are rarely decisive in a contest. As for 180 and 360 degree bonus points, well see above.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/16/08 06:04 PM

Quote:

Although all hand techniques may be allowed, I think I have only ever seen forefist and backfist attacks used in competition. The use of the glove makes it impossible to determine a knifehand strike. As for refs emphasising "hand techniques do not get out of hand," I don't think it is up to the ref, it is up to the other competitor to neutralise the use of the hands.




I would venture a guess it is another reason for holding free sparring to blue belt, so they have more of an arsenal to draw from. The ref is the 1 who must insure it doesn't turn into wildly swinging & the the hand techniques are focused, etc.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/16/08 06:07 PM

Quote:

It also I think addresses one of the weaknesses many people ascribe to TKD, that it is more for entertainment than fighting. Making sure that simple techniques are given equal weight to complicated ones shows a commitment to effectiveness over show. The ITF-NK rules frankly sound stupid.




I think these rules are to jazz up the competition for show, as an attempt or in the process of working towards Olympic status.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/16/08 06:20 PM

I was just at a tournament in Poland today. The competitors wore boxing gloves and the contact was pretty hard. Lots of hands but also some great kicking.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 05:01 AM

Quote:


I would venture a guess it is another reason for holding free sparring to blue belt, so they have more of an arsenal to draw from.




Is this only at international competitions, because at most of the local tournaments I have been to, there have even been yellow belt divisions for sparring. Personally I have no problem with this, although I think most people prefer to be at least green belt before they think about competing.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 09:11 AM

Quote:

Quote:


I would venture a guess it is another reason for holding free sparring to blue belt, so they have more of an arsenal to draw from.



Is this only at international competitions, because at most of the local tournaments I have been to, there have even been yellow belt divisions for sparring. Personally I have no problem with this, although I think most people prefer to be at least green belt before they think about competing.




No what I mean by this is that Ambassador Choi stated that sparring should begin at blue belt level. The premise is that if a student starts fighting before they learn enough techniques & even have the ability to use these techniques effectively, they will have a much reduced arsenal to utilize when fighting.
Therefore we wanted students to build basics & learn sparring through the progression he layed out in 3 step, 2 step, 1 step, then semi-free sparring before letting students free to spar. It is IMHO a great idea & I have had some good results with it. The problem is that it is so hard to implement in a commerical school. Tournaments exist to make money. The more divisions, the more potential to make money. Competing interests. The interest that should win out is the well schooled BB student, who will engage for a lifetime. Then blue belt doesn't seem like a bad starting place.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 09:45 AM

Well, quite apart from the tournament aspect, I think you can never be too inexperienced to start sparring. In my first school students were gently introduced to free sparring- allowed to attack more, attacked at a slower speed and so on. When I am sparring less experienced students, I am always trying to let them learn as much as possible and I think it really works well for them. Of course, you cannot expect a yellow tag or belt to be a good sparrer, but the sooner they start, the better they can get.

All good stuff for gaining confidence, and even if you have a small arsenal I think it is still possible to be very effective in sparring. Indeed, much of the improvements I made later on in my sparring were to cut down the number of techniques I used frequently and instead to focus on a few techniques that I could use in a diverse number of ways.

However, I can see your argument as well. As always it depends on how the instructor approaches such things and how he is able to make it both rewarding and safe for his students. It is another demonstration of why I am against more strict standardisation in the ITF- one instructor can make sparring at yellow tag work, another may not want to.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 10:16 AM

Supermor, ITFUNITY,



hummmmm,

You both have made good points, personally I don"t know how I feel regarding this madder. My first tourney was many years ago when I was yellow belt. Prior to that I had only sparred twice in the dojo in a controlled environment. Had never even witnessed a TKD competition and had absolutely know idea what to expect. Was scarred to death at the competition and ended up getting hurt, fought through it and took second out or three competitors, severe shoulder injury, couldn't"t even lift my arm to steering wheel to drive to emergency room after wards, had to used other arm and still dealing with this injury today.
Now, this was unfortunate but I can also say that I never made the same mistake that I did that day happen again and sense I have never been that scarred as I was that day either, maybe was not for not. Hummmmmmmmm, was it worth it? I don"t know.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 10:35 AM

Quote:

Hummmmmmmmm, was it worth it? I don"t know.




