Full contact or point system?

shieldg

White Belt
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Do you think Taekwondo will be better as a full contact martial art using the knock down rule? Or is it too violent? Thoughts comments?
 

BrandonLucas

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
902
Reaction score
41
Do you think Taekwondo will be better as a full contact martial art using the knock down rule? Or is it too violent? Thoughts comments?

I would love to see TKD go to full contact with knock downs and the like. In fact, I personally think that they should do away with points all together. It should be pretty clear on who the winner is in most matches, and when it isn't clear, then let them rest for 5 minutes and do it again.

Bottom line, any competition for martial arts should be as real as possible...with safety in mind, of course...otherwise, what's the point? Is it still TKD if it isn't realistic? If anyone considers a realistic competition too violent, then they need to rethink taking martial arts to begin with. It's kinda like entering a pie-eating contest when you are on a low-carb diet...you know what you're getting into when it starts, so you have no room to complain about gaining weight once the contest is over.
 

jarrod

Senior Master
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
2,172
Reaction score
96
Location
Denver
Bottom line, any competition for martial arts should be as real as possible...with safety in mind, of course...otherwise, what's the point?

i disagree here on two points. first everyone has different level of commitment to the martial arts. i worked out for a while with a bjj guy who quit boxing because he got a job as a microbiology tech. he looked though a microscope all day, & a bad enough black eye could put him out of work. another guy i know is a watchmaker; a hand injury does the same to him (he is an excellent judo & jujitsuka though). i think people with these type of considerations still should have martial arts to compete in.

the other point is that i view martial sports as opportunities to develop a specialty in your martial arts training. judo specializing in throwing, wrestling in pinning, tkd in high kicking, boxing in...well boxing, but you get my idea. even point fighting can be valuable if you view it as a tool to learn how to land the first effective strike & disregard all the slappy-slap junk that wouldn't really hurt anybody. i think the real danger lies in when people start manipulating the rules to win rather than focusing on the intended specialization.

karate has room for both knockdown & point tournaments, i can't imagine why tkd couldn't do the same.

jf
 

BrandonLucas

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
902
Reaction score
41
i disagree here on two points. first everyone has different level of commitment to the martial arts. i worked out for a while with a bjj guy who quit boxing because he got a job as a microbiology tech. he looked though a microscope all day, & a bad enough black eye could put him out of work. another guy i know is a watchmaker; a hand injury does the same to him (he is an excellent judo & jujitsuka though). i think people with these type of considerations still should have martial arts to compete in.

That's true. But, to play devil's advocate, if the rules for the competition were full contact, and the rules are explained in detail to anyone interested in competing, then the competitor would be aware of the risk and make their judgement accordingly.

the other point is that i view martial sports as opportunities to develop a specialty in your martial arts training. judo specializing in throwing, wrestling in pinning, tkd in high kicking, boxing in...well boxing, but you get my idea. even point fighting can be valuable if you view it as a tool to learn how to land the first effective strike & disregard all the slappy-slap junk that wouldn't really hurt anybody.

I can see the practicality of point fighting as being the first person to pull off an effective strike. The problem with that is that even if you pull off an effective strike before your opponent, you still need to be ready to defend yourself incase your strike was not effective enough. The only way you can be sure if your strike is that effective is to use full contact. This applies especially to the tournements with the rules of stopping the action after each point that is scored.

Even for continuous action sparring, how can you figure the ratio of how many points should be awarded for how effective a landed technique should be, which is what the case is if the rules don't allow full contact. With light to moderate contact, how can you tell that the sidekick that you just landed to your opponent's midsection would have been effective enough to stop your fully or even partially? Just because a kick or punch connects doesn't mean that it's effective. The effectiveness of strikes is 50% location, 50% force. So, compete in a ruleset that takes away the 50% for force, and you're only left with 50% effectiveness.

i think the real danger lies in when people start manipulating the rules to win rather than focusing on the intended specialization.

