Great ppoints made by you again exile and I sure do hope TKD stays, even though my family competes we are true TKD'ers in the sese SD and the principle behind them come first.
Thank you as always.
Thank you as always.
2 new TKD forms from the Kukkiwon
- Thread starter newGuy12
- Start date
Terry, it will stay, and again, most definitely, there is nothing wrong with competition, it's an option that many people who are also interested in SD, like you and your family, enjoy and want to pursue in tandem with your combat-oriented training, and it's all good. Preserving the range of options is the name of the game. And thank you, for showing how it's possible, and constructive, to pursue both the budo and the sport side of this art without contradiction. It's a lesson that alas seems to have been lost on the TKD Directorate, but my hope is that it will continue to gain traction in the West....
I'm not sure if it's been up this way or not, by another by-product of the type of unity that the sport aspect of TKD brings is MONEY. We don't even need to be talking McDojang here. But the fact is, sport ANYTHING is more marketable than traditional side of an activity.
Wrestling only had a small niche in the sport world until MMA came along. In fact, look at BJJ & other such things that exploded when the UFC came on the scene. Tons of folks (male & female would buy a Randy Couture t-shirt because of the exposure of the sport on UFC. If you own a gymnastics center to teach kids how to tumble, it's in your best interest to tap into the Olympic sport side of it in some way to make a buck.
The hard thing that the powers-that-be in TKD don't understand is that MOST folks that get into MA don't do it because they idolize Juan Moreno. As we all know, it's a small group of people who want to live out that TKD dream. A backlash is coming that makes the "TKD stinks cuz they fight with their hands down" crowd look our biggest supporters. People used to say that "TKD is as popular in Korea as baseball is in the USA." Well gang, baseball is getting less popular here every day. My biggest fear is that TKD will simply be ignored as that "overhyped sport" that my kid did when he was is in grade school.
We've got it have a better long term goal than the sport.
Wrestling only had a small niche in the sport world until MMA came along. In fact, look at BJJ & other such things that exploded when the UFC came on the scene. Tons of folks (male & female would buy a Randy Couture t-shirt because of the exposure of the sport on UFC. If you own a gymnastics center to teach kids how to tumble, it's in your best interest to tap into the Olympic sport side of it in some way to make a buck.
The hard thing that the powers-that-be in TKD don't understand is that MOST folks that get into MA don't do it because they idolize Juan Moreno. As we all know, it's a small group of people who want to live out that TKD dream. A backlash is coming that makes the "TKD stinks cuz they fight with their hands down" crowd look our biggest supporters. People used to say that "TKD is as popular in Korea as baseball is in the USA." Well gang, baseball is getting less popular here every day. My biggest fear is that TKD will simply be ignored as that "overhyped sport" that my kid did when he was is in grade school.
We've got it have a better long term goal than the sport.
Absolutely, this is going to happen, and the result in the end may actually be healthy for `old school' TKD. I have the feeling that the first point you raisedthe fact that very few TKD participants are actively committed to sport competitionis something the Korean TKD directorate is overlooking, and that they have a very exaggerated idea of their support base. My sense is that that only a very small percentage of TKDers entertain sport ambitions, and that of those who do, the vast majority are kids and maybe some teenagers. As time goes on, the KKW's efforts to define TKD increasingly narrowly, and purge it of its traditional combat content, will meet an increasing resistance of exactly this typein particular, fewer and fewer people on this side of the Pacific will consider the KKW to be relevant. And as that kind of reaction increases, there will be niches open for schools like yours and Terry's which advocate the full content of TKD.
In the end, I strongly suspect that we in N. America will wind up reverting to a school-based institutional model for TKD, much more like karate, with large top-down sports federations and controlling organizations increasingly marginalized and irrelevant. And if that happens, they have only themselves to blame...
It's sad to say that the power-base at the KKW has shifted more toward those with a sport-minded thought process. Yet, GM Uhm, Woon Kyu is still the head of the KKW. He was there when they invented the term "old school Taekwondo." The generation under him are folks like GM Park, Hae Man & GM Lee, Kyu Hyung are also men who have tested TKD in battle & appreciate it as an authentic SD art. Is it the generation after them, or the next gernation where the wheels feel off the wagon?