I would say that I would never let anyone enter a competition after sparring in class just twice. Nor would I let anyone enter a competition that they were not fully aware of the rules and proceedures for in advance. After all, competitions are frightening enough places without the added stress of not knowing how to navigate the organisation of the tournament.

For what it's worth, I first competed when I was a blue tag(5th kup). I competed a few times after that and always did well(I think I won every competition but one) but I did not enjoy the experience of competing particularly. Particularly when you are a black belt, you are often expected to officiate for much of the day, and may not get to compete until the very end of the day, when you're tired and don't have the adrenaline to fight well. I prefer to be a corner judge most of the time, to assess how people spar, and maybe even pick up some tips from the better ones.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 11:13 AM

Supermor:



I understand what you are saying but I still have mixed feelings because of the lessons learned from that experience and prior to the competition I was versed on the rules but that's about it.

Some of the more valuable lessons and experiences from that day were,

conquered fear of unknown

stress management


Pain management

victory through pain, meaning, (I survived, second is not victory.)

Gained Tactical knowledge from mistakes

Learned to focus and block out distractions (crowd)


sense of accomplishment


There are other lessons but my thoughts are scattered at the moment.


Oh, gave family and friends something to laugh about, everyone seems to get a kick out of it when I get injured, whats that about?

Maybe it is because I refuse any of them to come watch, I hate an audience even today after years of TKD.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 01:15 PM

Quote:

Well, quite apart from the tournament aspect, I think you can never be too inexperienced to start sparring. In my first school students were gently introduced to free sparring- allowed to attack more, attacked at a slower speed and so on. When I am sparring less experienced students, I am always trying to let them learn as much as possible and I think it really works well for them. Of course, you cannot expect a yellow tag or belt to be a good sparrer, but the sooner they start, the better they can get.




This is our philosophy as well. At white belt sparring is introduced with no contact, to light contact, to full contact. This then allows them to work with everybody no matter what level in class and where they can develop the necessary skills to become better as they progress. Martial arts is about contact and Taekwondo is no different. I see no reason for holding this back until they've invested years into the program as I believe they would be at a disadvantage then. At the white belt level they will have basic skills and they can grow on these while introducing more techniques into their training. But the nice thing is they will already know what being kicked/punched hard is and won't have that to overcome that as I find that is a large variable.

Now with that said, as far as competing this should be left up to the Instructor as some lower belt levels the practitioner is more then ready while others take some time to develop this. Based on their readiness then they should be allowed to compete.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 01:22 PM

Von, after reading your post I can see myself in that as well. I went to early with next to nothing for experience. I started after my two friends and had no sparring ability. The Instructor even told me so and I was in agreement with him however my two friends talked me into going and pushed for it and it blackened sparring for me. I also got injured getting a bone bruise on my hand from stopping a kick when I blocked and punched. I was scared but finished it off drained taking 3rd of 5 people. I was the smallest ranking belt at white and sparring people at yellow and yellow/green levels.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 01:28 PM

Supremor, I also do not enjoy the competition sparring of TKD and I definitely understand having to wait till the end to compete and having been there all day already; always disliked that as well. I don't compete in TKD and probably will never again. I do compete in grappling tournaments which still gives me butterflies in the beginning but once started it gets easier.

Competing I think is good and you should do it if you like it. I've always found that competing takes your level higher as you then get a better understanding of what you are doing and what you need to work on. One competition is better then 10+ classes in my opinion.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 02:12 PM


dereck

quote
Competing I think is good and you should do it if you like it. I've always found that competing takes your level higher as you then get a better understanding of what you are doing and what you need to work on. One competition is better then 10+ classes in my opinion.

