Are you really training in Taekwondo?

[Miles]

Not to start flames, but rather to play Devil's Advocate, I would suggest that if you do not perform Taeguek poomsae and do full-contact (Olympic style) sparring you are not training in Taekwondo.

If you go to Korea, you will not find people doing the Pyung-ahn, Chang-Hon, or Palgwe poomsae and calling what they are practicing Taekwondo. You will not find anyone wearing the foam safety-equipment on their hands or feet.

So my question is, are you really training in Taekwondo, or are you practicing something else?

Miles

[bignick]

Not to start flames? What did you think would happen when you set such narrow criteria (which I'm assuming you follow) as being taekwondo and everything else as some bastard version?

I think you're a bit off in your assumptions about what is taekwondo. Why do you feel that the doing the Palgwe or Pyong-an forms disqualify something as not being taekwondo...or for that matter what does your style of sparring have to do with it?

Remember, the taeguks are the only the newest set of forms practiced by WTF taekwondo. We are WTF and we practice the palgwe set. Perhaps I could accuse you of not practicing real taekwondo since you don't perform palgwe forms anymore. And perhaps someone else could accuse me of not performing taekwondo because I don't practice the pyong-an series.

And as for sparring, full contact and point sparring both have their benefits. As long as they are practiced with the right attitude either will benefit the practitioner greatly.

As for the Koreans? Why does what some of them practice, because I'm sure you could find ITF practioners in Korea or people that still perform the palgwe poomse, make it the international standard for taekwondo. Korea was the birthplace of what we call "taekwondo" but it owes it's origins to Okinawan and Chinese arts as well.

I don't quite understand what your playing "Devil's Advocate" aims to accomplish. But, I will now step down and let others have their say...

[TigerWoman]

Just because one organization practices one set a forms does not disqualify other forms or just because they practice sparring a certain way make it the best way. Especially since they were introduced later in the history of Tae Kwon Do. I would venture to say there are a lot of schools that do not fit your criteria nor would your school fit their's. Doesn't mean one is better than the other, as Bignick said, they all have their good/bad points. If we are training in Taekwondo or Tae Kwon Do, whether the sport or the art, it's all good, depending on your end goal.

We used to train more into the sport and more students went to Nationals but we still did form, Taekgueks, one-steps, self-defense, breaking etc. The Taegueks compared to the traditional (ITF) forms are alot simpler I have found and easier to teach. So more people stay in Taekwondo to further the art. I have learned the ITF forms and wouldn't mind learning the Palgwe's either. They are after all the older forms with alot more history behind them.

We do non-stop sparring for class practice with full gear even though I have witnessed a ton of injuries with gear on. Maybe that is why they made it. ;) And they continue to make protective gear better. And we do point sparring for tournaments for safety reasons with new cage headgear.
You can try your way with no gear on and see how many students are left at the end of the year if they make that far. However you or schools is Korea want to practice Tae Kwon Do or Taekwondo, or a myriad of others, it is still practiced the way of the individual Master or Grandmaster handed down. No one way is absolutely correct and no one organization is either. TW

[jfarnsworth]

So my question is, are you really training in Taekwondo, or are you practicing something else?
I fail to see what you are trying to say! :idunno:

Are we talking about personal interpretation of the art? Well then, my idea is different than yours. Probably different then the previous 2 posters. It may in fact be different from any other poster on this board. I do not see your point by this thread. I fought in PKC sanctioned tournaments, ustu tournaments, heck; as a matter of fact I climbed in the ring and did some full contact kickboxing. :idunno: And I still came back into the studio for our workout sessions. Are you still saying that I didn't do TKD? :idunno: :idunno: ????????? Our school did ITF forms. Did I still not practice TKD? :idunno: Help me out here then, and tell me what I did? 5yrs. of my life gone :idunno: . Bumber! Maybe I'll call my instructor and ask him tonight what he taught. I've been meaning to call him anyway for christmas. Maybe he and I can chat about the art he taught me.