Yes, I'm ranting. But I want to know who is to blame!!!!:biggun:
I have no love for the KKW but I do have a deep, profound affection for the fighting system of which they are, unfortunately, the stewards. My master was a big believer in the unified Kwan modern TKD style, but he always kept the WTF at arms length. When ever a newer student would ask When do we compete in tournaments? He would reply Oh no, thats not what we do here. Often, after class they would return to the changing room, somewhat disappointed, complaining under their breath of how they are being jipped out of a true MA experience. The constant sighing would soon attract the attention of one of the BBs who would sharply query What do you want; to learn how to fight or how to play a game? The training at my school was hard and geared towards the sole purpose of being able to quickly incapacitate an attacker(s).
That being said, I see nothing wrong with these new forms. The forms contain a multitude of advanced (not uselessly flashy) techniques of the KKW style of TKD and demands the practitioner to execute them on both side. Younger, dedicated BBs should have no problem executing these forms nor should older BBs who have kept in shape. My master was in his late 50s when I last saw him and he could easily perform these poomse, while adding the power thats lacking in the clips. I have used every technique demonstrated during hard sparring sessions and many of them during real altercations, successfully.
Devotees of traditional kata/hyung frequently comment on how their forms reflect the practical SD applications of their style, until they get to the high kicks and extremely deep stances. Then no, those are simply for exercise purposes, increasing flexibility and strengthening the legs. Surely they would cede that a form might have uses outside bunkai/boon hae. Cant they see the value in having a single physically demanding form that catalogues many of your systems more advance movements, even if it was unable to due so in a completely practical manner?
Exile, I can understand how you might feel that these poomse are another step towards TKD the martial sport and a huge departure from tradition but I think you are making the same mistake you have made in the past. You fail to recognize that KKW TKD is completely different from what you practice. Its not just a water down, sports variation of what you do but a wholly distinct fighting system that evolved partly from your style. It resembles your Song Moo Kwan as much as main land Shotokan resembles the CMA from which it evolved. KKW TKD is and amalgamation of various styles and has a lot more uniquely Korean influence than your heavily Japanese inspired system as well as having a good bit of direct CMA influence. Here is a link to a video posted by Mr. VanCise, it is an old clip of Kook Sool Won practitioners. Watch the first form they perform in the court yard. Mr. McLain later commented how its very, very similar to a Chuan-fa form called So Ho Yon. Note the spinning kick, the jumping kick and the jump-spinning kick. You can also see a very CMA long fist looking movement in the first clip that Newguy posted. It is first done at 00:44 and later is repeated around 1:25. So to say that its movements arent traditional may not be entirely accurate, the yare just not traditionally Japanese looking.
That being said, I see nothing wrong with these new forms. The forms contain a multitude of advanced (not uselessly flashy) techniques of the KKW style of TKD and demands the practitioner to execute them on both side. Younger, dedicated BBs should have no problem executing these forms nor should older BBs who have kept in shape. My master was in his late 50s when I last saw him and he could easily perform these poomse, while adding the power thats lacking in the clips. I have used every technique demonstrated during hard sparring sessions and many of them during real altercations, successfully.
Devotees of traditional kata/hyung frequently comment on how their forms reflect the practical SD applications of their style, until they get to the high kicks and extremely deep stances. Then no, those are simply for exercise purposes, increasing flexibility and strengthening the legs. Surely they would cede that a form might have uses outside bunkai/boon hae. Cant they see the value in having a single physically demanding form that catalogues many of your systems more advance movements, even if it was unable to due so in a completely practical manner?
Exile, I can understand how you might feel that these poomse are another step towards TKD the martial sport and a huge departure from tradition but I think you are making the same mistake you have made in the past. You fail to recognize that KKW TKD is completely different from what you practice. Its not just a water down, sports variation of what you do but a wholly distinct fighting system that evolved partly from your style. It resembles your Song Moo Kwan as much as main land Shotokan resembles the CMA from which it evolved. KKW TKD is and amalgamation of various styles and has a lot more uniquely Korean influence than your heavily Japanese inspired system as well as having a good bit of direct CMA influence. Here is a link to a video posted by Mr. VanCise, it is an old clip of Kook Sool Won practitioners. Watch the first form they perform in the court yard. Mr. McLain later commented how its very, very similar to a Chuan-fa form called So Ho Yon. Note the spinning kick, the jumping kick and the jump-spinning kick. You can also see a very CMA long fist looking movement in the first clip that Newguy posted. It is first done at 00:44 and later is repeated around 1:25. So to say that its movements arent traditional may not be entirely accurate, the yare just not traditionally Japanese looking.