End quote



Yes this is the attitude of my instructor too. At first I did not see the value but as time when by I did. For me personally, the biggest benefit is learning to manage the stress of it all and those dreaded butterflies/adrenalin. Next comes the personal evaluation aspect as how you stack up against others, and work on what did not go as you would have liked. You learn to modify and disregard many things very quickly and also gain perspective on what competition tools would not be efficient for real application SD or simply modify those techniques so they will work when needed.

You are also right as to the instructors determining as to if a student is ready. I may have been a yellow belt with only two sparring sessions but I was not a child or new to fighting, military back ground and such.

All that aside I am still torn as to weather I should have been put in there as soon as I was.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 02:14 PM

Quote:

Well, quite apart from the tournament aspect, I think you can never be too inexperienced to start sparring. In my first school students were gently introduced to free sparring- allowed to attack more, attacked at a slower speed and so on.




Everyone seems to miss the point. We learn to fight from day 1, with how to make a fist, punch, block, stand etc. Sparring is introduced gradually, through steps, called 3 step, 2 step, 1 step & semi-free.

Quote:

However, I can see your argument as well. As always it depends on how the instructor approaches such things and how he is able to make it both rewarding and safe for his students. It is another demonstration of why I am against more strict standardisation in the ITF- one instructor can make sparring at yellow tag work, another may not want to.



Well again this is not my way, but the founder's way. Please keep in mind that he & I am trying to develop BB that will train over a lifetime in aspects NOT limited to fighting, tournaments or even SD. Is it really too much to ask or demand from a student to forge their body, learn basics & develop techniques that they can later use in their arsenal?

How many learn other subjects by an almost complete immersion?
Drive a car:
study a book, learn the rules of the road, test your eyes etc, practice slowly at 1st, step it up, then put it all together. Sounds like a good plan.......
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 02:20 PM

Quote:

dojo
Hummmmmmmmm, was it worth it? I don"t know.





Only you can decide if it is or was worth it. I would say that tournaments exist to make money for the host. The more divisions, the more money. I am only talking about the long term development of the BB student, whom is preceived to be someone who will train over their lifetime. Waiting about a year for 4th gup blue belt to put it all together, in the big picture, doesn't seem like a bad thing. But again, our system is designed to emphasize more than the physical & certainly more than tournament contests.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 02:23 PM

Quote:

Nor would I let anyone enter a competition that they were not fully aware of the rules and proceedures for in advance.




Adding in that they have a more fuller range of techniques to avail themselves of AND be able to use them effectively, is probably not a bad thing either. Remember, it is much ahrder to teach an old dog new tricks or break bad habits.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 02:28 PM

Quote:

At white belt sparring is introduced with no contact, to light contact, to full contact. This then allows them to work with everybody no matter what level in class and where they can develop the necessary skills to become better as they progress. Martial arts is about contact and Taekwondo is no different. I see no reason for holding this back until they've invested years into the program as I believe they would be at a disadvantage then. At the white belt level they will have basic skills and they can grow on these while introducing more techniques into their training. But the nice thing is they will already know what being kicked/punched hard is and won't have that to overcome that as I find that is a large variable.




I see your point & we are not really that far apart. We of course have sparring & fighting, as it comes on day 1. However, like you, we emphasize other things 1st & introduce more fighting, as you again do, slowly. We call it forging, developing basics & we spar in steps, 3 step, 2 step, 1 step & semi-free. These steps are done with live opponents. They also practice getting hit early on as well, with forging.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 02:33 PM

Quote:

Competing I think is good and you should do it if you like it. I've always found that competing takes your level higher as you then get a better understanding of what you are doing and what you need to work on. One competition is better then 10+ classes in my opinion.




Yes competition can & is a great experience, even if things don't go your way.

I tend to want to produce a student 1st, so when they compete at BB level, they can hold their own. Everything else IMHO (color belts) is just prep time. I decide to prep my students in a way that looks towards the never ending end result.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 02:57 PM


quote
I would say that tournaments exist to make money for the host.


end quote




You know I can not or will not argue that this is the case 80% of the time.






