Did anyone here watch the UFC Saturday night? If so, did you hear Joe Rogan's comment about TKD. There was a fighter (can't remember the name) who stated he was a TKD stylist. When the fighter was coming into the ring, Joe Rogan stated "i can't believe anyone still claims that system....I used to teach TKD and it's pretty much useless". I thought that was a pretty "way out there" statement. What do you guys think?
Joe Rogan's TKD comment
- Thread starter shane23ss
- Start date
Zepp
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2003
- Messages
- 1,561
- Reaction score
- 22
Didn't see it, sorry.
There's no shortage of TKD McDojangs out there giving third rate instruction. Sounds like Joe Rogan learned from one of those schools. TKD isn't great for MMA competition if that's the only training you have, but a good teacher can train you in solid striking skills that will definitely transfer over to MMA.
Just out of curiousity, how did the TKD stylist do?
There's no shortage of TKD McDojangs out there giving third rate instruction. Sounds like Joe Rogan learned from one of those schools. TKD isn't great for MMA competition if that's the only training you have, but a good teacher can train you in solid striking skills that will definitely transfer over to MMA.
Just out of curiousity, how did the TKD stylist do?
In the UFC defense it is built on hardcore strikes and groundwork, everyone knows the new TKD is sport base. Not trying to start conflict just stating a fact.I myself teach TKD the sport and traditional but without the hard striking and grappling it would be hard for a purest of the sport to compete.Sincerly yoursshane23ss said:
Adept
Master Black Belt
Joe can only comment on what he sees. And looking around, pretty much every traditional TKD stylist I've ever seen would get hammered into pulp in the octagon. Their competition rules are so out-of-whack compared to MMA events, and their traditional syllabus doesn't focus on the things that are going to be used in a MMA bout.shane23ss said:
Having said that, for any fans of the UFC out there, I have just one word - Kimo.
The TKD stylist who took Royce (I think it was Royce) Gracie right to the end, and very nearly beat him.
It largely depends on the training moreso than the system. There's footage of a TKD champ vs Genki Sudo floating around the net, and the TKD stylist lasted two rounds against Sudo, which would at least IMPLY that TKD isn't totally worthless as a striking system.
That aside, mocking TKD is pretty much required in MMA circles. It's almost reflexive to those doofs. Just hit RMA some time.
That aside, mocking TKD is pretty much required in MMA circles. It's almost reflexive to those doofs. Just hit RMA some time.
Marginal said:
Excellent point! While TKD may not address all areas of fighting, it is a good striking system. This art does seem to take alot of heat, and until we see how every single school out there teaches, we really can't 'judge the book by its cover' so to speak.
A good example to good striking skills can be seen in the Mark Coleman/Maurice Smith match. While Smith was not the best grappler out there, he had enough skill to fend off the ground attacks, get back to his feet, and do what he does best...strike!!! And obviously it paid off, because the match was won by him, while standing!
As for the fight and the comment...I did see the fight, but I don't recall hearing that comment. I'll have to go back and watch it again.
Mike
Phil Elmore
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,514
- Reaction score
- 54
The proliferation of point-sparring no- and low-contact strip-mall TKD outfits has created, in large part, an overwhelming body of evidence where the viability of TKD as a self-defense system is concerned; it would not be far-fetched to say that at least the plurality of commercially available TKD is indeed "pretty much useless." This does not mean there are not good schools, good teachers, and good curricula out there among the many poor schools, nor does it automatically mean that if you've studied TKD (or some style of Karate) you're automatically going to fail in self-defense endeavors. It just means the odds are against you.
I spent a couple of years training in Wing Chun and had the fortune of learning from a gifted teacher at a very good school. I've talked with plenty of people whose negative opinions of Wing Chun bore no relation to what I'd studied -- because they'd formed those opinions based on the many bad schools out there (and therer is no shortage of poor Wing Chun available commercially).
I spent a couple of years training in Wing Chun and had the fortune of learning from a gifted teacher at a very good school. I've talked with plenty of people whose negative opinions of Wing Chun bore no relation to what I'd studied -- because they'd formed those opinions based on the many bad schools out there (and therer is no shortage of poor Wing Chun available commercially).
I train in Traditional TKD and my instructor has always incorporated grappling into or training, and he has been doing this since before the UFC craze started back in 1993/1994.
When it comes to TKD too many people generalize, the system I train in is very good for self defense, we also mix in Hapkido and cross train with other stylist's on different occasions.