Laurentkd
Master Black Belt
foot2face, you make some good points, especially early on in your post. I appreciate getting to see a view point that differs from my initial response. I agree, the first form shown is a technically difficult form and those who can perform it is most likely going to be individuals who have good TKD skills and good overall athleticism. A good challange for younger higher level practioners (I like how you mentioned a lack of power seen in these clips as I would agree, and I would go on to say that if/when I learn this form my stances will be deeper as well for a better performance). I am sure this new form would receive the most "oohs" and "aahhhs" from a crowd (martial artists or not) than our current poomsae. And I think you are also right that KKW TKD has become a different style than what many of us practice. Until we get some sort of name change or a way to differentiate amoung them we will continue to have these issues though.
By the way, does anyone know anything about these forms except for the fact that they are posted on youtube? Do we know for a fact that these are going to be the forms added, or maybe these are just two of the options they are looking at before making a final decision. I see the mooto symbol in the corner but could not find anything on the mooto news site. Anyone understand the Korean being spoken at the end of the second clip newguy posted? I would really like to learn more about what we are looking at.
By the way, does anyone know anything about these forms except for the fact that they are posted on youtube? Do we know for a fact that these are going to be the forms added, or maybe these are just two of the options they are looking at before making a final decision. I see the mooto symbol in the corner but could not find anything on the mooto news site. Anyone understand the Korean being spoken at the end of the second clip newguy posted? I would really like to learn more about what we are looking at.
I'm completely with your teachers here, f2f.
It's not a question of being able to perform these poomse. It's more a question of, what is the combat logic that the poomse themselves are expressing? The core idea of kata, poomse or whatever is that your MA teaches you certain technical elements—irreducible basics, like a knifehand strike or a Z-lock—but those in themselves don't tell you how to conduct yourself in a real street encounter, any more than a boxer's hook, jab, and uppercut, as separate elements, tell you how to go about winning a boxing match. The older Kwan forms incorporated what I'm calling the combat logic of the earlier Japanese and Okinawan empty-hand systems: they stitched together techniques into a pattern of application, guided by the particular strategic `wisdom' of the system. So, for example, the principle that you close the distance to get on the outside of the attack where possible and use the attacker's extension of his attacking limb as a way to trap, incapacitate, and ultimately force him into a lowered body position which you can then attack without risk to yourself, is realized in many different ways in Shotokan kata, but it's always the same general principles, manifested in dozens of different ways according to the various kata that this style comprises. And the older Kwan approach to combat mirrorred the Shotokan and Shudokan training of virtually all the original Kwan founders. But what the Kwan founders took over in their forms—their combat blueprints—wasn't a set of individual, isolated techs, but actual scripts for combat, each hyung corresponding to five or six such scripts (just like the kata on which the hyungs were technically based—in some cases literally, like the Taikyuko series, translated whole into TKD as the kichos). Sure, when I look at these hyungs, especially the first one, I see many of these techs; what I don't see is a combat rationale for the way they're organized. I mean, that series of spinning kicks? The move where you have a low, middle and high kick off the same chamber? That's an expression of technical virtuosity, period... and it was you yourself who pointed out that this was the basis of this particular hyung, no? I agree with you: the idea was to showcase balance and flexibility assets that are central to the flash-kick ethic of current Olympic practice... but for defense at night in a dark parking garage???
