TKD and real self defense

[K-man]

Our self- defense curriculum at the school I attend is Ok. There are 10 self-defense techs and 10 one step punch sparring techs to be learned for 1st dan...another 8 SD and 5 one step punch tech for 2nd dan. Most are prettys ound...there are a few really questionable ones though. At later ranks, we are asked to do a lot of creation stuff (first to specific techs, then instant creation...wich usually just turns into freestyle sparring at the later levels). It;s not a smooth and in depth as my taijutsu training...but pretty good.

We also incoporate grappling and submission work into our curriculum and sparring at later levels as well.

for myself, I do a lot of extra work with the poomse/kata practicing SD stuff for the katas with willing/resistant partners.

the stuff is there, you jsut have to train it. ....oh, and I also participate in that "powder puff" sparing too...got my rib bruised (through my hogu) at the last competition I was at...FWIW

Peace,
Erik

There is something here that really worries me. How long does it take to get to first dan? I'm thinking 4-5 years then another 2-3 to second. One step sparring techniques in karate are designed for tournaments where you score a point and the bout stops. How useful is TKD when I've been training for 3 years and this big bruiser picks me in the pub? I teach self defence against the most common street attacks, from white belt level, every week. You're saying the freestyle aspect kicks in after 2nd dan. That's the stuff that's going to save your bacon and I've had to train TKD for nearly 10 years before I'm even going to learn it. I might be wrong but that's the same the problem I have seen in Australia with TKD. It's trained as a sport, not to save your life.
I'm not saying that it is weak or useless, but without cross training it seems to lack the SD something that I would be looking for. Erik, what you're saying is that you are doing a lot of extra work to make TKD work for you and that is great. Unfortunately most MA students do their 3 hours a week and reckon thay are bomb-proof. :asian:

 

[ATC]

Unfortunately most MA students do their 3 hours a week and reckon thay are bomb-proof. :asian:

Note to all. He said most MA students, not most TKD students. MA as a whole not just one small subset.

 

[dancingalone]

On the outside Taekwondo is a very "basic" kick/punch art.

And that's the way it remains for the majority of the schools I have visited. I've lived in many large cities in the US as I moved around a lot for my career. It's a rare school indeed that teaches basics, sparring, forms, and SD as an integrated curriculum where one activity builds upon another. Sadly, that's just the reality of it, and I think it's better to acknowledge the shortcoming and work in our local areas to improve matters. That said, this criticism is true of many martial arts, karate and kung fu included, but certain specific strains of a style can be in better position pedagogically.

 

[bluekey88]

There is something here that really worries me. How long does it take to get to first dan? I'm thinking 4-5 years then another 2-3 to second. One step sparring techniques in karate are designed for tournaments where you score a point and the bout stops. How useful is TKD when I've been training for 3 years and this big bruiser picks me in the pub? I teach self defence against the most common street attacks, from white belt level, every week. You're saying the freestyle aspect kicks in after 2nd dan. That's the stuff that's going to save your bacon and I've had to train TKD for nearly 10 years before I'm even going to learn it. I might be wrong but that's the same the problem I have seen in Australia with TKD. It's trained as a sport, not to save your life.
I'm not saying that it is weak or useless, but without cross training it seems to lack the SD something that I would be looking for. Erik, what you're saying is that you are doing a lot of extra work to make TKD work for you and that is great. Unfortunately most MA students do their 3 hours a week and reckon thay are bomb-proof. :asian:

You make a good point, but it's not as bad as you're reading into it. I do wish we did more freestyle/randori type stuff. BUT, while the bulk of that happens later, it is a requirement at the 3rd gup level and again at 1st gup. Grappling is a requirement throughout the color belt curriculum, but submissions don't get taught in depth until after 1st dan. And, to be honest, we're not a jiu-jitsu school...so the overall depth is not there. Sparring (kick/punch) is a requirement throughout all the gup levels, but sparring with takedowns and throws isn't done much until later. Liek I said, I'd personally like to see more of that....but not my school and not my curriculum. That being said, it's not taking 10 years to get to that, and we are drilling some very basic techniques that have good fundamental lessons to teach. Doing these oevr and over is not a bad thing.
I've found that havign to visit and revisit these simple things has made them better and stronger.

In short, it's not a perfect system...but I've yet to see thaqt.

yes, I do a lot of supplementation. Many don't....that's been true of any school I've attended. I supplemented with striking trianign when i was doing Aikido. I supplemented with grappling when i tried out wing chun. EVeryone should cross-train once they have a strong foundation in the basics of an MA, irregardless of style.