I agree 110% here. And that's the problem with having rules for something that is most effective with no rules...people will start to manipulate them.

karate has room for both knockdown & point tournaments, i can't imagine why tkd couldn't do the same.

I agree here too. The only problem that I see with this is that TKD already gets watered down enough because of point tournements...maybe changing the rules back to reflect the art itself would change the training practices.
 

BrandonLucas

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
902
Reaction score
41
I agree. Why not both forms of competition. It gives practitioners the best of both worlds, if that's what they want. I mean, after all, it's all a consumers market right? Why not a buffet of choices?

I would say that this all depends on why a person chooses to compete. Do they want to test their skill against other different martial artists, or do they want to compete for bragging rights and a trophy?

Point sparring waters down the art to the point where it's barely recognizable, and then the competitors capitalize on the weakness of the ruleset to win...in other words, they "game the game". At that point, whatever they are competing in ceases to be TKD and becomes a game.
 

jarrod

Senior Master
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
2,172
Reaction score
96
Location
Denver
please forgive my use of bolds, i'm too lazy to cut up quotes right now:

That's true. But, to play devil's advocate, if the rules for the competition were full contact, and the rules are explained in detail to anyone interested in competing, then the competitor would be aware of the risk and make their judgement accordingly.

no problem here.

I can see the practicality of point fighting as being the first person to pull off an effective strike. The problem with that is that even if you pull off an effective strike before your opponent, you still need to be ready to defend yourself incase your strike was not effective enough. The only way you can be sure if your strike is that effective is to use full contact. This applies especially to the tournements with the rules of stopping the action after each point that is scored.

Even for continuous action sparring, how can you figure the ratio of how many points should be awarded for how effective a landed technique should be, which is what the case is if the rules don't allow full contact. With light to moderate contact, how can you tell that the sidekick that you just landed to your opponent's midsection would have been effective enough to stop your fully or even partially? Just because a kick or punch connects doesn't mean that it's effective. The effectiveness of strikes is 50% location, 50% force. So, compete in a ruleset that takes away the 50% for force, and you're only left with 50% effectiveness.

we agree here too. but like i said, not everyone is able or willing to compete in something where they take high power strikes. but the greater prestige is almost always given to higher-contact events. people who don't want to get knocked around too badly should still have something to play, but they should understand the limitations & differences within that ruleset.

I agree 110% here. And that's the problem with having rules for something that is most effective with no rules...people will start to manipulate them.

:asian:

I agree here too. The only problem that I see with this is that TKD already gets watered down enough because of point tournements...maybe changing the rules back to reflect the art itself would change the training practices.

i see what you're saying, but a full-scale conversion to knockdown TKD would lead to a mass exodus. part of why point fighting is popular is because it hurts less than knockdown rules. i think knockdown TKD as a division of competition would give the art more respect, but i don't think that it should replace point fighting. i think rather a restructuring of point fighting would be better. for instance, penalties for dropping your defense after scoring, not counting pitty-pat strikes, that sort of thing. like you said, you can't be 100% positive something would be effective with the power removed, but that's part of the comprimise. removing point fighting would just cause a mass exodus to karate schools that practice point fighting. it's not my thing, but some folks really like it.

jf
 

searcher

Senior Master
Joined
Mar 15, 2005
Messages
3,317
Reaction score
59
Location
Kansas
I love knockdown, but I have to agree that it is not for everyone. I fought knockdown for several years, but now if I compete I try to stick to froms and lighter contact stuff. I am just taking to long to recover these days.

I don't see why there can't be both options available. It give students a choice on what path they want to follow.
 

HM2PAC

Blue Belt
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
203
Reaction score
11
I personally would like to see more contact in TKD sparring.

My Org, (the be-deviled ATA), does not allow:
Punches to the head.
Strikes to the back, below the belt.
Full contact.

They do allow:
Punches to the chest to be counted.
Kicks to the back of the head.
About 50-75% contact.