But this comes back to what I was saying earlier; it looks like we simply disagree on the uses of forms. I don't train the kicks in the hyungs and kata I do as high kicks, precisely because the most practical application of those kicks—delivered in physical situations where the bunkai indicate you have control over your attacker's movement—are to lower targets: terminal damage to the side of the attacker's knee joint, knee strikes to his abdomen (with a hard strike to the exposed back of his neck the logical finale) and so on. I train high kicks, to the extent that my physical limits allow, via a set of exercises I've described in other threads, involving increasing stress to the hip flexors, prolonged full extension kicks performed slowly, and maintained for up to a minute or more, using leg weights to increase overload, etc. Forms were not put together to be calisthenic drills, or dedicated skill exercises of the sort that Loren Christensen presents in abundance in his Solo Training books; they were manuals of combat technique, and the assumption, back in the day, was that you would do whatever you had to do to develop the physical skills necessary to implement the instructions in those manuals. Lauren's post above, that I cited in color-coded form, makes this point very nicely.
Think of a boxer's shadow-boxing or partner training routine, and his rope-skipping sessions. You don't do mobility/cardio-capacity exercises like rope-skipping as part of your shadow-boxing training, do you? Rope-skipping and other footwork/endurance exercises are separate, and you pursue them separately to ramp up your physical capabilities to the max so that you can go the distance in the tactical drills that shadow-boxing/partner training consist of. What makes a form physically demanding—be it a strength, balance, or accuracy demand—is something that you are better off approaching through a targeted drill, like the boxer's, or the hip flexor strength exercises various people have been experimenting with.
But here's the crucial thing: if you look at the traditional kata, they aren't particularly physically demanding, because the assumption was, you're going to use the techniques embodied in these kata in a real fight, and you don't want, and don't need, to do anything extreme (and therefore higher-risk) to incapacitate your attacker. I spent a day earlier this year at a seminar with Gm. Pelligrini doing some very, very destructive Combat Hapkido techs, and they imposed very little demand on my strength, balance or flexibility abilities. They were simplicity itself—and they bore a considerable resemblance to techs apparent in traditional karate kata and `old school' TKD hyungs. The demand for extreme balance skills (spectacular high kicks, say) and pinpoint accuracy (because the prime targets are excluded in arena competition) are both manifestations of sport TKD's extremely artificial scoring rules. And that's a big part of my point about these `hyungs': they're embodiments of a point-scoring sport ethic, not a street-combat ethic.
I do? I thought the whole point of my previous posts was that the KKW has taken TKD in a direction radically different from what I call `old school' TKD, the kind I've been taught as a legacy of my SMK lineage and that people like Terry, Lauren and others take to be the `source art' of TKD. The part I've cited in green seems to be exactly what the part I've cited in red attributes to me: a conviction that what I and many other TKD practitioners do is a direct inheritance from our Kwan era ancestry, and what the KKW has been consistently doing over the years is a major deflection of that activity in the direction of an artificial point-scoring kicking game called `Olympic TKD'. I accept the parts in both red and green, but I don't see why you are saying that the part in red represents the failure you attribute to me in green. Haven't I been saying all along that the KKW is promoting something vastly different, unconnected to the SD sources of old-school TKD?
And isn't that what your own instructors were saying, as you cited them at the beginning of your post? You seem to be claiming I fail to see X at the same time that you're saying that that X is part of my own viewpoint...
How so? Where is there any evidence at all that the KKW curriculum aims at promoting a practical SD system, different from traditional TKD or not? I've seen the bunkai proposed on earlier versions of the WTF/KKW web site, and the assumptions involved were ludicrous... the idea that you stand facing 90º away from your attacker, wait till he gets close enough to throw a lunge punch at you, and then respond with a block, wait for his next move, and block again? Or block, and attack, on the assumption that he just stands there, waiting for your attack? Yet those were the bunkai supplied by the KKW website, the same hopeless applications that Iain Abernethy and other bunkai-jutsu practitioners have torn into little pieces in their writings about the `official' applications of the great classic kata such as the Pinan, Naihanchi and Bassai. I have yet to see any evidence at all that the KKW has ever taken the practical SD applications of its forms seriously.