[shesulsa]

I must say that after seven and one-half years in the Korean martial arts, it is very disheartenind to hear - from various Korean arts - the "my art is the REAL art and if you're doing it any other way, you're doing something else."

Apparently, some folks still think that purity in art is still possible and I say that's horse-puckey.

As soon as an art form or fighting system or combat style or whatever anyone wants to call their mucky-muck is passed on from one to another, it changes - even if ever so slightly.

Perhaps the other taekwondo practitioners on this forum aren't doing YOUR version of TKD, but that doesn't mean it isn't TKD. Arts grow and evolve and change over time. Like it or not, that is the martial arts world and arguing origins on the Korean peninsula is pointless, IMHO, because though not too many want to admit it, when one dynasty overthrew another, historical records were destroyed or changed, new ones created. And we all know how word-of-mouth goes. All one must do is look at some of the prominent Koreans in our arts to see how these things are often handled.

You might feel that you received strong responses to your original post. And you did. I think it's time we stop bickering about whose mucky-muck is the real thing and whose is not. We are all walking a path heading towards a common goal.

It is time for Korean martial artists to eat a piece of humble pie, shake hands, put the past behind them, and step forward to preserve the influence of Korean martial arts in America through common interest and sharing, rather than warring with one another.

Peace.

JKN Georgia Ketchmark

[terryl965]

Not to start flames, but rather to play Devil's Advocate, I would suggest that if you do not perform Taeguek poomsae and do full-contact (Olympic style) sparring you are not training in Taekwondo.

If you go to Korea, you will not find people doing the Pyung-ahn, Chang-Hon, or Palgwe poomsae and calling what they are practicing Taekwondo. You will not find anyone wearing the foam safety-equipment on their hands or feet.

So my question is, are you really training in Taekwondo, or are you practicing something else?

MilesFirst off your talking Olympic style which is Tae Kwon Do but the sport aspect not the same as traditional TKD. So before you make bold statement know all the facts about a Art not just the sport aspect, you insult the Art with this type of saying. The old guys that have been doing it the old way are pure TKD'ers not the sport. Use your search engines and look up Traditional TKD and maybe just maybe you'll understand. :erg:
Terry Lee Stoker

[Scout_379]

Miles, you didn't want a war, but its still going to be very one sided. You're doubting your art. If you feel as if you're not training as..hardcore as you think you should be, why not take it up with you're instructor, or better yet get a group of friends and try it out yourself.

[Zepp]

Miles,

Somehow I think I knew you were going to ask this question sooner or later. I think Shesulsa has already given you the best answer.

But just to play devil's advocate... :D

You are aware that the name Tae Kwon Do (doesn't matter how you spell it in English, since the Korean spelling is still the same) was originally put forth by Son, Duk Sung and Choi, Han Hi, aren't you? Neither of those men have ever been affiliated with the Kukkiwon or WTF, and both had left Korea before the founding of Kukkiwon. Therefore, if you really want to argue about who should use the name Tae Kwon Do/Taekwondo/Tae'guendo, I think the WTF comes in last place.

On a personal note, what they're practicing in Korea these days doesn't concern me very much. I train in the martial art taught by Grandmaster Duk Sung Son, one of the first people to use the name Tae Kwon Do for what he teaches.

Lastly, if you look through this section of the forum, I'm pretty sure you'll find that there is enough common ground amongst all of our training that the name we use is fairly irrelevant.

[MichiganTKD]

The Christian religion is divided into major subdivisions: Catholicism, Protestantism, Greek Orthodox, Anglican etc. Each of those is further divided into denominations. But all have the same roots and the same basic belief system.

