ITF & WTF is there any more?

[chrismay101]

Ok sorry if I don't put this right!

I was reading a Taekwondo schools website and it mentioned how the main styles of taekwondo are WTF and ITF but there style is a modern variant of taekwondo that has been updated so ground fighting is envolved!
So is this taekwondo?
ok I know taekwondo means foot -fist -way in its most basic translation
so anything that involves punches and kick could I supose be classed taekwondo!
but there should be apoint we say NO! this isn't TKD it's MMA or it TKD with a big bolt on!

 

[searcher]

The debate over this subject has been going on for years with many other styles. I don't have an answer for you, I have been struggling with this myself. When does a curriculum stop one style and start being another? Good luck in your search for an answer.

 

[bigfootsquatch]

Ok sorry if I don't put this right!

I was reading a Taekwondo schools website and it mentioned how the main styles of taekwondo are WTF and ITF but there style is a modern variant of taekwondo that has been updated so ground fighting is envolved!
So is this taekwondo?
ok I know taekwondo means foot -fist -way in its most basic translation
so anything that involves punches and kick could I supose be classed taekwondo!
but there should be apoint we say NO! this isn't TKD it's MMA or it TKD with a big bolt on!

Groundfighting/grappling is a great supplement to any martial art. TKD originally had many joint locks and throws, but in light of the competition era, most of that has been dropped(along with many other hand strikes) in favor of punches and kicks. Nowadays, if you want groundfighting and grappling, I think it is generally best to go with a style more oriented with that, because it is a safe bet thats where the moves came from anyway.

 

[chrismay101]

Yeah I know your right TKD does have some joint locks / throws but they come across as such an after thought that why bother! or is it me just me being misrable!

 

[FieldDiscipline]

or is it me just me being misrable!

Yep.

 

[chrismay101]

Is there any of you guys who do this sought of thing put the record straight!

 

[searcher]

Is there any of you guys who do this sought of thing put the record straight!

What sort of thing? Add to our art?

Yes I add to my Chito-ryu, but I have not added to my TKD. I have added TKD training to my Chito-ryu training along with other styles.

 

[TKDmel]

I have been involved in TKD for over twenty years, and during that time I have always trained in hapkido as a supplement to TKD and am tested on it as well in order to advance. I do not see it as an MMA per se, but rather enhancing my TKD training.

 

[searcher]

I do not see it as an MMA per se, but rather enhancing my TKD training.

This is an extrordinary way of looking at it and IMO it would benefit us all to look at our training in this manor.

 

[Kodiak61]

The style of TKD I study is about 50-50 hand and foot techniques. Our self defense borrows a lot from HKD. No martial art is complete all by itself. As students of martial arts we need to supplement our training with other elements (ground fighting, weapons, etc.) so that we can be well round and at least understand the principles of those other arts/techniques. I think open tournaments are a great help in that our opponents (sparring) fight with a different mind set then we are use to when facing someone from our own dojang/system.

 

[Kwan Jang]

It should be remembered that TKD (WTF at least) is an umbrella system consisting of the original kwans. These kwans were as much of seperate systems as the Japanese ryus. It was also common when I began TKD 30 years ago for schools to teach Hapkido and Yudo as part of a TKD school's curriculum and it was often hard to distinguish where the TKD ended and the Hapkido and Yudo began.

Hapkido is basically a Korean version of the Daito-ryu school of Jujitsu and Yudo is Korean Judo. Hmm, combine this with a full contact (though restricted rule set) full contact striking sport and it starts to seem a lot closer to current MMA than it may first seem. My only question is whether participants want it to continue to evolve to keep up with the progression in MMA that is happening elsewhere or to be watered down instead.

As Exile has posted several times (and provided the evidence to back up the claims), the real tradition of TKD is as a battle proven, very effective combat art used by the ROK military in CQC with devastating results. The shift to an emphasis as a "sanitized sport" for the Olympics is a later invention. I see the trend as a return to TKD's roots and traditions is one that I am glad to see.

 

[jim777]

This is an extrordinary way of looking at it and IMO it would benefit us all to look at our training in this manor.

I don't know that it is terribly uncommon. My TKD school also has Hapkido moves that are included with each rank test, be it a takedown or a simple side break fall. I'd guess a fair number of TKD schools mix in Hapkido as well.

jim

 

[rmclain]

TKD originally had many joint locks and throws, but in light of the competition era, most of that has been dropped(along with many other hand strikes) in favor of punches and kicks.