?? Where in the Taegeuks, for example, do you see CMA influence? Or in this pair of new KKW `hyungs', where is the CMA influence? And when you say `uniquely Korean', exactly what are you referring to here? There is now a ton of reseach, a huge amount, documenting the extinction of any prior KMA styles by the end of the late 19th c. as a result of the de facto occupation of Japan, which the Russo-Japanese war only ratified formally, but had been going on a good while previously. What is this `uniquely Korean influence?' Steve Capaner and Stanley Henning have shown that tae kyon, often cited in this connection, was long dead in Korea before the Kwan founders went off to study Shotokan and Shudokan in Japan, and the interview in the current Black Belt with Gm. Kim Soo makes the point clearly: he wanted to study tae kyon and found there wasn't any in the Korea of the 1930s and 1940s. So where is this `uniquely Korean influence coming from? What does it consist of?
I've no doubt that there are elements that resemble CMA moves here, as well as resembling many other MA systems; but that's not what you're claiming. You're saying that the KKW has consciously put together a syncretic style, incorporating some unspecified `uniquely Korean' elements, and some kicks and hand movements similar to certain CMA moves (among others) which reflects a particular theory of combat strategy and tactical application. And that is what I would like to see some documentation for. Where are the technical specifications for these elements? To what degree do we need to `reach' for CMA influence, given that almost every separate hand technique in the video clips reflects—so far as I can see—recognizable elements of the Shotokan ancestor of TKD? And most important, just what is the evidence that we have a well-thought-out set of practical fighting applications in these elaborately sticked-together linked showpiece spinning high kicks, unmediated by any hand techs to force the compliance of the attacker??
I'm sorry, but I just don't see any of that. I have to go with what you say your teachers were telling you, in the first bit I cited above from your post. I think they were dead right.
MikeSlisher
White Belt
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13
- Reaction score
- 0
A LOOONG time ago (I would guess somewhere around '77 to '80 time frame) I was at a fairly large tournament in Michigan and saw two Korean brothers demonstrating hyung/kata/forms. Allegedly one brother was dan ranked in TKD and the other in some Chinese style. The second form on the youtube.video reminds me tremendously of a form demonstrated by the Chinese stylist.
Of course, 25+ years relying on memory doesn't guarantee I'm anywhere close to being right, but when I saw it on the video, I immediately flashed back to that day. Stances and spins are eerily similar.
Of course, 25+ years relying on memory doesn't guarantee I'm anywhere close to being right, but when I saw it on the video, I immediately flashed back to that day. Stances and spins are eerily similar.
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
OK, then answer my this.
I did Taekwondo for two years...a few tournaments. Instructor was young but insistent on Taekowndo as self defense.
Then I switched to doing Hapkido with some Taekwondo, Muy Thai and BJJ thrown in. Did that for about a year and a half.
However, for various reasons, I'm not doing that and I've taken a month off to look around and I'm seriously thinking about going back to Taekwondo.
I'm not a soldier, or a cop, or a bouncer. Self-defense is not a day-to-day part of my life
"However* I refuse to have a hobby called "martial art" with a root in unarmed combat if what I'm learning and training does not take that seriously
I would like to do maybe a tournament or two a year for the competition and the "what do I really got?" aspect, but I also want to know that the techniques and training I'm putting my time into can be taken seriously should need ever arise for me our for my kids also into martial arts.
Question is, is Taekwondo (still) a place for this goal?
I look at the techniques and think "yeah, that could be powerful and effective" but I look at and read (here) of the 'watered down, kids, competition-only' training and I...I wonder if it would be worth the time.
Honestly and sincerely
I did Taekwondo for two years...a few tournaments. Instructor was young but insistent on Taekowndo as self defense.
Then I switched to doing Hapkido with some Taekwondo, Muy Thai and BJJ thrown in. Did that for about a year and a half.
However, for various reasons, I'm not doing that and I've taken a month off to look around and I'm seriously thinking about going back to Taekwondo.
I'm not a soldier, or a cop, or a bouncer. Self-defense is not a day-to-day part of my life
"However* I refuse to have a hobby called "martial art" with a root in unarmed combat if what I'm learning and training does not take that seriously
I would like to do maybe a tournament or two a year for the competition and the "what do I really got?" aspect, but I also want to know that the techniques and training I'm putting my time into can be taken seriously should need ever arise for me our for my kids also into martial arts.
Question is, is Taekwondo (still) a place for this goal?
I look at the techniques and think "yeah, that could be powerful and effective" but I look at and read (here) of the 'watered down, kids, competition-only' training and I...I wonder if it would be worth the time.