However, I believe that this is not the case regarding my instructor. He has said many times that one must learn to manage those aspects of fighting that hinder ones performance. All the tools and fighting knowledge mean nothing if one is paralyzed or handicapped by fear or adrenaline over load, (jitters)

One can be great in the comfort of their own training and the ones they train with, but every new person you face that is trying to take your head off offers new perspective to your weaknesses and your strengths. There are many great benefits to competition.

P.S. I hate to compete too but love the benefits it offers.

Will admit that even today I find it is nerve racking even after my fair share of competitions. The fear factor never go"s away but I love the fact that I know I can manage the stress of this.

This serves to boost confidence that if ever I need to call upon my training it should be easier because I have used some of it under extreme stress already.

What is really weird is that I find competition to be more stressful than actual SD because actual SD you really do not have time to think much, strange isn"t it.


So sorry UNITY I think I deleted your post with the quote that I lead with.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 03:27 PM

Please don't get me wrong. I am not anti-tournament! In fact, i am a big fan of the many benefits that they can have for those who particiapte. At our chool we greatly encourage it. I just think that the tournament has interests that compete & at times, may be counter productive in the OVERALL development of a lifetime BB holder.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 03:34 PM

Quote:


Competing I think is good and you should do it if you like it. I've always found that competing takes your level higher as you then get a better understanding of what you are doing and what you need to work on. One competition is better then 10+ classes in my opinion.




For sure, and I'm certainly not about to stop competing, just do it a bit less often. I think that once you've competed a few times and you have a decent level of proficiency in a martial art, you are able to use your sparring in class much more wisely, so competition becomes more a way of assessing where you are in the grand scheme of things in terms of the narrow aspect of sparring.

Quote:

I do compete in grappling tournaments




Yes, because grappling tournaments far better represent the broader range of the martial art. Almost all the techniques you use in class are allowed in competition, granted some submissions are sometimes disallowed. I also like competing in judo tournaments, although it's a shame that my speciality, groundwork and particularly strangles, don't get a very fair hearing in Judo tournaments. Of course, as I mentioned above, my proficiency in judo is nowhere near my proficiency in TKD, which may be part of the attraction for competing.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 04:23 PM

ITFUNITY

Understand and can see an argument that can be made for for your philosophy.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 06:14 PM

Quote:

Waiting about a year for 4th gup blue belt to put it all together, in the big picture, doesn't seem like a bad thing. But again, our system is designed to emphasize more than the physical & certainly more than tournament contests.




Honestly, after a year nobody should be a blue belt yet; two years perhaps.

Quote:

How many learn other subjects by an almost complete immersion?
Drive a car:
study a book, learn the rules of the road, test your eyes etc, practice slowly at 1st, step it up, then put it all together. Sounds like a good plan..




Drive a car ... both feet in and learned and how I am teaching my daughter. She obviously had to take the Learners exam which was a simple multiple choice that most can do without even looking at the book however the skills she gets will be immediate from doing it. This is also how I learned to drive fork lifts and such; get on and learn. That is how I learned to drive a standard on my first vehicle; got and in drove home and though I stalled over and over I learned on my own.

This is just me because I am a hands on person and so is my daughter. I can't learn from books and stuff and always had that difficulty growing. I have to learn by doing things and if I fail then I have to learn from this. And as you know with discussion of our training, application is more important to me then history and stuff ... again because I'm hands on.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 06:18 PM

To be honest, there are probably valid reasons for doing it either way. Some people learn by gradually developing their skills while others learn by putting both feet in immediately. Each individual will have to decide for themselves what they like better or just go with the flow of their school. I could have used more time before jumping in however my Instructor even expressed this but I didn't listen and listened to friends; doh! But I would not be one to wait till blue belt, just to a point where I felt comfortable and had some basics.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 09:01 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Waiting about a year for 4th gup blue belt to put it all together, in the big picture, doesn't seem like a bad thing. But again, our system is designed to emphasize more than the physical & certainly more than tournament contests.