I know that alot of people think this nowadays. But, the original kongsoodo/tangsoodo/taekwon arts did not have any takedowns or jointlocks. The original was kick, punch, block, strike techniques.

This is simple, yet difficult to explain in text without getting long-winded.

Prior to the re-introduction of such arts back into South Korea following WWII, many junior high and high schools had Yudo training for PE.

Back in those days 1945-1959, it was HIGHLY frowned upon to train in more than one dojang or art. So much, that is was very rarely done. If you tried to train somewhere else and someone from that dojang "told on you" you were likely to get beat up by some of the students or the instructor.

I personally think it is a wonderful thing that Korean martial artists began studying multiple arts later. My own instructor, Grandmaster Kim Soo, started at the Changmoo-Kwan in 1951, transferred to Kangduk-Won (same curriculum as Changmoo-Kwan) in 1957, then additionally trained in Yudo starting in high school under Han Jin-hee (Kangmoo-Kwan), and started Hapkido (Sungmoo-Kwan) in 1958 under Han Jae-ji.

He often tells the story about using Yudo takedowns in sparring at the Kangduk-Won and getting into trouble with Master Park Chul-hee, then using Kangduk-Won techniques at the Kangmoo-Kwan yudo dojang and getting into trouble with Master Han Jin-hee.

When he started as a white belt in Hapkido in 1958, someone told Han Jae-ji he was a black belt from the Kangduk-Won and Master Han tried to hurt him on purpose in a technique demonstration for the students. Afterward, they became friends.

This is just one of the examples from training at that time. But, I've been told by Grandmaster Kim that people didn't train very long (more than a few months or 1 year) during those days and they didn't (or rarely) trained simultaneously in several martial arts before 1960.

R. McLain

 

[Kacey]

I agree with rmclain - when ITF TKD was first introduced, all of the techniques were straight line techniques - nothing circular at all. Those techniques were introduced later, in the 1980s; my sahbum (who's been in TKD for 28 years) remembers techniques like crescent kick being introduced. Now, we do quite a few falls, releases, controls, and throws, and, as previously mentioned, they come primarily from Hapkido.

 

[FieldDiscipline]

I agree with rmclain - when ITF TKD was first introduced, all of the techniques were straight line techniques - nothing circular at all. Those techniques were introduced later, in the 1980s; my sahbum (who's been in TKD for 28 years) remembers techniques like crescent kick being introduced.

Is it possible that he just hadnt been taught them before? I have a book by one of the biggest influences behind Taekwon Do, published in 1979 with crescent kicks in it. It is an 'advanced' Taekwon Do book.

 

[Kacey]

Is it possible that he just hadnt been taught them before? I have a book by one of the biggest influences behind Taekwon Do, published in 1979 with crescent kicks in it. It is an 'advanced' Taekwon Do book.

It could have been the 70s... nonetheless, I have a 1965 Encyclopedia and there aren't any circular techniques in it. Also, remember, that I am talking solely about ITF TKD, not any other TKD organization.

 

[FieldDiscipline]

Incidently, the man who wrote my book also wrote most of that encylopedia. I'll ask around about this.

 

[rmclain]

It could have been the 70s... nonetheless, I have a 1965 Encyclopedia and there aren't any circular techniques in it. Also, remember, that I am talking solely about ITF TKD, not any other TKD organization.

I've been looking in that book since I was a child (My father bought the book in New York City in 1966) and I never really noticed about the circular techniques. Now I'm curious enough to go back and look.

R. McLain

 

[foot2face]

I may be wrong, but I believe GM S. H. Cho released a book in 1968 that detailed crescent kicks as well as some circular hand strikes. I think the title might be TAE KWON DO Secrets of Korean Karate.

 

[Kacey]

I may be wrong, but I believe GM S. H. Cho released a book in 1968 that detailed crescent kicks as well as some circular hand strikes. I think the title might be TAE KWON DO Secrets of Korean Karate.

Please bear in mind that the ITF under Gen. Choi was only 1 of 9 kwans, and that each kwan developed somewhat separately - so it would not surprise me at all if some techniques, or types of techniques, appeared earlier in some kwans that others, nor, therefore, would it surprise me if the texts developed by the founder of one kwan was different than that of another; actually, it would surprise me much more if they were the same.