Thoughts on past Threads

[TKDTony2179]

After the last few threads we have either discovered we can or cannot proctect ourselves. Given the fact that most of us knowingly have an idea of striking a vital area on the human body can change the pase of a fight but knowing that certain kicks don't belong in a street either because of the high risk factor, age trying to perform the intermediate and advance kicks, or knowledge on how to use a kick in multiple ways.

One thought keeps running through my head is that the growth of tkd is has spread so far to sport for citizens that the reality of true fighting has been hidden with lies of that this art is a kicking art and not a art that with incredible hand and feet combination. The love of kicking has surpassed the hand striking skills. When I was kid I could remember hearing that this art was of fast hands and quick powerful kicks.

Have we lost the ability as far as for a civilian martial art to understand how to protect ourselves and show the world that we are not just a bunch of people with pretty useless kicks?

How many practice the hooking block? How many practice your knees and not how thai fighters do? Elbows in all directions? Last all of the hand strikes from a nontraditional way but in actual live sparring?

Also do you believe that spin kicks were to be used as a finisher in a fight and not in the beginning?

 

[Earl Weiss]

One thought keeps running through my head is that the growth of tkd is has spread so far to sport for citizens that the reality of true fighting has been hidden with lies of that this art is a kicking art and not a art that with incredible hand and feet combination.
?

What you say is undoubtedly true for some factions and when queried it is part of how I describe as the main difference between "Us" and "Them".

 

[Kong Soo Do]

After the last few threads we have either discovered we can or cannot proctect ourselves. Given the fact that most of us knowingly have an idea of striking a vital area on the human body can change the pase of a fight but knowing that certain kicks don't belong in a street either because of the high risk factor, age trying to perform the intermediate and advance kicks, or knowledge on how to use a kick in multiple ways.

One thought keeps running through my head is that the growth of tkd is has spread so far to sport for citizens that the reality of true fighting has been hidden with lies of that this art is a kicking art and not a art that with incredible hand and feet combination. The love of kicking has surpassed the hand striking skills. When I was kid I could remember hearing that this art was of fast hands and quick powerful kicks.

Have we lost the ability as far as for a civilian martial art to understand how to protect ourselves and show the world that we are not just a bunch of people with pretty useless kicks?

How many practice the hooking block? How many practice your knees and not how thai fighters do? Elbows in all directions? Last all of the hand strikes from a nontraditional way but in actual live sparring?

Also do you believe that spin kicks were to be used as a finisher in a fight and not in the beginning?

TKD is an art, and it is a sport. Both of those are separate venues, with separate goals and separate teaching/training methodologies. They should not be confused as one in the same. This isn't putting one ahead of the other. Either is a viable pursuit if it meets the criteria of your goal.

TKD as an art; call it 'traditional' TKD, call it 'old school' TKD, call it 'combat' TKD or whatever. It pretty much looks like Okinawan Karate, depending on who's teaching it. It does not have a plethora of kicks, and those are usually ankle to waist height in targeting. Good striking as well as locks, throws, chokes, cavity pressing etc. I've not seen this version of TKD use hard body conditioning very extensively however which is one of the hallmarks of Okinawan Karate (many of the Ryus at any rate).

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Have we lost the ability as far as for a civilian martial art to understand how to protect ourselves and show the world that we are not just a bunch of people with pretty useless kicks?

There are a lot of people in the sport venue that don't know/understand/accept that what they do isn't viable for self defense and in many instances is actually detrimental and counter-productive to self defense. This is the fault of the instructor that either doesn't know/understand/accept that they teach sport and not self defense (i.e. an actual art). Now, to be clear, if the school is sport, the instructor teaches and advertises it as sport and the student wants sport then we're all peaches and cream. If it is sport but has the proverbial 'self defense taught here' sign hanging over the trophy case then we have a serious issue.

I've listed the telltale signs of sport schools vs. art schools before. A student has the right to know what they're training in and for.

 

[oftheherd1]

...

One thought keeps running through my head is that the growth of tkd is has spread so far to sport for citizens that the reality of true fighting has been hidden with lies of that this art is a kicking art and not a art that with incredible hand and feet combination. The love of kicking has surpassed the hand striking skills. When I was kid I could remember hearing that this art was of fast hands and quick powerful kicks.

...

FWIW. As I have mentioned before, I studied TKD many years ago under Jhoon Goo Rhee. It was not a sport as he taught, althougt some of our students did compete in local tournaments. In those tournaments, there were both Karate and TKD competitors. Our students often spoke of being bested by Karate students because were weren't taught effective use of hands as were the Karate students. If they could be kept at bay, they could be beaten with kicks. Certainly some depended on level of teaching. No one in his right mind would have taken on Mr. Rhee in a real fight. He did once take an arrogant student down a few pegs, using a side hook kick. We had never seen one before and it was so unexpected, we didn't know for sure what he had done. It was then something for a higher level. Now many arts teach it as a basic kick.