Honestly, after a year nobody should be a blue belt yet; two years perhaps.




With all due respect Sir, I am not comparing my apples to your oranges. Look above. I am talking about our system, not yours. I also said about a year. It would be exactly 15 months, provided the student had all their training time in & progressed according to the book, which few do. In fact, as you may already be aware, few if any pass our tests outright. So given that, in our system, since we look to develop people for a lifetime of learning a complete MA, having them work on getting ready to free spar for about a year, doesn't seem to be much to ask, given the big picture, our picture.

Quote:

Drive a car ... both feet in and learned and how I am teaching my daughter.




Well not really, but I would defer to you as it is your daughter & you are the one teaching. However I would guess that you have had numerous talks about driving, the responsiblity of driving & the safety. You probably taught her about the car, what it all means, weighs, how it can do much damage. You probably took time to teach her to adjust the seat, mirrors, steering wheel etc. I would imagine you pointed out emergency brake, brake, signals, wipers, defrost etc. You probably showed her the horn, gears etc. I woudl think you had her start the car. I hope you would have walked around the outside to point out her blind spots & had her do the same. When you 1st drove away, I wouldn't think you got on a super major hiway at a peak traffic time, etc.
So I don't think you simply tossed her the keys & said lets roll!
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/17/08 09:06 PM

Quote:

To be honest, there are probably valid reasons for doing it either way. Some people learn by gradually developing their skills while others learn by putting both feet in immediately.




Yes, but I am not talking about developing skills as they go along. That I think goes without saying. What i am talking about is learning MORE techniques besides the basic punch, front, side, turning & back kick combos, that most fighters rely on. I am saying teach more teach more techniques, then let them put it together & develop it against opponents, while figuring out what suits them best. I just want to give them more tools to fight with, simple concept, that I think makes some sense.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/18/08 10:10 AM

I'm being to think more and more ITF that we will never see the same picture so I'm not even going to bother debating on this any more then saying please continue to teach as you see fit but understand yours is not the only way and is not necessarily the best way.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/18/08 11:54 AM

Well I am very sorry that unfortunately you seem to think that I am advocating any type of superiority of my way or any way. In fact what I am saying that in our system, we start to learn how to fight from day 1. However, it comes in steps. I merely attempt to explain the steps in the context of our system. Given that & the fact that we have some 3,200+ fundamental movements, it makes sense from our standpoint that one learns more of these techniques, so they are better able to use them when the time comes.
However, you seem to critique this method, by going out of the context that it is set up within, to apparently try to prove or disprove some other point, thereby ignoring the comments & context they have been made in.
Posted by: RazorFoot

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/19/08 11:39 AM

Apparrently we agree to disagree gentleman? I have enjoyed all aspects of this debate and it has remarkably stayed on track most of the time. If we continue to focus on the discussion and not on each other, I am sure we can continue the debate further.
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/19/08 02:00 PM

This has got to be the longest thread. 64 pages and still going.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/19/08 02:45 PM

Quote:

Please don't get me wrong. I am not anti-tournament! In fact, i am a big fan of the many benefits that they can have for those who particiapte. At our chool we greatly encourage it. I just think that the tournament has interests that compete & at times, may be counter productive in the OVERALL development of a lifetime BB holder.





Please elaborate on why your definition of life time BB is any different than others that participate in TKD competition. I know that we train TKD as a life style as do every other TKD student I have talked to, I am somewhat confused by this remark as to what makes you/your organization different than other life time BB"s
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/19/08 10:38 PM

Certainly, it would be my pleasure to clarify. First, I teach students with the basic assumption that they will take the MA of TKD over a lifetime. I know that very few do. However, the thrust of my teaching & naturally, what I emphasize takes this basic concept into consideration. With that in mind, the context I was using is that since I look at all my students as someone who will train over their lifetime, I caution them to not rush things. I implore them to gain techniques 1st, work them into sparring via the step sparring progession in our syllabus, followed by semi-free sparring, in hopes that if they are patient, they will develop more techniques & then use them more fully & freely in free sparring, once they get to the level. I try to avoid having students fight too soon, when all they have are the basic, punch, front, side, turning & back kicks. Now for us, that time frame is blue belt, around 1 year (15 mos). So given that context, I don't think it is too long to ask a student to pay more attention to things that will make their fighting better, when they are ready to do so.