Similarly, Tae Kwon Do is divided into subdivisions: ITF, WTF, ATA, WTA etc. Each traces their history back to a certain period in the development of Korean Tae Kwon Do. Each is considered Tae Kwon Do because each was founded by Koreans trained in Tae Kwon Do and using traditional etiquette and practices. The forms are different, but all use accepted Tae Kwon Do technique, just different interpretations. ITF and WTF differ in many aspects, but both are simply variations of Korean Tae Kwon Do. Am I not Tae Kwon Do because I don't do the Chang Hon forms? Perhaps some hard core ITF people might think so, but I practice a version founded by Koreans, headquartered in Korea, and endorsed by the Korean government. Sounds like Tae Kwon Do to me.

[Marginal]

Not to start flames, but rather to play Devil's Advocate, I would suggest that if you do not perform Taeguek poomsae and do full-contact (Olympic style) sparring you are not training in Taekwondo.

That's like trying to say "If you don't practice Shotokan, you don't practice real karate." I'm sure someone beleives it...

[ajs1976]

I think Miles point was missed, so i'm going to talk about ice cream.

Let's say that when ice cream was invented, the original flavor was vanilla. then some time later, the ingredients were changed and the Strawberry flavor was invented. Then someone invented chocolate. There are three different flavors but in the end they are all still ice cream.

Someone else came up with something called vanilla frozen yogurt. It is very similiar to vanilla ice cream, but is a different product.

I was recently introduced to chocolate ice cream. I really like it and so far it is the only one i have tried and it is my favorite. I have learned there are other flavors of ice cream. I am interested in sampling these other flavors. Maybe overtime, I will decide the strawberry is my favorite flavor. Or maybe, I will like chocolate/vanilla twist or even Neopolian (the kind that has all three flavors). I have even heard that you can make your ice cream 'better' by adding either things to it like chocolated chips, peanuts, and butter scotch syrup.

Eventually, I will find the flavor or combination that is the 'best' for 'me'. They way the people in this community can help is instead of trying to make your favorite flavor my favorite flavor by cramming it down my throat, you can discuss the difference of the flavors or find ways to help others sample your flavor.

[terryl965]

Please everybody that would say Olympic is TKD is the only TKD does not know there backside from there Front. Nothing wrong with Olympic TKD we train prospect everyday in it but you have to relize the other aspect as well. I for one do both ITF, WTF and traditional style of TKD. Does evrybody I know like it NO but thats there choice, I train my wife and three boy.s in all aspect of TKD and then we train people in just the sport of TKD. Please read history about the Art and then make comments that can be backed up with doc.Have a Wonderful Holiday.
Terry L Stoker
Twin Dragons MAS
Arlington, TX. 76010

[TigerWoman]

Okay we have mostly all made our viewpoints known, but Miles, I don't think you have. You just posed the "devil's advocate" viewpoint not necessarily yours, I believe. So what is your viewpoint and the point to your original post? TW

[Miles]

Okay we have mostly all made our viewpoints known, but Miles, I don't think you have. You just posed the "devil's advocate" viewpoint not necessarily yours, I believe. So what is your viewpoint and the point to your original post? TW
I am sorry that the question was misconstrued-that is my fault. Thank you TW, perhaps I should have expounded upon my "Devil's Advocate" viewpoint only after providing my personal viewpoint.

Personally, I believe that all martial arts have at their core the ability to develop character. The art is not as important as the artist. Whether you practice a Korean/Japanese/Filipino/Russian/Western or a mixed art, if you are training hard and overcoming your personal limitations, developing into a more positive person, that is the goal.

I have had the privelege to study under ITF and WTF instructors, along with Shotokan Karate, Judo and Jujitsu. Currently, I teach Kukkiwon-styleTaekwondo. I graduated from the Kukkiwon Foreign Instructor Course this year.

Now, to get back to my original question, in Korea and across the world, there is a standardized form of Taekwondo which is continuing to evolve-lets call that Kukkiwon-style. There are globally, likewise, people who study an earlier form (for lack of a more universal description). These earlier forms have also continued to evolve independently. I am making no value judgments as to either "form", if you will.