...

TKD as an art; call it 'traditional' TKD, call it 'old school' TKD, call it 'combat' TKD or whatever. It pretty much looks like Okinawan Karate, depending on who's teaching it. It does not have a plethora of kicks, and those are usually ankle to waist height in targeting. Good striking as well as locks, throws, chokes, cavity pressing etc. I've not seen this version of TKD use hard body conditioning very extensively however which is one of the hallmarks of Okinawan Karate (many of the Ryus at any rate).

Under Mr. Rhee, we did do conditioning and he would give us a pretty hard workout. As much as Okinawan Karate? I don't know. Certainly we were learning a combat art.

There are a lot of people in the sport venue that don't know/understand/accept that what they do isn't viable for self defense and in many instances is actually detrimental and counter-productive to self defense. This is the fault of the instructor that either doesn't know/understand/accept that they teach sport and not self defense (i.e. an actual art). Now, to be clear, if the school is sport, the instructor teaches and advertises it as sport and the student wants sport then we're all peaches and cream. If it is sport but has the proverbial 'self defense taught here' sign hanging over the trophy case then we have a serious issue.

I've listed the telltale signs of sport schools vs. art schools before. A student has the right to know what they're training in and for.

Agree with the above paragraph. There should never be any doubt. I would add that I think against a single untrained opponent, a sport TKD person would have a good chance as long as his mind was geared to hurt his opponent, not just score points.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Under Mr. Rhee, we did do conditioning and he would give us a pretty hard workout. As much as Okinawan Karate? I don't know. Certainly we were learning a combat art.

As an example, we would stand in front of each other in deep horse stance and punch the chest/abs area on each other repeatedly. Or, stand in front of each other in deep horse stance doing arm pounding which is various repeated hard blocks or arm rubbing exercises. From a combat stance we would kick the inside/outside of each others thighs and calves using our shin (as opposed to the instep or top of foot like some arts). We would condition our fists of course with the boards or knuckle push ups and our shins with either tires mounted to the wall or bowling pins. Sanchin kata, which was the first learned was performed while 1-4 BB's stood around you punching, striking and kicking various parts of you while you performed the kata. This is a signature part of training in arts like Pangainoon/Uechi Ryu.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I'm not a TKD guy but my wife has a black belt in TKD. She has "cross trained" many other MA styles. Just wonder what your guy's opinion about "cross training"? IMO, a MA style that has everything in it just doesn't exist on this planet.

 

[sopraisso]

The problem taekwondo is facing began before it had this name. Most of all karate taught in the world after the art left Okinawa was not aimed at fighting applications, most subsequent instructors and practitioners didn't really understand how the art worked (and still don't today), and taekwondo just inherited this problem. The sport thing really brought it to a more complicated situation, but taekwondo was already largely born from the bad understanding of karate. Even in the karate world, relatively very few people understand how the art really works in terms of self-defense fighting.

Enviado de meu GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk 4

 

[TKDTony2179]

The problem taekwondo is facing began before it had this name. Most of all karate taught in the world after the art left Okinawa was not aimed at fighting applications, most subsequent instructors and practitioners didn't really understand how the art worked (and still don't today), and taekwondo just inherited this problem. The sport thing really brought it to a more complicated situation, but taekwondo was already largely born from the bad understanding of karate. Even in the karate world, relatively very few people understand how the art really works in terms of self-defense fighting.

Enviado de meu GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk 4

I have seen where some okiniwa karate katas movements are a self-defense all by themselves but in TKD I have noticed that no most hyungs dont go together in sequence so you have to know how to pull techniques from all forms you know.

I try to tell customers that a black belt would mix match movements for sel defense. No forms are alike and they dont add up or connect to each other either.

 

[Kframe]

This is a interesting topic. Now my coach has a deep background in karate. He became dissatisfied with karate due to the fact that the teaching was so diluted and misunderstood. Made to be overly complicated. After some time in the military and training MCMAP with marines, and LINE with his Marine father, in addition to Kempo he has created his own style using karate techniques. He left out all the other BS he sees as useless precisely because so much of it is not understood by teachers of karate.

He saw the value in the techniques but did no like the way they were taught and felt that there was to much fluff. He wanted more efficiency in the art. So he started peeling off layers and we have what we practice today. No unnatural static stances, just natural movements and efficiency. One thing he didn't like was that there was no really quality way to apply the kata. No one ORG has quality commonsense standardized applications. Basically to much filler and fluff in the art.