With respect to the tournament contests, these things exist to make money for the host. Therefore they have categories for white belt all the way up. Given my previous statements, it is easy to see that tournaemtn competition creates competing interests. These interests, wanting to win as a white, yellow or green belt & the rush to prepare for that, can & at times does have some detremental effects on how I wish to move students forward who look to me for guidance.

I hope nothing was seen as I thought my way was superior, better etc. For those of you who have children, I do not think that you are raising 5 year olds or 15 year olds, but rather you are raising them to be productive adults who can stand on the own, for their lifetime. I look at my students much the same way.
I hope that helps clear things up.
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 01:53 AM

I personally don't see tournaments as being money makers. I don't doubt that some can be, don't get me wrong, but there are quite a few legit tournaments out there. Just because they cost money doesn't mean they are some sort of scam; they cost money to run so somebody has to pay. And this goes for any tournaments whether TKD, Karate, BJJ, Judo, etc.

ITF I think your process of teaching is a good way and most certainly can have its benefits. BUT we both can agree it is not the only way or the best way and many times that comes down to the individuals. I would hate to see somebody get held up even at white belt when they show promising attributes to sparring just because of a belt color. Or to have held up my own Instructor who started at white belt to go on to be a top sparrer for his weight class in his area, then Alberta, then Canada and then going to the worlds held in Japan.

As said earlier, I think as individuals we need to learn at our own pace and not be held up by rules set out by others; and why many schools teach different things. We as individuals need to find the right school with the right teaching styles to help us develop in the right way for ourselves. I think I could have benefited with some of your teachings and blended with my own schools; while others will benefit from my school and while others would benefit from yours.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 06:52 AM

Quote:


I personally don't see tournaments as being money makers. I don't doubt that some can be, don't get me wrong, but there are quite a few legit tournaments out there. Just because they cost money doesn't mean they are some sort of scam; they cost money to run so somebody has to pay. And this goes for any tournaments whether TKD, Karate, BJJ, Judo, etc.





I agree. In my experience many tournaments are more concerned with breaking even than with making profit. Also, they are so much work for the organisors, especially if they are already instructors, that it makes little sense as a money making tool.
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 01:31 PM

This may not be the correct thread to post this but I thought this to be a very informative site that covers the forms that most of us train. http://www.natkd.com/tkd_forms.htm

just click on the form you want to see demonstrated.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 01:45 PM

Unfortunately the Chang Hon patterns shown are not at all similar to how an ITF practioner would perform them. There is no sine wave, some of the movements are done in slow motion where they shouldn't be and generally the patterns are just performed differently. Not saying it's wrong, but it is certainly not a chang hon pattern.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 02:04 PM

Quote:

Quote:


I personally don't see tournaments as being money makers. I don't doubt that some can be, don't get me wrong, but there are quite a few legit tournaments out there. Just because they cost money doesn't mean they are some sort of scam; they cost money to run so somebody has to pay. And this goes for any tournaments whether TKD, Karate, BJJ, Judo, etc.



I agree. In my experience many tournaments are more concerned with breaking even than with making profit. Also, they are so much work for the organisors, especially if they are already instructors, that it makes little sense as a money making tool.