Honestly and sincerely
That depends entirely on who you find to instruct you. Like with any style there are a discouragingly large amount of instructors who aren't worth a damn, but there are still competent masters who can fulfil your needs.
Good luck with the search!
Exile, Im afraid that our experiences and perspective on the art is so different that we may have a difficult time immediately understanding one another, but I enjoy the discussion and would like to try so here I go.
Firstly, I know nothing of the new forms other than what I saw in the clips. My post was a first impression analysis and a response to some of the comments that proceeded it. I am not here to defend the new poomse, I cant, I know nothing definitive about them. Since I believe it futile to debate on the behalf of pure conjecture, I will refrain from making comments directly about the new form but will address some of the things you have said.
Exile, your post was full of many great comment that I would like to address, unfortunately Im really pressed for time right now and couldnt get to all of them.
Best Holiday Wishes - F2F
Firstly, I know nothing of the new forms other than what I saw in the clips. My post was a first impression analysis and a response to some of the comments that proceeded it. I am not here to defend the new poomse, I cant, I know nothing definitive about them. Since I believe it futile to debate on the behalf of pure conjecture, I will refrain from making comments directly about the new form but will address some of the things you have said.
I completely agree with you and would add that the forms practiced by post-Kwan era TKDist have a combat logic incorporated within them as well, at least the ones Ive been taught. It may not be entirely Japanese or Okinawan, but there is defiantly a strategic wisdom to them.
Again, I believe you are misunderstanding me. When reading many of your post I get the impression that you believe that your traditional, SD oriented, heavily Japanese inspired SMK TKD was watered down by the KKW/WTF into the sport oriented Olympic-style TKD. The point I tried to make was that your missing a step, between your old school TKD and Olympic-style was the development of a new combative system. A true fighting style that evolved from other systems, including yours, and that it was this different style that was co-opted by the WTF and unfortunately turned into Olympic TKD.
I cant dispute this. The governing body that is the KKW has dropped the ball on many aspects regarding the art. I was taught and trained in applications of the Tae Geuk poomse, much to the surprise of most TKDist. Though few and far between, there are KKW style instructors who teach them, but there is defiantly a lack of boon hae training across the art as a whole. Besides the push towards Olympic sparring I think the problem also lies in how my style makes use of the forms. Ive written before about how I was taught to divide H2H into two parts, SD/anti-smothering/anti-grappling and fighting. Fighting is a spontaneous, aggressive and instinctive response, based on a highly refined skill set and years of rigorous, impromptu force on force training. The SD/anti-smothering/anti-grappling techniques are used to counter specific techniques or tactics that inhibit your ability to fight, giving your attacker the advantage. For example, lets say an inside-striker (think Wing Tsun) gets the drop on you, they square you of and take your center, then proceed to drive you back with a vicious barrage of chain punches. Youre in their kill box and your fighting skills are of little to no use. The kicking, striking, blocking and evasive footwork you normally relay on to dominate you adversary are of little help to you because of the proximity of your attacker, your vulnerable position and the fact that you are being driven backwards. This is the time to use one of the appropriate boon hae from our poomse. It is believed that fighting is the more determinative of the two aspects of H2H. Its simple hit fast, hit hard and dont get hit approach able to resolve the majority of altercations on its own; because of this I believe boon hae training often falls by the wayside. In most schools the poomse are nothing more then a formal exercise.
When I say uniquely Korean Im not referring to the supposed inclusion of ancient Korean MAs but contemporary Korean culture, and how it impacted the MAs studied at the time. Similar to how many MA systems have changed after being brought to the U.S., like how the Brazilians modified jujutsu/judo or just like how the Japanese altered the CMAs they were exposed to. While some Korean styles remain true to their Japanese heritage others have evolved, reflecting the unique experiences of their practitioners. I recall reading an article many years ago regarding General Choi and his system. The author wrote some thing to the effect that Shotokan went into the Korean War and came out TKD. He wasnt merely implying a name change but that experience gained in the war began to change their understanding of MA, altering the system. This is the type of uniquely Korean influences I was referring to.
Exile, your post was full of many great comment that I would like to address, unfortunately Im really pressed for time right now and couldnt get to all of them.