My question is at what point are evolutionary paths between these "styles/forms" so disparate that they become different arts? (i.e. Judo from Jujitsu, Hapkido from Jujitsu, Taekwondo from Shotokan Karate, etc.) Again, I apologize to anyone offended, that was surely not my goal.

Miles

[Miles]

I fail to see what you are trying to say! :idunno:

Are we talking about personal interpretation of the art? Well then, my idea is different than yours. .....
Thank you Jfarnsworth, you are asking the question better than I did. What is your personal interpretation? At what point is Tang Soo Do really Taekwondo or vice-versa or something else?

Miles

[shesulsa]

My question is at what point are evolutionary paths between these "styles/forms" so disparate that they become different arts? (i.e. Judo from Jujitsu, Hapkido from Jujitsu, Taekwondo from Shotokan Karate, etc.)
Now that's a good question.

Sorry if you felt ganged-up on. I think it's fascinating that so many people feel the same way about KMA and perhaps with discussions happening in other forums about standardization we wonder about the continued industrialization of martial arts. (anyone?)

[Miles]

I think Miles point was missed, so i'm going to talk about ice cream.

Let's say that when ice cream was invented, the original flavor was vanilla. then some time later, the ingredients were changed and the Strawberry flavor was invented. Then someone invented chocolate. There are three different flavors but in the end they are all still ice cream.

Someone else came up with something called vanilla frozen yogurt. It is very similiar to vanilla ice cream, but is a different product.

......(heavily edited by Miles) They way the people in this community can help is instead of trying to make your favorite flavor my favorite flavor by cramming it down my throat, you can discuss the difference of the flavors or find ways to help others sample your flavor.
Exactly. Now, Doc, what about Taekwondo?

Miles

[Miles]

Now that's a good question.

Sorry if you felt ganged-up on. I think it's fascinating that so many people feel the same way about KMA and perhaps with discussions happening in other forums about standardization we wonder about the continued industrialization of martial arts. (anyone?):) Not so much "ganged-up" as misunderstood. But, that was my fault.

Yes, I got the idea from the Hapkido folks who speak about standardization in rank and curriculum all the time. :)

Miles

[jfarnsworth]

What is your personal interpretation?
As stated before I did ITF TKD. I had a variety of instructors in TKD as well. I got to see the favorite aspects of TKD from each of them. A kick is a kick and a punch is a punch. As far as personal opinion goes; are we trying to compare curriculum's from our instructors to their instructors and so on? I know that I was promoted in my style of TKD which was slightly different from another TKD school less than 10 miles away. Are our schools both right; Yes. Were either wrong; No. All of our curriculum's will be different depending upon association, instructor, lineage, groups, fly by nights, backyard dojo's, fighting style's, previous experience, etc. No one style is right or wrong just a different way to do things. :asian:

[Marginal]

My question is at what point are evolutionary paths between these "styles/forms" so disparate that they become different arts? (i.e. Judo from Jujitsu, Hapkido from Jujitsu, Taekwondo from Shotokan Karate, etc.) Again, I apologize to anyone offended, that was surely not my goal.

Miles

Usually such a shift comes into play when the strategic focus of a style shifts. For example, TKD's a empty handed striking art with the core concept that the legs are superior weapons to the hands.

So if you're teaching a version of Taekwon Do that features mainly grappling and/or punching, it's hard to qualify that as TKD anymore. You could try to still call it TKD, but it'd probably confuse more people than anything else.

[Tae Kwon Doughboy]

What they teach at my school works for me, no matter what it's called. I'm in it for my health. Anything else is gravy.

[Miles]

Usually such a shift comes into play when the strategic focus of a style shifts. For example, TKD's a empty handed striking art with the core concept that the legs are superior weapons to the hands.

So if you're teaching a version of Taekwon Do that features mainly grappling and/or punching, it's hard to qualify that as TKD anymore. You could try to still call it TKD, but it'd probably confuse more people than anything else.
Now, I think we are getting somewhere.:) From my albeit limited perspective, Jujitsu contains Judo, but Judo is a separate art unto itself and has become more known as martial sport (much like some view TKD). There was a stategic focus :) shift away from striking (which in Judo it is called atemi-waza and usually taught after blackbelt) and an emphasis on sport though both contain grappling/throwing/jointlocks.