When it comes to TKD too many people generalize, the system I train in is very good for self defense, we also mix in Hapkido and cross train with other stylist's on different occasions.
phlaw said:
What does the grappling consist of at your school?
Sounds like you're getting a well rounded art. Its good IMO to always keep an open mind and at the very least, check out what else is out there. Even if its not so much as cross training, but cross ref., at least you're getting an idea of some of the other ideas/concepts that are out there!! :ultracool
Mike
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
I think part of the problem of perception is that for a lot of people and a lot of schools, the focus really is on the sport aspect. TKD has a strong sport aspect to it in that you can participate in organized tournaments and such and train the rules for the sport and not even really look at it as combat. That's ok for some people, that's what some schools teach and what some people want to do. However, people don't sit around arguing whether football or baseball is the best sport for self-defense and I don't think 'olympic-style sparring' or 'point-sparring' as some schools teach as a sport is really meant as self-defense training either. A friend of mine says the whole point of coming to class is to spar and while I don't have the same viewpoint, if that's what he's in it for then I really don't fault him for that
That being said, I think using any sort of ring-style sparring match as a true gauge of the self-defense aspects of a MA, even for those who practice the MA for self-defense/combat, is a bit misleading. Take someone with strong ground-grappling and joint manipulation skills and put them in an TKD match and you'd see a different result as grabs and holds are not allowed. They may be a very good grappler and even an adequate striker but in a context where striking is favored by the rules against someone who heavily focuses on striking and it's a different ballgame. What does that say about the grapplers self-defense skills? Nothing, really. It's just the rules of the game. Last week I was playing jazz at a club and the TV was playing something with some female kickboxers and I thought their kicking was terrible; poor technique and no power (by TKD standards). In a TKD match, they would get killed..but they were also very good at standing in and using punches and taking hits and especially avoiding punches. What does that say about TKD versus kick-boxing? Nothing...different rules encourage different tactics lead to different strengths and training styles.
'Cause after all, it's just a game. Any sort of tournament is an artificial situation. I think one of the fisrt aspects of self-defense is having the situational awareness to try to avoid being in danger in the first place. If something comes up you can't avoid, then a little pain may diffuse the situation. Something to allow the aggressor a chance to back down. Again, situations vary; a drunk at a superbowl party mad at you for wearing the wrong team jersey is not the same as a guy pulling a knife on you for your wallet in the parking lot afterwards. Different situation, different aggressor mentality, different ways to get the aggressor to back down before it gets to all-out combat. In a MMA style tournament, your opponent is trying to win and is not going to back down. However, in a live situation where you do run into an aggressor where you cannot minimalize the situation and they are really trying to hurt or kill you, then all bets are off, and all rules are out. Which means no messing around with points or legal strikes, and if you're training is in a striking art, especially TKD, then that's going to include breaking bones, strikes to the throat,etc... In other words, I think there are techniques available in striking arts that would be useful in a life-threatening situation that are not allowed under any rules, so judging the effectiveness of an art for combat based on performance in a context where some of the art is not available is not really realistic.
In the end, it's really all up to a) what do you want to do and b) what do you train for. If you train for sport and the sport aspect is what's important to you, then that's good. If you train for combat/self-defense, most systems were designed for that anyway and as long as you train in the full range of your art then that's good. I think we nned to be careful, though, not to judge the combat effectiveness of a particular MA based on it's sport expression
That being said, I think using any sort of ring-style sparring match as a true gauge of the self-defense aspects of a MA, even for those who practice the MA for self-defense/combat, is a bit misleading. Take someone with strong ground-grappling and joint manipulation skills and put them in an TKD match and you'd see a different result as grabs and holds are not allowed. They may be a very good grappler and even an adequate striker but in a context where striking is favored by the rules against someone who heavily focuses on striking and it's a different ballgame. What does that say about the grapplers self-defense skills? Nothing, really. It's just the rules of the game. Last week I was playing jazz at a club and the TV was playing something with some female kickboxers and I thought their kicking was terrible; poor technique and no power (by TKD standards). In a TKD match, they would get killed..but they were also very good at standing in and using punches and taking hits and especially avoiding punches. What does that say about TKD versus kick-boxing? Nothing...different rules encourage different tactics lead to different strengths and training styles.
