WTF Kick Rule

[terryl965]

Today at the US Open we had a converstation about the upcoming new kicking rules that are going into place: the Thing I like most is the 10 second rule, a competitor only has 10 seconds to engage or be given a 1 point deduction now that will make them compete and just not stand there waiting to counter fight. I believe this is a great big step in the right direction in brinding back the competitive edge of TKD.

Terry Lee Stoker
Master Instructor

 

[karatekid1975]

Cool. I'm a counter fighter, but I agree. I hate sitting there watching and waiting for someone to do something in a match. At least, fake or something to see what the other would do ... do something. The 10 second thing is cool.

 

[terryl965]

Cool. I'm a counter fighter, but I agree. I hate sitting there watching and waiting for someone to do something in a match. At least, fake or something to see what the other would do ... do something. The 10 second thing is cool.

I teach my students when someone hard checks to see what you are going to do kick em and kick them hard, I have never understood someone hard checking to see what some one is going to do, I'm kicking the crap out of you

Master
Terry Lee Stoker

 

[FearlessFreep]

What's a 'hard check' other than just a check motion? Sometimes I use checks to get the guy responding, not to see what he's doing but to get him to do...something...and respond of that

 

[TigerWoman]

So if both just stand there waiting for the other to attack, both get penalized?
TW

 

[Laborn]

that's cool, im an agressive attacker, and a defensive counter. I check my opponent to make him do what i want him to do...watch their feet, if you see that their wanting to do a spin kick, ill check them to see if i can draw it out, then i can counter your butt or just jam you to the floor one or the other lol. So i check to force my opponent to stay on the edge, and to cause him to attack me.

 

[terryl965]

So if both just stand there waiting for the other to attack, both get penalized?
TW

That is correct they have to engage withen those 10 seconds
Terry

 

[terryl965]

What's a 'hard check' other than just a check motion? Sometimes I use checks to get the guy responding, not to see what he's doing but to get him to do...something...and respond of that

A hard check is when your opponet diggs there front foot into the ground and dips there body forwards towards you and is unable to deliver a kick towards there oponet because of the first foot being dugg into the matt.
Terry

 

[SAVAGE]

Thats a good rule..in ten seconds I want the fight over and done with...can you tell I am a attacker:mp5:....I attack all the time..I dont stop....its how I play the game....one thing you always hear my Japanese sensei screaming is:

Darren...you must rern to brock..when he counter..you...brock..not attack all the time...you must,must brock!

 

[FearlessFreep]

A hard check is when your opponet diggs there front foot into the ground and dips there body forwards towards you and is unable to deliver a kick towards there oponet because of the first foot being dugg into the matt.

I did that earlier in my career (such as it is...still pretty young at it) but I thought that's just because I wasn't good enough to do a good check and keep my balance ready to respond

 

[Gemini]

A hard check is when your opponet diggs there front foot into the ground and dips there body forwards towards you and is unable to deliver a kick towards there oponet because of the first foot being dugg into the matt.

I did that earlier in my career (such as it is...still pretty young at it) but I thought that's just because I wasn't good enough to do a good check and keep my balance ready to respond

It is. It's a bad habit that competitors mature out of. My oldest son just recently started doing it, and it makes me crazy. If he's not going to listen to me, his competitors will teach him to stop soon enough.

I don't like the 10 second rule. I understand why you'd want to keep the action going, but they pretty much do that now. To me, sparring is more of a mind game and I'm not real happy about the idea of someone else telling me when to make up my mind. How long it takes to get into my opponent's head is dependant on the opponent, not a clock.

In many tourney's they have only multiple 1 minute rounds and the action never stops anyway. There's just no time to stop. When you start getting into the multiple 2 and 3 minute rounds, "resting" is part of the game plan. Taking that away may keep the action going, but may well also drop the "quality" of the action because the competitors aren't being allowed to rest.

Thoughts?

 

[FearlessFreep]

I haven't experienced it for myself but my speculation is that some of the time rules make it more difficult to first plant an idea in your opponents head and then take advantage of that. Such as first using the front side slide roundhouse or hop-to roundhouse to get him torespect that you will attack from the front, and depending on his reaction, you can later fake that move with the raised knee and then flip the hips over and attack from the other leg. With shorter rounds, it seems harder to set that up; with a time limit is seems harder to use feints and checks to watch reactions or force reactions

I think TKD took a hit in the last olympics because of the inaction and now WTF is trying to work rule changes to force more fast action. However, it occurs to me that this is making the sport less of a mental chess match with full contact and more of a spectator sport

 

[AceHBK]

Valid points on both sides. I have to enter a tournament and see how it really is to see which method I prefer. I will say though I hate sparring someone who is totally passive and just waits on you to attack.

 

[Miles]

I am on the fence on this rule change-I understand the policy reason, but think that most of the waiting games are fought at higher levels where 1 error is going to be the match. At a less than elite level, there is usually lots of action. And if you count it out, 10 seconds can be a really long time.

Miles

 

[Shu2jack]

Pardon my ignorance, but how is this 10 second rule supposed to help? If one person wishes to engage, then there will not be problems with an action-less match. If both people stall, what is the point of deducting points from competitors? Making the score 2 to 1 in points from 3 to 2 because of point deductions doesn't really change the situation in the match.

Instead of having any kind of "10 second" rule, the ATA makes it illegal to "run away"....in other words refusing to engage when the other person attempts to by basically..."running" away.

Thoughts?

 

[TX_BB]

It only comes into play when neither will engage, no one is running away they are checking or switching or moving back and forth at a safe distance. A player will be penalized for running/evading the fight.

 

[Shu2jack]

It only comes into play when neither will engage, no one is running away they are checking or switching or moving back and forth at a safe distance.

Then who gets penelized? The one that is showing less action of two competitors who are not really fighting? That seems kind of iffy and I don't believe penelizing both competitors really helps with this. If I am competing solely to win and I am winning against a more passive sparrer by points, I would be willing to keep contact to a minimum and let both of us take deductions in points. Doesn't really change the score and it eats time.

Perhaps I am missing something here....

 

[FearlessFreep]

I think anouther rule change going n is that point deductions are going to start being deducted from your score. AFAIK, currenty, deductions only come into play with who has more if both are tied in regular points, this is changing so that they will count against your score so in this situation, if you have a 5-3 lead, you won't be able to just stall and evade because you would be losing points

 

[TX_BB]

Then who gets penelized? The one that is showing less action of two competitors who are not really fighting? That seems kind of iffy and I don't believe penelizing both competitors really helps with this. If I am competing solely to win and I am winning against a more passive sparrer by points, I would be willing to keep contact to a minimum and let both of us take deductions in points. Doesn't really change the score and it eats time.

Perhaps I am missing something here....

In a 3 round fight with 3 minutes per round, you could eliminate a few boring fights quickly.

Since the rule has not been implemented all I can tell you is scuttle butt. The scuttle butt is that the match deduction will be automatic and indiscriminate so that both would get the deduction. Since the timer is set/reset by the judges there is no need for stopping of the match. Only 1 Judge of 4 Judges would be necessary to reset the timer. This is also a major departure from the current situation where the referee stops match describes the penalty, penalizes the player and then continues action, this may or may not cause the IR's heartburn we'll have to see. I'd like to see them implement the rule to see what effect it really has.