One of the things he told me when we first met regarding other arts was this. "I don't judge other arts by how well there black belts fight, but on how well there white belts can defend themselves." Hence why RBSD self defense is lesson one. His motto for our gym is simple. "You have to learn to defend your self before you can learn to fight."

I wonder what karate was like before it was dumbed down for mass teaching. One thing that I gather from looking at karate and similar arts, was that I was ment to be taught over a long period. I suspect that training from child hood, was how it was intended, with refinement of skill increasing as age goes up towards adult hood. I doubt that as they got close to teenage years, that more destructive movements were held back. They couldn't be, if they were to be ready for the real world by the time they were of age.

 

[TKDTony2179]

I'm not a TKD guy but my wife has a black belt in TKD. She has "cross trained" many other MA styles. Just wonder what your guy's opinion about "cross training"? IMO, a MA style that has everything in it just doesn't exist on this planet.

I believe that ju jitsu had kicks punches locks and throwing and ground grappling before judo or aikido came around. Most arts that devrived from other arts tend tov focus on one aspect of the art or combat.

 

[sopraisso]

I have seen where some okiniwa karate katas movements are a self-defense all by themselves but in TKD I have noticed that no most hyungs dont go together in sequence so you have to know how to pull techniques from all forms you know.

I try to tell customers that a black belt would mix match movements for sel defense. No forms are alike and they dont add up or connect to each other either.

The fact that most taekwondo hyungs don't function to self-defense the same way traditional kata do is a very consequence of what I previously said: the creators of taekwondo hyungs didn't understand the practical applications of techniques, so when they created their new hyungs they only strung techniques together without further thought on practical applications and tactical aspects of fighting. If they had a better understanding about karate they wouldn't have abandoned the old kata, or at least they would've created new forms which would be intended to work in similar ways as the earlier ones.

The dilution and misunderstanding wasn't restricted to forms: details of techniques have been changed as well just because the changers didn't understand what the techniques were really meant for. Some time ago there used to be a member in this forum who had direct contact with a few of the creators of Kukkiwon pumsae forms, and he was very emphatic about the fact that the creators of pumsae never intended the techniques to have a different meaning from that one taught in the typical dojang. By the way I believe the big taekwondo orgs generally support those mistakes as they don't do nothing to correct them, what is a shame.

Again this is not only a taekwondo problem: later mainland Japanese styles and lineages of karate have gone through the same process. Now gradually karate practitioners are becoming humbly aware of the issue (and also trying to understand and correct the mistakes in their training). I just wish taekwondo practitioners were less proud of themselves and admitted the problem as well. I think taekwondo as an effective self-defense martial art would be largely benefited from that.

Enviado de meu GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk 4

 

[sopraisso]

This is a interesting topic. Now my coach has a deep background in karate. He became dissatisfied with karate due to the fact that the teaching was so diluted and misunderstood. Made to be overly complicated. After some time in the military and training MCMAP with marines, and LINE with his Marine father, in addition to Kempo he has created his own style using karate techniques. He left out all the other BS he sees as useless precisely because so much of it is not understood by teachers of karate.

He saw the value in the techniques but did no like the way they were taught and felt that there was to much fluff. He wanted more efficiency in the art. So he started peeling off layers and we have what we practice today. No unnatural static stances, just natural movements and efficiency. One thing he didn't like was that there was no really quality way to apply the kata. No one ORG has quality commonsense standardized applications. Basically to much filler and fluff in the art.

One of the things he told me when we first met regarding other arts was this. "I don't judge other arts by how well there black belts fight, but on how well there white belts can defend themselves." Hence why RBSD self defense is lesson one. His motto for our gym is simple. "You have to learn to defend your self before you can learn to fight."

I wonder what karate was like before it was dumbed down for mass teaching. One thing that I gather from looking at karate and similar arts, was that I was ment to be taught over a long period. I suspect that training from child hood, was how it was intended, with refinement of skill increasing as age goes up towards adult hood. I doubt that as they got close to teenage years, that more destructive movements were held back. They couldn't be, if they were to be ready for the real world by the time they were of age.

Actually I believe there are a few karate orgs that do have some kind of "quality standard applications", but they're not the big ones and come directly from Okinawa instead of mainland Japan. I would suggest you look for the Okinawa Goju-ryu Kenkyukai of Masaji Taira so you can see a bit of this. But karate kata is really a deep thing and the applications go way deeper than what we see today in Iain Abernethy's vids on YouTube, so you'll hardly find many people who understand near completely what a kata has to teach you (and that goes greatly beyond practical applications of unrelated techniques) - most traditional kata have enough material to be studied through many, many years.

