Is taekwondo a form of karate?

[Daniel Sullivan]

Does your taekwondo school say, "karate" on the door? More importantly, do you consider what you do to be a subset of karate or a distinct martial art? Does your taekwondo school say, "karate" on the door?

I am not asking for a definitive answer on this. I realize that there will be different perspectives, so I am not looking for a "correct" answer.

What I am looking for is your perspective as to why. Perspective of karateka is welcome too.

Well, its a public forum, so anyone's perspective is technically welcome.

I would appreciate as much respect of each others' views on this, as this is a potentially contentious subject. If you don't agree with someone else, agree to disagree agreeably. As I said, I'm not looking to settle the issue, but to gain insight into the perspective of the participants' view.

Daniel

 

[igillman]

Karate has had an influence on TKD mainly due to the occupation of Korea by Japan in the early to mid 20th century. However my own impression is that TKD has become something different from karate and different enough to not be called a form of Karate. The boundary between being close enough to something to be called "a form of" and far enough away not to be called "a form of" is a very flexible one, it is subjective and open to interpretation.

Our school does not have the word Karate anywhere and the instructors will tell you (if you ask) that this is Tae Kwon Do and not Karate.

Is TKD a form or Karate? - No but you have to define "a form of" for a definitive answer.
Has Karate influenced TKD? - Yes but the extent was minimised after the Japanese left Korea and Korea gained its national identity back.

 

[Kwanjang]

Interesting topic CT! In the early days we would use the term Korean Karate for marketing pourposes. At one of my locations my main sign says in BIG red letters. KARATE. I generalize for marketing and educate when they are in the door.

 

[Ninjamom]

Karate has had an influence on TKD mainly due to the occupation of Korea by Japan in the early to mid 20th century. However my own impression is that TKD has become something different from karate and different enough to not be called a form of Karate. The boundary between being close enough to something to be called "a form of" and far enough away not to be called "a form of" is a very flexible one, it is subjective and open to interpretation.

Our school does not have the word Karate anywhere and the instructors will tell you (if you ask) that this is Tae Kwon Do and not Karate.

Is TKD a form or Karate? - No but you have to define "a form of" for a definitive answer.
Has Karate influenced TKD? - Yes but the extent was minimised after the Japanese left Korea and Korea gained its national identity back.

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

What he said.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Interesting topic CT! In the early days we would use the term Korean Karate for marketing pourposes. At one of my locations my main sign says in BIG red letters. KARATE. I generalize for marketing and educate when they are in the door.

With the exception of Jhoon Rhee, every taekwondo school and one tang soo do school (TKA) I've studied at had 'karate' on the door in BIG red letters or in the case of TKA, in the course description. In fact, until we moved, our dojang said 'karate kendo' over the door and in neon letters in the windows. The new location says, "Korean Martial Arts," as that is the formal name of the business and we have since added Hapkido to the curriculum.

Daniel

 

[Kwanjang]

The new location says, "Korean Martial Arts," as that is the formal name of the business and we have since added Hapkido to the curriculum.

Daniel

Curious to how that is wourking out- From a purley Mktg standpoint. I personally like it.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Interesting topic CT! In the early days we would use the term Korean Karate for marketing pourposes. At one of my locations my main sign says in BIG red letters. KARATE. I generalize for marketing and educate when they are in the door.

Now, aside from marketing, do you consider taekwondo to actually be a subset of karate or a separate martial art?

Curious to how that is wourking out- From a purley Mktg standpoint. I personally like it.

So far so good. Not sure how much of a difference it has made, but I do think that it is more genuine.

Daniel

 

[bostonbomber]

What does it matter? It all came from Kung Fu anyways (just joking!)

 

[bluekey88]

Well, at the school where I train, Taekwondo is painted in big white letters on the roof, but karate is painted in smaller red letters on the wall of one outside corner. Techniqcally, not a discrepancy as we do explore Shotokan karate kata between sho dan and ee dan.

I do think taekwondo is not karate, they are close cousins. However, that is based on many years of martial arts training that allows me to be aware of subtle distinctions in the delivery of techniques and an awareness of startegic and tactical differences. To civilians (non-martial artists), they basically look the same.

Hell, the more I train, the more i see the similarities between arts and the less i see the differences.

Peace,
Erik

 

[Kwanjang]

Now, aside from marketing, do you consider taekwondo to actually be a subset of karate or a separate martial art?