In TKD, for sake of discussion (there may certainly be more), lets say there are 4 separate divergent paths of evolution: TKD-kwan style (i.e. utilizing original hyungs-pyung ahn, bassai, etc.), ITF (pre and post sine-wave), and WTF. Are pre-sine wave ITF and TKD-kwan stle closer in strategic focus (to quote Marginal) than both post-sine ITF and WTF?

Miles

[Miles]

What they teach at my school works for me, no matter what it's called. I'm in it for my health. Anything else is gravy.
Come on TKDoughboy, don't give up so easily! You must exercise your mind too! :)

Miles

[Zepp]

I think "strategic focus" is a good term Marginal. I may steal it in the future. :D


Are pre-sine wave ITF and TKD-kwan style closer in strategic focus (to quote Marginal) than both post-sine ITF and WTF?

I think the answer is yes. In the past, the ITF has put more of an emphasis on continuous sparring (and I know some ITF instructors still do), which is something it would have had in common with most of the older kwan styles.

Something else I'd like to say since it's on topic: This hasn't been brought up in this thread, but it has been said before that the TKD-kwan styles aren't really TKD because the forms practiced don't contain "Korean kicking." To me, this point of view ignores that kicking of all kinds is an integral part of kwan-style training. The skills practiced in forms don't define a style by themselves.

[Marginal]

In TKD, for sake of discussion (there may certainly be more), lets say there are 4 separate divergent paths of evolution: TKD-kwan style (i.e. utilizing original hyungs-pyung ahn, bassai, etc.), ITF (pre and post sine-wave), and WTF. Are pre-sine wave ITF and TKD-kwan stle closer in strategic focus (to quote Marginal) than both post-sine ITF and WTF?


Not a whole lot changes when sine wave's introduced in terms of the focus IMO. It's still an empty handed striking art that focuses on superiority of the leg over the hand.

Are they truer to what TKD should be, or was? Couldn't say. TKD, is more or less an umbrella term as I see it. There's room for minor changes in focus without it becoming another animal entirely. You might like a Manx better than a Maine coon, but they're still both cats.

[Adept]

As Bruce Lee said about JKD (which is a strangely similar scenario):

"It's just a name. Please dont fuss over it"

As far as I'm concerned, if the training I'm recieving is satisfying, then I dont care what it is called. And I dont care what other people call their styles, either.

Thats why I list myself as MMA, not TKD, even though my primary style was TKD, or at least heavily influenced by it.

[TigerWoman]

My question is at what point are evolutionary paths between these "styles/forms" so disparate that they become different arts? (i.e. Judo from Jujitsu, Hapkido from Jujitsu, Taekwondo from Shotokan Karate, etc.) Again, I apologize to anyone offended, that was surely not my goal.

Those mentioned are already separate arts. You separated Taekwondo into separate segments of style. Kwan style, ITF-pre-sine, ITF-post-sine, (is there a ITF present-sine?), and WTF. Even with in each of those are different styles-Kwan, Chung Do, etc.. WTF, I have found is varied too. Sure they follow Kukkiwon guidelines but just looking at requirements, every master teaches differently and has different focus-sport or traditional or both like in our school. Just like any college, they are not all the same and the same titled courses in one college will get you a different education than another but basically the same.