Peace,
Erik

 

[goingd]

And that's the way it remains for the majority of the schools I have visited. I've lived in many large cities in the US as I moved around a lot for my career. It's a rare school indeed that teaches basics, sparring, forms, and SD as an integrated curriculum where one activity builds upon another. Sadly, that's just the reality of it, and I think it's better to acknowledge the shortcoming and work in our local areas to improve matters. That said, this criticism is true of many martial arts, karate and kung fu included, but certain specific strains of a style can be in better position pedagogically.

I certainly do not disagree that this is the sad truth for most Taekwondo schools in the United States. The fact is that many black belts of any level and style can only see the outside aspects of their style.
It is not our responsibility to mandate the teachings of our piers and fellow instructors, but it is our job to make sure that if we make the choice to teach, we teach correctly, which is never easily.

 

[dancingalone]

It is not our responsibility to mandate the teachings of our piers and fellow instructors, but it is our job to make sure that if we make the choice to teach, we teach correctly, which is never easily.

Mandate, no. Educate, yes. I refuse to stay silent within the mediums I have available to me such as this forum, lest the general public believes that the typical studio on the corner is ALL there is available to train in.

There's a hunger out there for solid traditional martial arts taught by knowledgeable, yet forward looking instructors. I see it as my duty to make people aware there are more options to train in than McDojos or MMA gyms.

 

[chrispillertkd]

there is a good reason why i teach kenpo techniques in my school.

TKD, in and of itself, lacks depth in self defense

some instructors add it in, but the system itself doesnt contain a lot of SD training by default.

and the more korean the school, the shallower the self defense training, in general.

and if you walk in and see a v neck uniform? in general, dont expect to learn actual self defense

It's a shame you've had such a limited exposure to Taekwon-Do.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Twin Fist]

yeah, its a shame i have only been doing TKD since 1984....... you want to see REAL self defense? go to a kenpo or kajukenbo dojo

 

[msmitht]

I have been involved in the Martial Arts since 1979. I teach WTF TKD and BJJ. One steps and one step style sparring is only to teach the basic principles of self defense. If you want true self defense go do judo or BJJ or join the Marine Corps and learn the real art of war. Most stand up style schools cant teach you self defense. If you dont believe me watch the early days of the UFC or go rent FIST FOOT WAY. This is what many schools across america look like.

 

[dancingalone]

One steps and one step style sparring is only to teach the basic principles of self defense.

They don't teach SD principles in my system. They're an introductory method of combining basics (kihon) along with foot manuevering.

If you want true self defense go do judo or BJJ or join the Marine Corps and learn the real art of war.

Judo is a sport created from jujutsu techniques. Many of its techniques can be adapted for self-defense usage, but it's entirely wrong to claim judo is at its core a self defense art, because it's not. The intent of Jigaro Kano its creator was something else entirely.

As for learning the "art of war" from the Marines, I suppose you could. I suspect you could also learn many other things from the Marines like camaraderie or how to endure hot desert climates. For those of us who are interested in self-defense rather than how to wage war, there are other avenues.

Most stand up style schools cant teach you self defense.

A more correct statement would be: An unknowledgeable instructor, no matter his style, will not be able to transmit his system as a comprehensive self defense system. You can learn self defense from any system: Krav Maga, karate, aikido, etc. It's just a matter of understanding your own technical and physical limitations and working within them.

If you dont believe me watch the early days of the UFC or go rent FIST FOOT WAY.
This is what many schools across america look like.

No doubt there are lots of poor quality MA schools in the US. But I hardly think the early UFC matches are a good indicator that "stand up" systems cannot tech effective self-defense. Most of the early opponents hand picked for the Gracies were mediocre at best, and the rules even today surely favor a grappler. I do credit the UFC and the Gracies with reminding everyone that ground defense is important for every complete martial artist.

 

[chrispillertkd]

yeah, its a shame i have only been doing TKD since 1984....... you want to see REAL self defense? go to a kenpo or kajukenbo dojo

I love when people start rolling out the date they started training. How does 1981 strike you? Or 1986 when I return after a hiatus?

The fact is that Taekwon-Do has plenty of self-defense techniques in it. Your particular branch may've stopped at kicking and punching but others didn't.