Daniel

I will refer to Bluekeys post on this one

 

[jim777]

I personally think TKD is indeed a type of karate if not karate itself (which isn't a style but a subject heading anyway). Certainly it is closer to karate than the average stadium hot dog is to meat (or Miley Cyrus is to rock 'n roll). Is it different from GojuRyu? Yeah, but so are Seido, Kyokushin, Shotokon and Ishin Ryu. All the little different nuances don't get you past the fact that all the major points are there; kyohon (hand and foot techniques), kumite (sparring), and kata (forms, hyungs, poomse, etc). They are all of course a little different from style to style, but not night and day different; just different enough most of the time to make them distinguishable from one another. Some changes are even made just to make usre you see what might otherwise be extremely difficult to distinguish (like changing from a traditional gi to a v-neck dobok). Hapkido isn't karate, but no one would argue that it is, right ;-)

Of course, this is only my opinion and I'm not a zealot one way or the other. I do study both TKD and Seido karate, so I do see a large amount of similarity.

 

[dancingalone]

I hold dan rankings in both Okinawan Goju-ryu karate and tae kwon do. I would say although taekwondo clearly started out as a form of karate, it has sufficiently diverged enough in philosophy and technique to be its own animal. Key differences include kicking technique even with regard to common attacks like the side kick or the roundhouse kick. If you pay attention to the fine points like chambering and hip rotation, the differences are very pronounced even if superficially they look the same to the untrained eye.

That said, karate is not a dirty word, and I do think the TKD cognoscenti go too far in trying to bury the origins of the art. There are many lessons TKD people can learn from karate people (the opposite is surely true too). I look at it like spending time with my father. I am different from him with different goals, different desires, even different skill sets. But I would be a fool to not listen to my father when the subject is car maintenance or when personal finance. Why then do so many TKD masters close their ears as soon as the words Japan or karate come up?

 

[Manny]

Back in the mid 80's whrn I got hook in TKD in the door and windows of my fisrt dojan it stated Tae Kwon Do/ Karate Koreano (Tae Kwond Do/ Korean Karate) and my sambuim told me he must to put this to encourage pepople to aproach and take TKD classes cause Tae Kwon Do wasn't recognized by the average people and KARATE was an established word and every one knew karate was a martial art, and because Kaeate was catchy.

Nowadays in my new dojan it sates Tae Kwon Do/ Korean Martial Art.

Yes the karate influenced Tae Kwon Do, in fact Tang Soo Do the old brother of TKD is based in some shotokan karate.

As much as I love the martial art more than the olimpic sport I remember the old good years when Tae Kwon Do had more hand/strike/punching techniques and a lot of more self defense.

Manny

 

[exile]

Great thread, CT and all you followup posters! I think this is the first time I've seen the issue posed in quite this way, which brings up some fairly difficult issue involving the idea of what 'identity' means in the martial arts.

Based on what I've been able to learn about its history—and most of you folks I think have a pretty good idea of where I'm coming from on this point, based on your participation in previous discussions/arguments/shouting matches/riots on the topic—I think it's fair to say that TKD and TSD are the Korean flowering of karate. They share many of the same individual techniques. Many of the hyungs are taken over unchanged from Shotokan (the Kichos are the Taikyoku katas, the Pyang-Ahns are the wonderful, ever-green Pinan/Heian forms, and in schools Koreanized versions of classic kata such as Rohai and Empi are on the syllabus) or else are in effect mixmastered and recombined Shotokan forms (the Palgwes in particular). A lot of the training methods—kihon line drills and so on—are very similar to karate methods.... and so on.

But as many of you have pointed out, there are many differences as well: a karate performance of one of the Pinan kata is almost certainly going to look very different from a TKD/TSD performance of the corresponding Pyang-Ahn form. The mechanics of the kicks are quite different, and their role in the curriculum. There are small differences in the way the hands move in blocking and so on (Stuart Anslow's book has a nice chapter on technical differences beween ITF TKD and Shotokan).

Here's the way I would try to answer the question, if it were practical. Take two groups of very well-trained karateka and TKDists, respectively, with members of both groups having received many years of realistically pressure-tested training in close-quarter street combat. Put them in situations where two members, one from each group, are paired, and in which each of them respectively is confronted by an assailant using the same violent initiations in each case, the same sequences of violent actions, at very close quarters (where most street altercations begin). Here's my question: will a well-informed observer be able to tell which of the two defenders is the karateka and which the TKDist? In any give case? In the majority of cases? In the great majority of cases? We're talking unchoreographed, totally brutal-realistic street defense here, remember...