So this is the bottom line, as long as whatever Taekwondo you teach, if some kind of standard results, similar black belts, it is Taekwondo. I would like to know what that standard is too. Why are some masters are so easy and some so hard. Why are some breaking standards eased for those with small hands and not others for bad knees? Why do some have to do two forms for BB test but others ten? Or do no sparring for testing? If you are a sport TKD school, do you not require traditional standards as well -poomse, one-steps etc.? It all comes down to the master/owner of the dojang. Lineage/teach what you know and know what works and then it becomes individualized. The question is-- is it really becoming divergent or becoming a melting pot? TW

[terryl965]

TW some Master as you put it ephisis on the conditioning aspect of TKD along with the self defense, one steps, and sparring, along side Poomse. On the other hand it's more about stategic fighting I.E. Olympic style which is the new thing right now and has been since the mid 80's, these types of school really do not focus on the above mention as much, kinda like a breeze in the night. Alot of instructor of the sport really emphisis on breaking because they don't teach the others, to me a break means nothing, in no way does it prove your abilities of TKD it's a show and tell for school and converstation. Breaking is a show stopper but with all the way you can doctor a break is a break a break! Just my soap box I'll get off it now thanks Terry.

[Miles]

Those mentioned are already separate arts. You separated Taekwondo into separate segments of style. Kwan style, ITF-pre-sine, ITF-post-sine, (is there a ITF present-sine?), and WTF.

(heavy editing by Miles) The question is-- is it really becoming divergent or becoming a melting pot? TW
Yes, those mentioned are separate, but one sprang/evolved from the other. To illustrate what I was originally thinking, if I add Western Boxing to any of the separate styles of TKD, I think I still have TKD. If I add Brazilian Capoeria however, don't I have something different?

The separations within TKD are my own (which may or may not be exclusive) and as you noted (in a portion of your post I edited :( there are differences within each of my separations. As such the separations are artificial.

To answer your question, I think that TKD is becoming more divergent (which is why I asked the question). Is this good or bad or neither?

Miles

[Miles]

As Bruce Lee said about JKD (which is a strangely similar scenario):

"It's just a name. Please dont fuss over it"

As far as I'm concerned, if the training I'm recieving is satisfying, then I dont care what it is called. And I dont care what other people call their styles, either.

Thats why I list myself as MMA, not TKD, even though my primary style was TKD, or at least heavily influenced by it.
Yes, this discussion is academic as each individual has the ability (consciously or subconsciously) to "adopt what is useful."(to counter your BL quote :) In that sense each of us has their own style.

Miles

[Miles]

Something else I'd like to say since it's on topic: This hasn't been brought up in this thread, but it has been said before that the TKD-kwan styles aren't really TKD because the forms practiced don't contain "Korean kicking." To me, this point of view ignores that kicking of all kinds is an integral part of kwan-style training. The skills practiced in forms don't define a style by themselves.
Agreed-the Korean kicks may not have been in the TKD-Kwan stle forms (which were after all basically Okinawan) but they were present in the sparring and (as you point out) the basic training-was that a sufficient shift in strategic focus to be a different art? I'd say yes.

Miles

[Miles]

.........Alot of instructor of the sport really emphisis on breaking because they don't teach the others, to me a break means nothing, in no way does it prove your abilities of TKD it's a show and tell for school and converstation. Breaking is a show stopper but with all the way you can doctor a break is a break a break! Just my soap box I'll get off it now thanks Terry.
Different topic, but I totally agree with you Terry-I have seen folks breaking wafer-thin boards using all kinds of jumping back-flipping kicks. IMHO, they were demonstrating gymnastics, not TKD. It looked cool, but those kicks couldn't stop a 60lb 7yr old yellow belt (or break a 1in pine board).

Miles

[TigerWoman]

To answer your question, I think that TKD is becoming more divergent (which is why I asked the question). Is this good or bad or neither?


Time will tell. Whether they will be around with a following or not. I don't see anyone strong emerging from my club to carry it on, if that's a sign. What I get from a disappearance of the older black belts is that it is too much work, there is no work ethic or even motivation to go further. So our requirements were dumbed down. If everybody follows this trend though, it will be seen for what it is, ineffective. If it is ineffective, the art will disappear and possibly weed out the bad teachers/dojangs.