I never meant to imply that tournaments were not good or because the motive is money, that they were not worth it or a scam. Rather my point is that tournaments have beginners competing as that increases opportunity to bring in revenue to off set costs & hopefully make a profit. Giving beginners would are not yet schooled enough can have detremental affects on their overall development if you are trying to produce more well rounded students.
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 02:13 PM

Well this could just be semantics, but they are Chang Hon patterns, but just not performed in the way that they evolved into. The evolution was done by the founder to help insure that we had a distinct look from TKD's roots in Japanese Karate. I would venture a guess that more people do them this way then the 2002 final version.
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 02:24 PM

Ah, now I understand a bit better. I can see your point, and honestly I've been one of those judges looking at 50 yellow belts doing dan-gun, and I can say it wasn't a very pleasant experience!

I have to say though, that in the majority of cases I have seen students come back from tournaments really enthused and ready to work that bit harder. I think they are an excellent way of being able to assess your skills compared to others at your same level- particularly for the colour belts, the black belts it's a bit harder- and usually I think students realise that there are other students just as focused on being good martial artists. And hopefully this encourages a student to work harder in order to become the best he can be at every rank.

Quote:

Giving beginners would are not yet schooled enough can have detremental affects on their overall development if you are trying to produce more well rounded students.




This is a good point, and I have seen it happen a couple of times myself. Also, I think sometimes the competition aspect of TKD can become an end in itself, which I think is detrimental. For me, the desire to train TKD should be intrinsic, not derived from the thrill of winning. However, honestly this thrill is a very large motivator, and for some students it can be very helpful. Basically I'm undecided
Posted by: Supremor

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 02:27 PM

Quote:


Well this could just be semantics, but they are Chang Hon patterns, but just not performed in the way that they evolved into. The evolution was done by the founder to help insure that we had a distinct look from TKD's roots in Japanese Karate. I would venture a guess that more people do them this way then the 2002 final version.




nono, you are quite right. I meant to say that the pattern was not typical of an ITF pattern- I can appreciate that some Chang Hon practitioners may do it this way.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 06:01 PM

Why do we always seem to go on about the roots (and often the faults) of TKD being in Karate instead of referring to the evolution of Karate being in TKD?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/20/08 10:19 PM

Hey I never looked at it that way, interesting. However, the title of this thread is TKD losing it's face/popularity. With that in mind, the all important historical development is important to look at & consider. Thus my constant reminding of it, as it has very clearly impacted where we are today. JMHO
Posted by: trevek

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/21/08 05:52 AM

Well I was recalling an earlier post on this thread about the relationship with TKD and MMA and something was said along the lines that TKD training would be so-and-so because Karate was like that and the roots of TKD are in Karate.

It seemed rather stange to think that something which had developed so much would automatically be considered to have kept all the "faults".
Posted by: michaelboik

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/21/08 08:48 AM

Quote:

Well this could just be semantics, but they are Chang Hon patterns, but just not performed in the way that they evolved into. The evolution was done by the founder to help insure that we had a distinct look from TKD's roots in Japanese Karate. I would venture a guess that more people do them this way then the 2002 final version.




You say 2002 is the final version of the patterns. Are you saying that there should be no more updates?
When General Choi said that know he has many General's, did he put the art into their hands? I remember reading that he said he was done with updating TKD and it was up to his senior instructors now. Of course this was in the 90's and we know updates were still being made. But, in any case, has the baton been passed to these seniors and should they keep it as is or look for improvements (updates)?
Posted by: ITFunity

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/21/08 05:49 PM

Mr. Boik:
Update & improvements can & should be welcomed. However in the case of the patterns it was the founder's signature. As such, they should remain as designed by him. JMHO
Posted by: von1

Re: Taekwondo losing it's face/popularity - 03/22/08 09:35 AM

ITFUNITY


Does that mean even if newer and better patterns emerge?

Do you really believe the general would not want to progress just because the old patterns are his signature?

No offence intended but this sounds to be, well, selfish, vain, and egotistical.

Everything is always, and should always, be in a state of evolution to strive for perfection, not to mention that the rest of the world is always in a state of change so things must evolve and adapt or they risk becoming a non entity and parish. Fighting styles and methods are not exempt from this process and need to adapt also.