My feeling is, the less able that observer is to do better than a random guess, the less distinction there really is between the arts, taken out of the school/demo context. The more they overlap in content, and the more the difference between them are strictly stylistic and only dojo/dojang-visible. And the flip side: the more it's true that successful observers are successful in identifying which of the two is a practitioner of which art just by watching each of the pair fight an attacker using the same attack moves on them respectively , the more the difference between the arts is substantive, not cosmetic.

Do any of you-all have any thoughts on this? I suspect that the numbers would be no better than chance, but that's obviously nothing more than a gut-reation-based guess...

 

[Touch Of Death]

Does your taekwondo school say, "karate" on the door? More importantly, do you consider what you do to be a subset of karate or a distinct martial art? Does your taekwondo school say, "karate" on the door?

I am not asking for a definitive answer on this. I realize that there will be different perspectives, so I am not looking for a "correct" answer.

What I am looking for is your perspective as to why. Perspective of karateka is welcome too.

Well, its a public forum, so anyone's perspective is technically welcome.

I would appreciate as much respect of each others' views on this, as this is a potentially contentious subject. If you don't agree with someone else, agree to disagree agreeably. As I said, I'm not looking to settle the issue, but to gain insight into the perspective of the participants' view.

Daniel

Two things are at play here: Karate is just a word Americans understand to mean martial art. Secondly TKD does just happen to be a subset of Karate, the sport.
Sean

 

[miguksaram]

There is no question that the roots of TKD are in Karate. When it was first introduced, it was called Korean Karate simply because "Karate" was more of a household name. So for marketing purposes that was the best way to go. Even now you can still find schools that have been established for a while still say Korean Karate. I do Shorei-ryu Karate now and there is a world of difference in what we do and what I do in my TKD. Neither one is better than the other, just different.

The kwan leaders were karate-ka. However, as it has been said already, TKD has become its own seperate art (via good or bad depending on you perspective).

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

My feeling is, the less able that observer is to do better than a random guess, the less distinction there really is between the arts, taken out of the school/demo context. The more they overlap in content, and the more the difference between them are strictly stylistic and only dojo/dojang-visible. And the flip side: the more it's true that successful observers are successful in identifying which of the two is a practitioner of which art just by watching each of the pair fight an attacker using the same attack moves on them respectively , the more the difference between the arts is substantive, not cosmetic.

Do any of you-all have any thoughts on this? I suspect that the numbers would be no better than chance, but that's obviously nothing more than a gut-reation-based guess...

My thanks for an excellent response. I quoted this part because it addresses the way in which I am asking regarding the similarities and/or differences, which is in regards to technique, forms, application, and sparring.

I recall many years back being in a 'karate' class at a local community center. The only thing I remember from that childhood class is that we did Pinan forms. Our discussions about the Kukkiwon and a comment made by Miguksaram that the old kwan leaders were just practicing Shotokan got me into my library and I dug out a 1982 printing of 'Karate Basic Manual, by A Pfluger' and started looking at the forms and techniques as detailed in the book, as I remember little from my childhood classes.

Without a solid articulated boon hae in taekwondo class, just looking at the photographs and reading the descriptions, I see a lot of similarities in both forms and in technique, with subtle nuances differentiating the two. The biggest difference that I saw, and by no means is this an up to date book, was that not one single kick was higher than chest level, and there were very, very few that were even that high. Another difference was the huge emphasis on hand techniques, something I feel is sorely lacking in KKW taekwondo; can't speak for ITF or other styles of TKD.

After reading, I realized that my taekwondo looks a lot more like the guys in these pictures than it does like the pictures in say, Jennifer Lawler's book, 'The Secrets of Taekwondo' or anything in TKD Times, or even GM Kim's form and technique.

That got me wondering if this is a residual from my childhood training or if I just don't generally kick as high as GM Kim and happen to enjoy punching. The conversation of the 'Restructuring of the Kukkiwon' thread also was thought provoking, and so, here I am with this thread.

It is in the forms, techniques, application, and sparring that I am interested in the relationship or lack thereof, so if anyone can articulate some of those differences, I would appreciate the feedback.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

Here's my question: will a well-informed observer be able to tell which of the two defenders is the karateka and which the TKDist? In any give case? In the majority of cases? In the great majority of cases? We're talking unchoreographed, totally brutal-realistic street defense here, remember...

An interesting question, Exile. Truthfully, I believe the average karateka or taekwondoin will look exactly alike in a street fight with flailing punches and wild, too high kicks. That's rather more a function of poor training than style as I suspect kung fu people would react similarly.

But what about highly trained people? Really for most taekwondoin this is where their self-defense or one-step sparring will come into play. I've seen the CS Kim tang soo do one steps and they're full of what I consider impractical responses to a step through punch, relying on kicking as a counter to what really should be close range fighting at that point. At the risk of controversy, I suspect most TKD have similar material.