Best Holiday Wishes - F2F
Likewise with yours, f2f!
This is the kind of back-and-forth debate/discussion I really enjoy and that shows why MT is such a great forum; alas, these pesky holidays are making it very difficult for me to get in my usual quota of reading/thinking time on the board... will read your post again carefully as soon as no one is around to find work for me to do
and will try to see how it relates to my own take on things. Meanwhile, you too have a great holiday; afterwards, let the conversation go merrily on!
cheers, exile
Just a quick reality check. Unless you live alone, in an inpenetrable gated compound which you never leave, self defense should be part of your life. Bad people ARE out there, and they go where you go. (A famous bank robber, whose name escapes my memory, is reported to have answered the question "why do you rob banks?" with "That's where the money is!") For most people, most of the time, their self defense should be focused on recognizing and avoiding, when possible, dangerous situations, and then on being prepared appropriately when they must go somewhere dangerous. A handful of solid, reliable, simple self-defense techniques are all they need.
First -- tournaments are, at best, a different pressure test and not a good measure of your ability (or an art's capability) to defend yourself.
With that out of the way, the answer to your question is "it depends." Many martial arts schools, especially (in my experience) tae kwon do schools, have focused on answering a market need for something for kids to do, family sports activities, and day care in a "non-day care" environment. This isn't bad; it isn't evil; it's not even wrong. It's a legitimate BUSINESS decision based on the market and the reality that a business needs to make money to stay in business.
However, there are Tae Kwon Do schools that remain realistic and function oriented. Some do both; the "grown up" classes are in the evenings and the "kiddie" classes run during the day. Others are purely for adults, and don't cater to the family/kid oriented programs. So, if you want a function/adult oriented TKD school, just look around. The more they're focused on tournaments and Olympic TKD events, the less likely the are to be function oriented, as a general guide.
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
Just a quick reality check. Unless you live alone, in an inpenetrable gated compound which you never leave, self defense should be part of your life. Bad people ARE out there, and they go where you go. (A famous bank robber, whose name escapes my memory, is reported to have answered the question "why do you rob banks?" with "That's where the money is!") For most people, most of the time, their self defense should be focused on recognizing and avoiding, when possible, dangerous situations, and then on being prepared appropriately when they must go somewhere dangerous. A handful of solid, reliable, simple self-defense techniques are all they need.
Oh, yes, I know what you're saying. I take the self-defense aspects of Taekwondo seriously, and it's importance in my life and my families. Just that it needs to be balanced. I was spending up to 20 hours a week in class at one point and that's an awful lot of time to spend on something you hope will never happen. If you have a hobby like "Taekwondo", I think you are already taking self-defense seriously or you wouldn't be there ( I would hop ) and do need to take that aspect seriously
First -- tournaments are, at best, a different pressure test and not a good measure of your ability (or an art's capability) to defend yourself
Oh, yeah, by 'what I got'.. partially it's "How am I doing compared to my peers?" as a competitive thing but mostly I approach it as a way to test my own reactions, speed, adrenaline, stress, against a willed opponent who acts in ways I can't predict and who is acting against me. Not a street fight, not a realistic self-defense situation, but just another measuring stick of where I am in certain areas of my training
Oh, yes, I know what you're saying. I take the self-defense aspects of Taekwondo seriously, and it's importance in my life and my families. Just that it needs to be balanced. I was spending up to 20 hours a week in class at one point and that's an awful lot of time to spend on something you hope will never happen. If you have a hobby like "Taekwondo", I think you are already taking self-defense seriously or you wouldn't be there ( I would hop ) and do need to take that aspect seriously
First -- tournaments are, at best, a different pressure test and not a good measure of your ability (or an art's capability) to defend yourself
Oh, yeah, by 'what I got'.. partially it's "How am I doing compared to my peers?" as a competitive thing but mostly I approach it as a way to test my own reactions, speed, adrenaline, stress, against a willed opponent who acts in ways I can't predict and who is acting against me. Not a street fight, not a realistic self-defense situation, but just another measuring stick of where I am in certain areas of my training
TKDmel
Blue Belt
To me they look flashy and "modern". Tae kwon do is not a modern art form. These forms would do well at open karate tourneys, but does not give us the traditional lower stances that are all part of training. I tell my students that the lower the stance the more we train our muscles and discipline ourselves to perform things to develop our bodies and mind. While the numerous kicks look good, they are just too flashy for me. Give me "old school" Tae kwon do!