Your comment about joint locks coming from Hapkido and so aren't Taekwon-Do is a bit confusing since many of its techniques came from Shotokan. Or do only things that the Kwan founders made up themselves qualify as being Taekwon-Do? That would be odd. Hapkido techniques, as well as some throws from Judo, have long since been assimilated into Taekwon-Do your comment not withstanding. Add to that Taekwon-Do's kicking techniques, which are devastating, and its powerful hand techniques and the only thing lacking for self-defense is a student's effort and/or an instructor's knowledge.

I've personally found Taekwon-Do to be very effective for self-defense. But since I haven't trained in kenpo or kajukenbo I guess I don't know what "real" self-defense is

Pax,

Chris

 

[Twin Fist]

look, Burger king is good, and if that is the only place you have ever eaten, you will think it is great.

till you eat somewhere else.

i USED to think that TKD was the bomb

till i got my *** handed to me by a kenpo guy.

his STYLE contained stuff that TKD didnt, and he could do things that TKD couldnt do

some things are just more comprehensive than others, it is the nature of the universe.

 

[chrispillertkd]

look, Burger king is good, and if that is the only place you have ever eaten, you will think it is great.

till you eat somewhere else.

i USED to think that TKD was the bomb

till i got my *** handed to me by a kenpo guy.

his STYLE contained stuff that TKD didnt, and he could do things that TKD couldnt do

some things are just more comprehensive than others, it is the nature of the universe.

LOL What a great way you have of insulting people who dare disagree with you!

Burger King hardly qualifies as good, even if you've never had anything else LOL If that's how you view your training, I'm sorry.

As I said, TKD has joint locks, throws, kicks second to none, and powerful hand techniques. I'm glad you branched out to get some training you were missing. It's a shame your branch of TKD, or your instructors, didn't share those things with you already. I had to use TKD to defend myself and it was very effective.

Pax,

Chris

 

[terryl965]

And that's the way it remains for the majority of the schools I have visited. I've lived in many large cities in the US as I moved around a lot for my career. It's a rare school indeed that teaches basics, sparring, forms, and SD as an integrated curriculum where one activity builds upon another. Sadly, that's just the reality of it, and I think it's better to acknowledge the shortcoming and work in our local areas to improve matters. That said, this criticism is true of many martial arts, karate and kung fu included, but certain specific strains of a style can be in better position pedagogically.

If you are ever around my neck of the woods, come see me and I will show you how it can be done. It is so sad that alot of TKD instructor are just about sport and nothing else.

 

[Twin Fist]

LOL What a great way you have of insulting people who dare disagree with you!

Burger King hardly qualifies as good, even if you've never had anything else LOL If that's how you view your training, I'm sorry.

As I said, TKD has joint locks, throws, kicks second to none, and powerful hand techniques. I'm glad you branched out to get some training you were missing. It's a shame your branch of TKD, or your instructors, didn't share those things with you already. I had to use TKD to defend myself and it was very effective.

Pax,

Chris

i AM NOT insulting you, i am stating a fact. I used to think TKD was pretty comprehensive. I dont think that any more because i studied other things and learned what comprehensive really means.

have you? have you studied anything BUT tkd?

if not, then you simply dont know what you are talking about,.

everyone THINKS what they have is pretty good, till they learn that there is more out there.

some people want more, they are not bad people for wanting more.

you do not have to insult my style, instructors or knowledge.

this is just an opinion, feel free to disagree, but my opinion is based on actual KNOWLEDGE, not blind loyalty

 

[chrispillertkd]

i AM NOT insulting you, i am stating a fact. I used to think TKD was pretty comprehensive. I dont think that any more because i studied other things and learned what comprehensive really means.

It's not an insult to compare my style as Burger King? Really? I'll take your word that you didn't intend to insult me, but the fact that I took it as an insult might tell you something about your general demeanor on the board. Or not.

I'm glad you studied other arts since your instructors weren't teaching you enough.

have you? have you studied anything BUT tkd?

Yes.

if not, then you simply dont know what you are talking about,.

But I have.

I will point out, however, that even if someone only studied one style your conclusion here is a non sequitor.

everyone THINKS what they have is pretty good, till they learn that there is more out there.

This may or may not be true. You simply have no way of knowing what everyone thinks unless they tell you.

some people want more, they are not bad people for wanting more.

I never even implied this. I said it's a shame you have had such a limited exposure to Taekwon-Do that you would believe what you posted. It's demonstrably false.

you do not have to insult my style, instructors or knowledge.