Enviado de meu GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk 4

 

[oftheherd1]

As an example, we would stand in front of each other in deep horse stance and punch the chest/abs area on each other repeatedly. Or, stand in front of each other in deep horse stance doing arm pounding which is various repeated hard blocks or arm rubbing exercises. From a combat stance we would kick the inside/outside of each others thighs and calves using our shin (as opposed to the instep or top of foot like some arts). We would condition our fists of course with the boards or knuckle push ups and our shins with either tires mounted to the wall or bowling pins. Sanchin kata, which was the first learned was performed while 1-4 BB's stood around you punching, striking and kicking various parts of you while you performed the kata. This is a signature part of training in arts like Pangainoon/Uechi Ryu.

That kind of conditioning we did not do. I was referring to physical conditioning as in building muscle and stamina. We were taught control, and using ki in striking and kicking. We were also taught how our stances and movements added power from the ground up.

However, we did block with full strength. That was painful until you got used to it. But once you did, the hardest block wouldn't bother you. I guess the strikes you mention would have become the same.

...

The dilution and misunderstanding wasn't restricted to forms: details of techniques have been changed as well just because the changers didn't understand what the techniques were really meant for. Some time ago there used to be a member in this forum who had direct contact with a few of the creators of Kukkiwon pumsae forms, and he was very emphatic about the fact that the creators of pumsae never intended the techniques to have a different meaning from that one taught in the typical dojang. By the way I believe the big taekwondo orgs generally support those mistakes as they don't do nothing to correct them, what is a shame.

...

I have mentioned before when I taught a 4th Dan TKD (I taught Hapkido), that when I taught him some techniques he would stop and show me the movement in some kata. He said he had never understood the move, and in fact had been told it was the art side of martial arts. Apparently there are a lot of things in the kata that have been retained, but their meaning or proper application lost.

 

[sopraisso]

That kind of conditioning we did not do. I was referring to physical conditioning as in building muscle and stamina. We were taught control, and using ki in striking and kicking. We were also taught how our stances and movements added power from the ground up.

However, we did block with full strength. That was painful until you got used to it. But once you did, the hardest block wouldn't bother you. I guess the strikes you mention would have become the same.



I have mentioned before when I taught a 4th Dan TKD (I taught Hapkido), that when I taught him some techniques he would stop and show me the movement in some kata. He said he had never understood the move, and in fact had been told it was the art side of martial arts. Apparently there are a lot of things in the kata that have been retained, but their meaning or proper application lost.

Now it's time to recognize that problem and bring back that lost meaning. I believe there's a really great job being done by a few people, and the knowledge is being spread out. Only what I learned from the five pinnan kata and naihanchi is already far more than all I got from my taekwondo classes.

Also, the knowledge hasn't actually been completely lost: we just have to search in the correct sources and instructors, and make a good effort trying to understand by ourselves (it's certainly worth it). By the way, there's a quote from Masaji Taira that goes like this:

I would like to make one point in relation to bunkai practice, as you have mentioned that many instructors are “only now discovering bunkai”. I know of a number of experienced overseas instructors who have said that bunkai was not ever practiced in Okinawan dojo when they were there. They should be careful how they word those statements, as this might well simply reveal the level of karate that was entrusted to them by their instructor! Bunkai has indeed been an essential practice in Okinawan karate from its inception.

Enviado de meu GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk 4

 

[TKDTony2179]

I would agree that some meaning of the blocks or strikes in the system maybe confusing and when you hear what a instructor say they are for it do make you turn your head sideways and look at them strange.
Somethings are clear in forms and shouldn't be looked at differently.

Now asking this question. Do any of you believe that regardless of forms a martial artist can just do the self-defense movement without thinking of which form it come from? The old "it hits all by itself."

I don't know how much Choi understood Shotokan or Taekyon but some forms where very simple like do san but others was confusing like Po Eun but sometimes when I look at what Chan hun hyungs I tend to see just building blocks that will make you a better person in the art and the self-defense is just what ever you want to do at that time dealing with that issue. So what I am trying to say if i am not clear is that you should know all movements in forms. Understand the simple ones, use the simple ones in different manner, understand the advance movements, apply the advance movements, and never stop exploring the hyung because it is more than what it looks.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

The fact that most taekwondo hyungs don't function to self-defense the same way traditional kata do is a very consequence of what I previously said: the creators of taekwondo hyungs didn't understand the practical applications of techniques, so when they created their new hyungs they only strung techniques together without further thought on practical applications and tactical aspects of fighting. If they had a better understanding about karate they wouldn't have abandoned the old kata, or at least they would've created new forms which would be intended to work in similar ways as the earlier ones.