Laurentkd
Master Black Belt
I am most interested in this part of your post (although I enjoyed all of it). Can you tell me more about your idea that "WTF style" (for lack of a better term) is a fighting style evolved from other systems? What systems are you referring to? How and when did this evolution take place? I would really like to hear your thoughts on this so I can understand your opinion as it seems to be a new idea to me or at least comes from a different angle. Of course, with the holidays I know I may have to wait...
e ship yuk
Yellow Belt
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2007
- Messages
- 52
- Reaction score
- 5
These forms appear, to me, to be more in line with "TKD-based self-defense" than what I've seen of the previous forms. Granted, I've not studied any of the KKW forms, except 2 of the palgwe forms. TKD starts from a couple of basic premises:
1) The legs are the strongest part of the body.
2) The legs are the longest part of the body.
1+2=legs as primary weapons. Whether that means standing, jumping, or spinning kicks. Isn't this what everyone wanted when the kwans unified? "How can we make TKD more unique? Lots of kicks!" They standardized the sparring rules around this. They teach line drills marching up and down dojangs the world over throwing jump kick after spin jump kick.
Then you get to the forms. The forms don't follow the "legs as primary weapons" principle. Lots of hand techs with a couple of kicks. It's a somewhat bizarre dichotomy, which truthfully is evident in most arts, but especially in TKD.
Which one will someone fall back on when forced to defend themselves? Probably the former, because the forms are so different from the rest of the training, and somewhat marginalized.
These forms, at least the first one, appears to try to bridge that. Time will tell whether there are "official" applications, but just watching the first form a couple of times, other than the oddly-placed flying sidekicks, all of the jumping/spinning kicks are placed after what I would term "distancing techniques" - techs designed to push your opponent away or make him retreat, giving you more room for the follow-up. Another of the sequences of kicks starts with a step back followed by a skipping roundhouse kick. Did they just think it looked cool, or did they want to teach evading and follow-ups, or feigning weakness to draw in an opponent?
All conjecture. But to me, the old (and not likely to be replaced anytime soon) way looked like "fight using these principles, practice forms (which could be self defense) using these principles". If these forms, and more like them, are used, it would seem to form a more coherent system, wherein instead of borrowing Japanese self-defense principles, they would use the principles, or at least similar ones, taught in the rest of the curriculum.
Or, you know, they just thought they looked cool.
1) The legs are the strongest part of the body.
2) The legs are the longest part of the body.
1+2=legs as primary weapons. Whether that means standing, jumping, or spinning kicks. Isn't this what everyone wanted when the kwans unified? "How can we make TKD more unique? Lots of kicks!" They standardized the sparring rules around this. They teach line drills marching up and down dojangs the world over throwing jump kick after spin jump kick.
Then you get to the forms. The forms don't follow the "legs as primary weapons" principle. Lots of hand techs with a couple of kicks. It's a somewhat bizarre dichotomy, which truthfully is evident in most arts, but especially in TKD.
Which one will someone fall back on when forced to defend themselves? Probably the former, because the forms are so different from the rest of the training, and somewhat marginalized.
These forms, at least the first one, appears to try to bridge that. Time will tell whether there are "official" applications, but just watching the first form a couple of times, other than the oddly-placed flying sidekicks, all of the jumping/spinning kicks are placed after what I would term "distancing techniques" - techs designed to push your opponent away or make him retreat, giving you more room for the follow-up. Another of the sequences of kicks starts with a step back followed by a skipping roundhouse kick. Did they just think it looked cool, or did they want to teach evading and follow-ups, or feigning weakness to draw in an opponent?
All conjecture. But to me, the old (and not likely to be replaced anytime soon) way looked like "fight using these principles, practice forms (which could be self defense) using these principles". If these forms, and more like them, are used, it would seem to form a more coherent system, wherein instead of borrowing Japanese self-defense principles, they would use the principles, or at least similar ones, taught in the rest of the curriculum.
Or, you know, they just thought they looked cool.