You mean like calling it Burger King? Oh, wait, that wasn't me. Nor did I insult you or your instructors. It's not an insult to say I'm sorry they didn't teach you enough in the way of self-defense when that was the claim you were making. Hence your need to study Kenpo and Kajukenbo, remember?

this is just an opinion, feel free to disagree, but my opinion is based on actual KNOWLEDGE, not blind loyalty

Hey, great so is mine.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Twin Fist]

i used Burger King as an example, it isnt my problem if YOU think Burger King is bad, i happen to like it.

since your instructors weren't teaching you enough.

thats you being insulting again.

Please explain, in detail, what else you have studied other than TKD.

it's ok, i will wait.

it's a shame you have had such a limited exposure to Taekwon-Do

this is you being insulting again. it's getting old and sounds infantile. Stop it please. My exposure to TKD is long and has covered everything IN tkd. Lots of schools have added things over the years to fill those gaps, but it is still a fact that that material is NOT TKD

TKD is what Jhoon Rhee brought over in 1959. Some katas, about a dozen punches and kicks and the standard variations, 2 take downs, the concept of one steps, and not much else.And that is ok

that is plenty for most people. Lots of things have been added since 1959, but thats just what it is, added stuff. it ISNT TKD.

But , and I am not the only person to say so on this board, today, in MOST TKD schools, SD is an afterthought, a minimal part of the focus of the schools which is in most cases sport competition.

I wanted more, and I found it. But i had to go outside TKD to find it.

There is more out there, that TKD simply doesnt cover. You can insult me all you want, i literally could not care less what you think. You and your opinion mean NOTHING to me, I know what I know.

 

[Twin Fist]

since I haven't trained in kenpo or kajukenbo I guess I don't know what "real" self-defense is

thats correct.

 

[chrispillertkd]

i used Burger King as an example, it isnt my problem if YOU think Burger King is bad, i happen to like it.

Liking something and it being good are two distinct things.

since your instructors weren't teaching you enough.

thats you being insulting again.

If your instructors were teahcing you enough in the way of self-defense or were teahcing you effectively then your training in other styles would have been unnecessary. You could've still done it for a variety of reasons but you said yourself you didn't have self-defense experience that you needed. That's not an insult unless you were insulting them, too.

Please explain, in detail, what else you have studied other than TKD.

it's ok, i will wait.[/quote

Praying Mantis kung-fu. I have experience with other styles, too, but not enough to consider them having been "studied."

Again, it's good to see you insult people when you feel it's OK. The sign of a true martial artist.

it's a shame you have had such a limited exposure to Taekwon-Do

this is you being insulting again. it's getting old and sounds infantile. Stop it please. My exposure to TKD is long and has covered everything IN tkd. Lots of schools have added things over the years to fill those gaps, but it is still a fact that that material is NOT TKD

You said you had no exposure to self-defense aspects of TKD. That's a lmiinited exposure, by definition.

Your repeated assertion that anything that you haven't been taught as TKD isn't TKD is what is childish. If you think TKD stopped at Shotokan, great. It's not accurate, of course, but you're free to hold that opinion.

TKD is what Jhoon Rhee brought over in 1959. Some katas, about a dozen punches and kicks and the standard variations, 2 take downs, the concept of one steps, and not much else.And that is ok

Again, you're free to hold that opinion but it is misinformed. It overlooks any sort of development of the style.

that is plenty for most people. Lots of things have been added since 1959, but thats just what it is, added stuff. it ISNT TKD.

This is wrong. It might not be the Chung Do Kwan/Shotokan you learn but it can certainly qualify as TKD. There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

But , and I am not the only person to say so on this board, today, in MOST TKD schools, SD is an afterthought, a minimal part of the focus of the schools which is in most cases sport competition.

This may be the case regarding schools, but the style as a whole? No. at least not all styles of TKD.

I wanted more, and I found it. But i had to go outside TKD to find it.

Sure, you had to do that. Not everyone has to.

There is more out there, that TKD simply doesnt cover. You can insult me all you want, i literally could not care less what you think. You and your opinion mean NOTHING to me, I know what I know.

I find it odd that you think repeating the points you yourself made is insulting.

You're right about TKD not having everything. It lacks a grappling game, for example. But joint locks and throws are certainly there regardless of whether or not you were taught them or even recognize that fact. You, I am sure, know your style very well. BUt to say it is the zenith of TKD or that somehow everything else is not TKD would be innaccurate.

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

thats correct.

Except it's not

Pax,

Chris