The dilution and misunderstanding wasn't restricted to forms: details of techniques have been changed as well just because the changers didn't understand what the techniques were really meant for. Some time ago there used to be a member in this forum who had direct contact with a few of the creators of Kukkiwon pumsae forms, and he was very emphatic about the fact that the creators of pumsae never intended the techniques to have a different meaning from that one taught in the typical dojang. By the way I believe the big taekwondo orgs generally support those mistakes as they don't do nothing to correct them, what is a shame.

This is correct. I've stated in the past that Okinawan kata was akin to a well written paragraph. All the elements of good literature were there in the paragraph. Koran forms (the ones that weren't simply renamed kata) had all the letters of the alphabet but really was bad grammar strung together. Some bits fit since they were copied somewhat from older kata, but they weren't joined correctly most of the time. This was directly related to an incomplete or shallow understanding of kata and in truth, karate as a whole. This isn't to disrespect the pioneers of TKD, but it is what it is and shouldn't be embellished to make it something it isn't. A few Koreans had a better than average understanding and they are to be credited but they were in the minority. The rest, if they even attained Dan status were very low Dans. And the climate of the times went against them as well for having the opportunity to learn to the fullest. So they can't be looked down upon for what they didn't know in many cases. They did the best they could with what they knew.

Could subsequent generations have increased the depth of TKD, particularly in this age? Yes. Have they? A few have but the majority have not. And that is a shame as it is the student that suffers the most. Many see TKD as a shallow 'kicking' art. It really doesn't have to be limited to just that, and some have gone beyond that fortunately.

 

[Earl Weiss]

but some forms where very simple like do san but others was confusing like Po Eun but sometimes when I look at what Chan hun hyungs I tend to see just building blockss.

What is it about Po Eun you find confusing?
In Do San are moves #14-16 (And Again #s 17-19) for the same or different opponents?

In Chon Ji is #1 & 2 and similar series for the same or different opponent? Sometimes simple is not so simple.

 

[Earl Weiss]

"Understanding" patterns. TKD Tony and others. What do you think about what this person said;

" Patterns are various fundamental movements....a pattern can be compared with a unit tactic or word if fundamental movement is an individual...'s training or alphabet."

Using the above metaphor, each motion is a single letter. Letters may have some meaning by themselves, but different meanings emerge depending on how they are arranged and connected with other letters.

First you learn to recognize letters, then you learn to recognize certain arrangements as words. Finaly, based on what you have learned you can try to figure out arrangemets you haven't seen before and learn how to use them.

Useful metaphor?

 

[TKDTony2179]

What is it about Po Eun you find confusing?
In Do San are moves #14-16 (And Again #s 17-19) for the same or different opponents?

In Chon Ji is #1 & 2 and similar series for the same or different opponent? Sometimes simple is not so simple.

We don't do Chon Ji pattern. We have a Kibon pattern that starts like your chon ji pattern. Could be or could not be. No one acturally does a lunge punch after blocking a kick or a punch to their body. I have seen where karate styles use it as to knock someone over once they have broken the balance of their opponent and simply just walked forward. Now I have imagine how the intial step can be used as a step and jab opening from a neutral stance (feet under shoulder) to start a combination. (step jab, reverse, hook).

When first starting to learn the forms I could understand certain movement because I had already been a fan of martial arts since I was a kid and I was familar with certain punches and kicks. So for me and I am sure for some others that I talked to in my school that Do San looked kinda easy. I say this because of the first two moves are a left outter forarm block, right reverse punch. If someone can not see a simple block for a haymacker punch and reverse punch to the body they have trouble. Now, as someone advances up rank they should be able to understand how to the height of the punch if needed in a real fight.

For 14-16, I do believe that the double outter forarm blocks followed by rear front kick and two punches can be misleading because if someone really grabs your neck and you do that portion of that pattern you will find out that you can not kick because of the distance that is required. But if you block before they grab you and you use a rear front kick the distance may be there. As for the two high blocks and a turn around knife hand chop mid in a horse stance. Maybe just put in their to learn a sequence but also to train both sides of the body. Dan Gun has three high blocks and I know I am not going to ever use three high blocks in row.

Po Eun. Well, Earl we have talked about this in another thread but here is some more of confusing parts of that form. Low block/back fist in sitting stances( won't be blocking a kick and punching someone behinde me), Double rigid hand low blocks(for a kick or a what?), and I believe you covered the other two in that other thread for me.

Sorry to take too long to get back with you I have been busy.

Yes, Simple isn't always simple.