This is point sparring, which has been a very different evolution for me. I originally trained in Hung Gar and our competitions were Chinese boxing style. Timed rounds that were full contact. I could allow some punches in and absorb some of them to score. "Trade paint" if you will.

That doesn't help with point sparring, it's all about speed. Which has changed all of my workout habits. Weightlifting is now all about sets of 25 reps, plyometrics, jumping, and more abs than I have ever done. Swimming is now sprints instead of distance, and lots of sprints with the kickboard.

What I would like to see change:
1. Allow punches to the head.
2. Timed rounds that do not stop when a score is made. I think competitors should be able to finish 2-3 timed 2:00 minute rounds.
3. Allow some kicks below the belt. Not to the groin obviously, or the knee. But the outer thigh shouldn't be a penalty in my book. I think there could also be some discussion as to whether a completed foot sweep could score.

I would not make a black & white distinction between full contact vs points. Even boxers, kick boxers get each punch/kick tallied, there are minimum kick counts, and rounds must be decided as to which fighter they go to. A good fight has both components.

Just my .03 cents.
 

Hand Sword

Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Sep 22, 2004
Messages
6,545
Reaction score
61
Location
In the Void (Where still, this merciless GOD torme
I would say that this all depends on why a person chooses to compete. Do they want to test their skill against other different martial artists, or do they want to compete for bragging rights and a trophy?

Point sparring waters down the art to the point where it's barely recognizable, and then the competitors capitalize on the weakness of the ruleset to win...in other words, they "game the game". At that point, whatever they are competing in ceases to be TKD and becomes a game.

As I said there's something for all. Point fighting for point fighters, knock down for knock downers, and traditional Tae Kwon Do for those like you. All can take the traditional TKD classes and still do the other stuff on the side. Everyone can be happy.
 

Dao

Green Belt
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
How about full contact with the option of wearing protect gear?
I remember kick boxing being banned for one year in Ontario, Canada because it was too brutal too many people were getting severely injured.
 

myusername

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
477
Reaction score
36
Location
UK
I personally think both so as to allow people to make the choice. Touch contact sparring is a real skill and allows practitioners to demonstrate a high level of control and compentancy in a competetive environment. However, I would love to see full contact divisions in tournaments as well. At times it annoys me that when I deliver a kick during touch contact or semi contact sparring it allows the opponent to still keep on moving with their attack when I imagine that if I had been allowed to go full force it would have interupted the forward momentum. Good examples of this are the front snap kick or the front thrusting kick, both kicks designed to stop the opponents momentum or push them back just don't work as effectively when not allowed to go at full speed and power as the opponent just keeps coming.

I think if both were available within my organisation, even though I do enjoy the semi-contact sparring and see at as a valid way of demonstrating skill and control I would have to try the full contact at least once to feel the difference.
 

StuartA

Black Belt
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
634
Reaction score
33
Location
London
No no.. don't do that, the ITF boys will have little left to make jokes about to re-enforce their own beliefs on sparring!! :)

Seriously, many do not realise that (and I'm not even sure 100% they still do it) KK has both knock-down and a clicker-system (similar to points fighting), so theres no reason why WTF can't have both if they wanted.

That said, the rules dictate what is used, if heavy punching and sweeping etc. were allowed, the kicks would change a fair bit. Actually, the ITF has a reasonabily good format of full contact in their Pro-TKD movement, as it still places an emphasis on good kicks and is full contact (not sure if it allows sweeps or low kicks). AFAIA, the system allows only 2 hand strikes between kicks, so bouts are much more kick-orientated ala TKD (the sporty side as people know it).