My Goju karate teacher taught a variety of self defense techniques all based on movements in our kata and they incorporated classical locks, takedowns, and throws after an entry technique such as a punch or open hand strike. He had few kicking applications and none used 'modern' technique like the sidekick; they were invariably front kicks.

Will a karate guy look different from a TKD guy in a real fight? Perhaps not. Should they? Perhaps so.

 

[exile]

But what about highly trained people? Really for most taekwondoin this is where their self-defense or one-step sparring will come into play. I've seen the CS Kim tang soo do one steps and they're full of what I consider impractical responses to a step through punch, relying on kicking as a counter to what really should be close range fighting at that point. At the risk of controversy, I suspect most TKD have similar material.

I don't think it actually is that controversial, fortunately, da—most of us has seen alleged applications in which the assumption is that your attacker obediantly stands there, stock-still, after throwing a punch that you supposedly block while you move forward into a lung punch which he is happy to just there and receive. The phrase, 'What planet did these guys have their last bar fight on???' comes to mind...

My Goju karate teacher taught a variety of self defense techniques all based on movements in our kata and they incorporated classical locks, takedowns, and throws after an entry technique such as a punch or open hand strike. He had few kicking applications and none used 'modern' technique like the sidekick; they were invariably front kicks.

Low side kicks to the inside of the attacker's knee joint, while you've got them immobilized with a pin, are a genuine fight ender (and they're not going to have much left of their career as a quarter-mile sprinter either, once you're done with them). For the close-in work that most fights require, a knee attack to a soft target is probably the main player—a knee to the abdomen followed by a hard side kick down to the inside of their knee joint is a very effective way to make them rethink their original intention to hassle you. If you can break a couple of boards consistently with that kick, you're going to be true hell on the ligaments in their knees when you deliver that kick.

Will a karate guy look different from a TKD guy in a real fight? Perhaps not. Should they? Perhaps so.

See, this is what I really wonder about—I don't know what the answer is! A skilled technician, equipped with the full range of TKD techs, is probably sharing 80% or more of those techs with a skilled karate technician. The spectacular kicks are going to be hard to get in in most real-life situations where the fight comes to you; you have to train, I think, for the nasty close-in scenario—something boxers do routinely, which is why they're so formidable.

My instinct is that two really good, practical MAists of the TKD and Karate types will actually react to a grab-and-roundhouse, a double-grab/headbutt, or a shove-and-kick attack in much the same way. But I could be wrong... my guess is that if I watch pairs of fighters undergoing this kind of standard attack initiation , the TKDist will respond in a very similar manner to the karateka. I'm reasonably sure that the respective performances of the TKD and Karate person will be much closer to each other than either is to an Akidoka. What about Long Fist Chuan Fa? Fukien White Crane? Southern Mantis? I've no idea really...

... and this gets to what I think is the really deep question underlying Celtic Tiger's OP question: what give a MA its particular identity? Is it its history? Its curriculum? Its forms? Its technique set? Something about the way practitioners perform its techniques? Its strategy/tactics? People seem to have a clear sense that, say, TSD and TKD really are different MAs and both are distinct from Shotokan. OK, but exactly what are the differences? Are they functions of the abstract technique set, or are they matters of execution, or the practical combat strategy? Or are they more matters of history and marketing? People perceive vast distances in many areas—language, ethnicity and so on where objective measures show almost everything in common. What is the real basis of the identity that we attribute to different MAs, such that we talk about these two as being different arts, these two as being different styles, and these two just being two different schools?

 

[Kacey]

Ch'ang H'on (ITF) TKD was founded by Gen. Choi, Hong Hi, who had a II Dan in Shotokan Karate. The forms, especially at the lower gup ranks, are amazingly similar, and the influence of Shotokan is clearly visible, especially at the beginning; the original edition of the Encyclopedia of Taekwon-Do written by Choi, Hong Hi, includes the Shotokan patterns within the volume.

Many US schools in the 1960s - and some as recently as the 1980s - used "Karate" in their school name, as people had some idea what Karate was, while Taekwon-Do was a mystery - it was a marketing device. I've even met students (and the occasional instructor) who knew the Ch'ang H'on forms and ITF curriculum, but who had been taught from day one that they were doing Karate.

That said, I think that each style has gone it's own way, and while TKD's roots in Shotokan are clearly visible, I think they are both their own, independent styles at this point - rather the way Spanish and Italian can clearly be traced back to Latin, but are each their own independent language at this point.