Now that the fact that traditional arts are being dissected and changed into taekwonjitsu who knows? Probably depends on the leader of the style if it flys. Then there are MMA people who combine everything. So theoretically we have 200 substyles and combination styles, it seems to me to be heading toward all MMA. I for one, would like to learn more than just Taekwondo has to offer but get stopped. So I would have to look elsewhere, train in another art. How to you keep them separate? It sounds like its going to be a melting pot to me. Good or bad? Probably neither. I truly love Taekwondo, the art, the way it is taught. I would hate to see it changed. But the world is changing and as the demand, whether for pretend martial arts (kids and tournaments), or more for self defense, or competitive fighting, the arts will adapt IMO. TW

[TigerWoman]

Different topic, but I totally agree with you Terry-I have seen folks breaking wafer-thin boards using all kinds of jumping back-flipping kicks. IMHO, they were demonstrating gymnastics, not TKD. It looked cool, but those kicks couldn't stop a 60lb 7yr old yellow belt (or break a 1in pine board).

Miles

I wouldn't categorize all breaking like that. Our dojang has never used demo boards that are 1/2". Up to my test, the breaks were hard, see the breaking threads. Demo is for demo sake. Breaking in tests and tournaments are completely different. TW

[XxTKDPenguinxX]

Okay... here is a thought (and if it was alreadt touched on, please forgive).

Taekwondo. A Korean martial art, we all agree. To say that if we don't do this poome-sae, or what have you, or we do this style, and so on, we are or are not practicing real taekwondo.

I'm obviously one who disagrees with this. I am learning a style that has been handed down though the years. A style that has come frome Korea. The Grand Master has taught countless Korean military personnel for the Korean government before coming to America.

If a technique that I am taught is the same in Korea as it is anywhere else, it is taekwondo. If I am doing a poome-sae that has similar, or exact techniques as the original was created... it is taekwondo.

I study "The way of the hand and foot" THAT is Taekwondo.

[Miles]

I wouldn't categorize all breaking like that. Our dojang has never used demo boards that are 1/2". Up to my test, the breaks were hard, see the breaking threads. Demo is for demo sake. Breaking in tests and tournaments are completely different. TW
TW, I didn't categorize all breaking to be of that ilk (gymnastic kicks on wafer-thin boards).

Breaking should be a test of skill and power. What I was describing was done skillfully but with questionable power and therefore to create the "illusion" of power, wafer boards were used.

Miles

[TCA]

You mentioned Olympic Style TKD (full Contact) as if it were the only full Contact competition in TKD. In the 1970's, with point fighting, I remember that we were allowed full Contact to the body and medium to the head (if under black belt). We had no head gear, chest protectors, or any padding on the bottom of our feet. To me, it hurt more. But that's just me...Have a great day and certainly no disrespect.

[Miles]

You mentioned Olympic Style TKD (full Contact) as if it were the only full Contact competition in TKD. In the 1970's, with point fighting, I remember that we were allowed full Contact to the body and medium to the head (if under black belt). We had no head gear, chest protectors, or any padding on the bottom of our feet. To me, it hurt more. But that's just me...Have a great day and certainly no disrespect.
No apologies needed TCA. I remember when Jhoon Rhee's Saf-T equipment first came out and everyone was wondering would it make the sparring safer or more dangerous. We sparred with just the foot and hand pads-no hogu or head gear and it was contact. I don't know about the point fighting now whether it is with or without contact.

Miles

[Marginal]

*Bump for JM*

[JanneM]

Thanks marginal.
I might be just too lazy to look up to these older posts. :)


I don't know any of the Taeguk forms, and I still have a Kukkiwon certificate.
If you have been certifyed in the 60's I think it is ok. But you still can't say you practise taekwondo today as it is ment to bee practised today. If you got yor certificate some times after the taeguks have been introduced then I think you should ask your teacher the name of the art you are practising. (Now I'm just plain evil...) ;)

As Miles said in the start of this thread. You can't find any schools in Korea that does anything but Kukkiwon and WTF originated tekwondo and nothing else. In my oppinion Kukkiwon guidelines are most efective arguments in this debate. Kukkiwon regures taguks Palgwes are known in Kukkiwon and you can eaven find modern instructionals for palgwes by kukkiwon but they are not in reguirements of promotions.