'Cause after all, it's just a game. Any sort of tournament is an artificial situation. I think one of the fisrt aspects of self-defense is having the situational awareness to try to avoid being in danger in the first place. If something comes up you can't avoid, then a little pain may diffuse the situation. Something to allow the aggressor a chance to back down. Again, situations vary; a drunk at a superbowl party mad at you for wearing the wrong team jersey is not the same as a guy pulling a knife on you for your wallet in the parking lot afterwards. Different situation, different aggressor mentality, different ways to get the aggressor to back down before it gets to all-out combat. In a MMA style tournament, your opponent is trying to win and is not going to back down. However, in a live situation where you do run into an aggressor where you cannot minimalize the situation and they are really trying to hurt or kill you, then all bets are off, and all rules are out. Which means no messing around with points or legal strikes, and if you're training is in a striking art, especially TKD, then that's going to include breaking bones, strikes to the throat,etc... In other words, I think there are techniques available in striking arts that would be useful in a life-threatening situation that are not allowed under any rules, so judging the effectiveness of an art for combat based on performance in a context where some of the art is not available is not really realistic.
In the end, it's really all up to a) what do you want to do and b) what do you train for. If you train for sport and the sport aspect is what's important to you, then that's good. If you train for combat/self-defense, most systems were designed for that anyway and as long as you train in the full range of your art then that's good. I think we nned to be careful, though, not to judge the combat effectiveness of a particular MA based on it's sport expression
Sharp Phil said:
The odds grow longer compared against what standard? An untrained person? A MMA practitioner? A high school wrestler? Will practicing a fusion of MT and BJJ really up the odds of avoiding injury during an attack against three people with tire irons?
Basically the generic MMA argument (which I am NOT attaching to Sharp Phil's comments, just making a general comment) is TKD, WC, Kenpo, Shotokan, Combativies, Tai Chi etc all fail in self defense situations becuase highly considioned pratictioners of multiple arts have consistently beaten practitioners of the aforementioned "useless" single focus systems. Works great when you assume that an attacker in a SD situation is going to be attacking you barehanded, and that this attacker posesses an expert knowledge of all fighting ranges.
BJJ fails under that same criteria as does MT. Both systems on their own are incomplete, and will (and have) failed when pitted against a multi dimensional martial artist. Doesn't make the arts bad. Doesn't mean that since you study one or the other but not both (along with relevant weapons training) that you have a much higher chance of failing in all SD situations. (Since SD situations rarely mimic conditions in the octagon.)
Phil Elmore
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,514
- Reaction score
- 54
Compared to the standard of someone trained in an art or system that is realistic and self-defense oriented.
Yeti
Black Belt
Joe Rogan did not learn TKD from a McDojang. He studied under GM Jae H. Kim in Boston (also where I studied although at a different time). JH Kim TKD Academy is an ITF style school, which is a lot less "sports" oriented that the WTF (Olympic) style. We sparred frequently, but it was free sparring and not tournament or point sparring. From what I understand, Joe Rogan was a pretty bad-a$$ fighter. This is at least what I heard from one of my instructors who progressed through the ranks with Mr. Rogan. FWIW.
bushi jon
Green Belt
the reason people say all the karate is not good self defense because alot of what we learn today is incomplete from what was taught in the past.
"Having said that, for any fans of the UFC out there, I have just one word - Kimo.
The TKD stylist who took Royce (I think it was Royce) Gracie right to the end, and very nearly beat him."
And he used 0 TKD...
watch the fight again... Kimo had been "training" with a Mr. Joe Son in TKD (soon to be re-named "Jo Son Do" - i am not making that up!) for about 3 mos. before entering the UFC. Mostly what he used was his footaball background & what would come to be known as "ground & pound" .
The TKD stylist who took Royce (I think it was Royce) Gracie right to the end, and very nearly beat him."
And he used 0 TKD...
watch the fight again... Kimo had been "training" with a Mr. Joe Son in TKD (soon to be re-named "Jo Son Do" - i am not making that up!) for about 3 mos. before entering the UFC. Mostly what he used was his footaball background & what would come to be known as "ground & pound" .
Phil Elmore
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,514
- Reaction score
- 54
I would consider boxing more useful for self-defense than most commercially available TKD, sure. There are always exceptions and there is a lot of variation within each style.
Adept
Master Black Belt
Maybe he wasn't very good at TKD, but my point was more that the style does not make the fighter, not that the TKD syllabus can hold up to MMA in the octagon.Toasty said:
http://neurology.med.upenn.edu/~jason/fights/Match-Karate.vs.TKD.wmv
Just in case someone was wanting to view the clip I mentioned earlier... Can't say much for his handwork though.
Just in case someone was wanting to view the clip I mentioned earlier... Can't say much for his handwork though.