Stuart
 

mozzandherb

Green Belt
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
119
Reaction score
3
Location
Gatineau
If I am not mistaken aren't most BB sparring matches full contact even when it's a point system? I mean it is not considered full contact, but when you step in the square it usually becomes full contact (at least from my experiences). Now for coloured belts I dont think it should be full contact for a number of reasons, the main one being lack of experience.
I think like other full contact sports, even though there are knock down rules, they still use a point system, and yes for BB's I believe it should be the same.
 

granfire

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
16,006
Reaction score
1,612
Location
In Pain
Do you think Taekwondo will be better as a full contact martial art using the knock down rule? Or is it too violent? Thoughts comments?

Not reading what anybody else has said, my 2 cents worth:

There is room for both I suppose, but even boxing has a point system, can't knock somebody out all the time (besides, it's not healthy)

But the full contact is best reserved for the young males in the prime of their lives.

Sexist? maybe, but as I age I also come to the conclusion that an older body does not mend as well anymore, and since we are not full time warriors, it really hinders one to get up in the morning going to work when all busted up. I have too many things riding on my body being able to function (mind, too, but that's another story) I just can't afford to be out of commission because of what is essentially a hobby.
 

cali_tkdbruin

Master of Arts
Joined
Aug 27, 2002
Messages
1,697
Reaction score
16
Location
Los Angeles suburbs, Cali. USA
Do you think Taekwondo will be better as a full contact martial art using the knock down rule? Or is it too violent? Thoughts comments?
At it's core the origins of TKD involves the use of full contact hard violence, that's what attracted me to the art. But in order to keep it one of the most popular MAs now for everyone, of course it needs to be deluted in order to make it more acceptable and accessable. That gives other non-Taekwondo practitioners ammunition to bad mouth my beloved art, and maybe rightly so...
 

bluekey88

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
89
How about full contact with the option of wearing protect gear?
I remember kick boxing being banned for one year in Ontario, Canada because it was too brutal too many people were getting severely injured.

This is exactly what WTF sparring is. It is full-contact (in that the competitors are throwing hard shots and only score points for solid blows, bouts can result in and be won by KO), continuous (in that the clock does not stop when a point is scored, you keep going), with protective gear (cup, shin/instep and forearm pads, chest/body protection, helmet, gum shield), vaild targets being anywhere on the body above the belt excluding the spine for hand a feet , and anywhere on the helmet/face for feet (no hands to the head).

I think what most people object to is the ruleset that de-emphasizes the full range of TKD tecniques and leads to a very specuialized sparring style. These are valid issues...but do not confuse WTF/Olympic style sparring with light contact, point-STOP sparring (often seen in Karate tourny's).

There is certainly room for many style's of sparring. I'm all for it. I think Jarrod said it best when he sauid that one should view competitve sparring as a tool...as one piece of the puzzle that one can use to develop their TKD skills, but not the whoel of the art.

Sadly, not everyone does that....regardless of org.

Peace,
Erik
 

jim777

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
1,014
Reaction score
31
Location
Blackwood, New Jersey
The original post doesn't say whether the question considers competition or in class sparring, so I would say in class should remain as is. As for competitions, I don't have a problem with putting it out there. If people want to spar full contact no pads, let 'em go for it. But not everyone trains to do competitions, so I see no real need for it in 'regular' classes; sparring specific classes, maybe.

To be succinct, I'm fine with it being available as long as it isn't forced on anyone at any point.
 

mozzandherb

Green Belt
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
119
Reaction score
3
Location
Gatineau
The original post doesn't say whether the question considers competition or in class sparring, so I would say in class should remain as is. As for competitions, I don't have a problem with putting it out there. If people want to spar full contact no pads, let 'em go for it. But not everyone trains to do competitions, so I see no real need for it in 'regular' classes; sparring specific classes, maybe.

To be succinct, I'm fine with it being available as long as it isn't forced on anyone at any point.
Good point, class sparring and competition sparring could and should be different in terms of contact. B ut if competition sparring were to be full contact, then there would have to be some aspects of your training that involves full contact, either in class or perhaps a separate class intended just for those who want to spar full contact.
 

Latest Discussions

Top