[Adept]

But you still can't say you practise taekwondo today as it is ment to bee practised today.
Well, this is really the guts of the issue here. Who gets to decide how it is meant to be practiced? And why does that person/organistaion get to decide and no one else does?

More importantly why are we so concerned with the name of the style we study?

[JanneM]

Well, this is really the guts of the issue here. Who gets to decide how it is meant to be practiced? And why does that person/organistaion get to decide and no one else does?

More importantly why are we so concerned with the name of the style we study?
Kukkiwon, WTF and ITF are those who dicedes what is and should be called taekwondo. The reason for that is that those organisation are ONLY authotrities on taekwondo in world.
If you want to practise WTF style taekwondo you should practise like Kukkiwon tells you to and compete as WTF tells.
If you want to practise ITF style taekwondo you should do things in ITF way.
If you want to study any other kind of taekwondo... Well in my oppinion there is no other type of taekwondo.

[Adept]

Kukkiwon, WTF and ITF are those who dicedes what is and should be called taekwondo. The reason for that is that those organisation are ONLY authotrities on taekwondo in world. Says who?


If you want to practise WTF style taekwondo you should practise like Kukkiwon tells you to and compete as WTF tells.
If you want to practise ITF style taekwondo you should do things in ITF way.
If you want to study any other kind of taekwondo... Well in my oppinion there is no other type of taekwondo. So what it all boils down to is opinion then. Well, thats fine. You have your opinion, I have my opinion, and while neither of them match, they are both equally valid.

FROM THE OTHER THREAD


Do you have some art that you practise or do you X-train or do you practise in some sort of lee/Inosanto based academy...? I started training in TKD about eight years ago. The TKD school I attended included instructors from many different styles from Jiujitsu through Karate to Boxing. So TKD is my base art, which I supplement with, well, just about anything that seems to work for me.

[JanneM]

Says who?
Says the main principle that taekwondo was founded on.


So what it all boils down to is opinion then. Well, thats fine. You have your opinion, I have my opinion, and while neither of them match, they are both equally valid.
Maybe so but I have the bacid idea of taekwondo to back me up.


FROM THE OTHER THREAD

I started training in TKD about eight years ago. The TKD school I attended included instructors from many different styles from Jiujitsu through Karate to Boxing. So TKD is my base art, which I supplement with, well, just about anything that seems to work for me.
I'm gladd that it works out for you.
I also practise NHB eaven TKD in my main art.

[Miles]

The intent of this thread (tangled as it had become) was to explore the "evolution" of Taekwondo.

The last few posts seem to be about whether Taekwondo should be standardized? That is a 180 degree different concept. So, to explore folks' thoughts about that, I will start a different thread.

Miles

[JanneM]

The intent of this thread (tangled as it had become) was to explore the "evolution" of Taekwondo.

The last few posts seem to be about whether Taekwondo should be standardized? That is a 180 degree different concept. So, to explore folks' thoughts about that, I will start a different thread.

Miles
I think taekwondo is evolving(is this a word?) martial art and it is ongoing a change as we speak. And specially in competition side we are about to see some major things in future. But I think that it is up to Kukkiwon and WTF to make those changes. (And in ITF side the ITF is the one who makes the canges)

[searcher]

First off your talking Olympic style which is Tae Kwon Do but the sport aspect not the same as traditional TKD. So before you make bold statement know all the facts about a Art not just the sport aspect, you insult the Art with this type of saying. The old guys that have been doing it the old way are pure TKD'ers not the sport. Use your search engines and look up Traditional TKD and maybe just maybe you'll understand. :erg:
Terry Lee Stoker
Says it all!!!!http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif