Old School Taekwondo vs the new Kukkiwon

[skribs127 148]

I cannot count the times I took control of someone with a wrist/elbow/should manipulation in my LEO days.

One thing I've really learned in BJJ is the faster you take advantage of an opportunity, the better your success with the technique. And, the moment you let up the pressure from the technique, you're back to square one.

 

[philwhite54 10]

I cannot count the times I took control of someone with a wrist/elbow/should manipulation in my LEO days.

I think I was too generic in my assessment. We did the wrist manipulations where someone is standing infront of you cross grabs your wrist and does not resist as you reverse their hand to a takedown. If you resist or roll it not a hard move to escape. Now if you have some one on the ground and your twisting their wrist I see your point as its a good restraint.

 

[J. Pickard]

I think the difference is that most modern KKW dojang focus so heavily on promoting WT sport that there is no real martial art to it anymore, its just promoting the sport. Arguably WT has done more harm than good by watering down TKD to a shell of what its meant to be. The fact that WT tournaments have about 7 forms divisions, including dance (dont even get me started on that whole bunch of BS) and only one type of sparring that is as close to real fighting as a watergun is to actual war is why I think people consider non-sport tkd to be "old school". I would argue that the practical side (head punches, leg kicks, takedowns, etc.) is not old-school, but rather a holistic approach to TKD as a martial art, with sport as a tertiary aspect of training. And while that is harder to find in many kkw dojang, it is still a very thriving concept as you will undoubtedly see in this forum. There are many TKD dojang owners on MT that still regularly train the comprehensive martial art of tkd and not just sport.

 

[HighKick]

I think I was too generic in my assessment. We did the wrist manipulations where someone is standing infront of you cross grabs your wrist and does not resist as you reverse their hand to a takedown. If you resist or roll it not a hard move to escape. Now if you have some one on the ground and your twisting their wrist I see your point as its a good restraint.

 

[HighKick]

I think I was too generic in my assessment. We did the wrist manipulations where someone is standing infront of you cross grabs your wrist and does not resist as you reverse their hand to a takedown. If you resist or roll it not a hard move to escape. Now if you have some one on the ground and your twisting their wrist I see your point as its a good restraint.

With very few exceptions, you took control facing the person straight on. Distraction was a big part of the equation.

 

[Earl Weiss124 24]

With very few exceptions, you took control facing the person straight on. Distraction was a big part of the equation.

I use a similar concept for releases and manipulations. Give every technique it's D.U.E. First, Distraction, then Unbalance (Even slightly) the Execute the technique.

 

[skribs127 148]

I use a similar concept for releases and manipulations. Give every technique it's D.U.E. First, Distraction, then Unbalance (Even slightly) the Execute the technique.

There's a similar concept in BJJ. You learn the technique of a take-down or sweep (a sweep is basically a take-down when you're already on bottom). But in order for it to work in a live roll, your opponent needs to either already be unbalanced and you make them hit the tipping point, or you need to unbalance them first. If you execute the technique against an opponent with a solid base, it's never going to work.

I'm not really sure if there's a term to describe a technique that is technically correct but functionally useless because the situation isn't right; a technique that works in drills but not live because you don't yet have the experience to know when the window is open.

I've been watching a lot of Rick Ellis videos lately (the channel "Art of Skill" on Youtube) and in some of his videos he's been talking about when the window for a technique opens or closes. If you can spot a window as its opening, you can hit the technique when its fully open and it will be easy. If you spot the window only when its open, you're going to hit it while its closing and it will be much more difficult. And if you spot the technique only after it was open, while its closing, then by the time you execute it's already closed. Experience helps you both spot the window opening much faster, as well as decide when to act much faster, and have a much easier time executing the technique.

In the context of traditionally-learned self-defense in a TKD curriculum, this applies to both the person executing the self-defense technique and the person receiving it. If the person receiving the technique is able to recognize it coming in, they're more likely to counter or escape it, leaving you at square one.

 

[Simfers128 36]

I'm not really sure if there's a term to describe a technique that is technically correct but functionally useless because the situation isn't right; a technique that works in drills but not live because you don't yet have the experience to know when the window is open.

An inopportune technique, maybe? You have all the pieces, the timing just isn't there yet.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf127 1]

I think I was too generic in my assessment. We did the wrist manipulations where someone is standing infront of you cross grabs your wrist and does not resist as you reverse their hand to a takedown. If you resist or roll it not a hard move to escape. Now if you have some one on the ground and your twisting their wrist I see your point as its a good restraint.

This sounds like it may just have been an issue of your school not teaching properly. Doing that should be the first step to make sure you're technically getting it right. After that you should be going into getting it against resistance, how to set it up so you can land it before they realize they need to be resisting, and how to use their resistance to flow into another technique if you're not getting it.

 

[isshinryuronin18 18]

how to use their resistance to flow into another technique if you're not getting it.

If you can't do this you can lessen their resistance with a kick to the shin, headbutt, spit, kiai, knee or anything else to distract them so you can complete your original technique or to facilitate flowing into another. Better yet, do this before/in conjunction with your technique to keep the resistance from manifesting to begin with as you said. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Don't try it if you haven't set up first or if the opponent opens himself for it.

 

[HighKick]

I'm not really sure if there's a term to describe a technique that is technically correct but functionally useless because the situation isn't right; a technique that works in drills but not live because you don't yet have the experience to know when the window is open.

Bad timing.

 

[HighKick]

In the context of traditionally-learned self-defense in a TKD curriculum, this applies to both the person executing the self-defense technique and the person receiving it. If the person receiving the technique is able to recognize it coming in, they're more likely to counter or escape it, leaving you at square one.

This is an issue with how traditional one-step/three-steps are taught/expressed and perceived from 'outsiders'. If a person doesn't understand that one person is on the offense and the other person is reacting, they either don't know what they are watching/doing, it has not been expressed correctly, or both. They are not so much about read and react but having a good set of options to react with. There is a considerable amount of rote memorization but let's be honest, this is true about nearly everything we do. And remember, they are usually done in a 'formal' format, but it must be strongly explained/learned that the techniques may have to be done from any direction, stance, or height. This is too often not explained well enough, and people develop memory only for the formal punch/strike.
What too often happens is a lackadaisical approach toward the method and not enough (safe) contact to keep a healthy level of realism. Of course, there are some things that just have to be practiced on a target or bag for safety. But this must be reconciled when doing non/light contact drills.
When you add kids into this mix, I feel the partner has to be an adult. Or limit the techniques/steps.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf127 1]

If you can't do this you can lessen their resistance with a kick to the shin, headbutt, spit, kiai, knee or anything else to distract them so you can complete your original technique or to facilitate flowing into another. Better yet, do this before/in conjunction with your technique to keep the resistance from manifesting to begin with as you said. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Don't try it if you haven't set up first or if the opponent opens himself for it.

Oh absolutely. I wasnt trying to make a comprehensive list, this is one of my favorites.

 

[Earl Weiss124 24]

There's a similar concept in BJJ. You learn the technique of a take-down or sweep (a sweep is basically a take-down when you're already on bottom). But in order for it to work in a live roll, your opponent needs to either already be unbalanced and you make them hit the tipping point, or you need to unbalance them first

This exists in Judo as well and referred to as "Kuzushi - Wikipedia" The hue difference between this and what I teach forslef defense is that contest rules will generally frown on a strike to distract them.

 

[skribs127 148]

This exists in Judo as well and referred to as "Kuzushi - Wikipedia" The hue difference between this and what I teach forslef defense is that contest rules will generally frown on a strike to distract them.

To quote one of my Professors: "You get 4 penalties before you're DQ'd, you might as well use them."

The full context: we were doing competition rounds, where we got into groups of 5. Two people fought, two people coached, and one person reffed. I (at the time a white belt, weighing 185) was going against a brown belt around 230. My coach - a good friend of the brown belt - said "Knee him in the balls!"

The aforementioned Professor walked by, I told him my coach's advice. That's when he said, "You get 4 penalties..."

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Having began my Tae Kwon Do journey in the mid 1980's, my Kwan Jang Nim is an ROK veteran, and distinguished martial artist from the 1950-60's kwan era of Tae Kwon Do. During the first 10-15 years of my TKD journey, my KJN was supportive of the Olympic movement, as most of the korean instructors were at the time. In fact, my KJN served as the Vice President of the USTU during the 1990's. He began to see the sport side detract from both the art and the martial science, in favor of manipulating the rules to win matches. It was after he left the olympic development movement that we saw punches to the head return to normal sparring. These days, all of the competitions we support allow scoring with hand techniques to the head. At the competition I host, we allow punches, back fists, and ridgehands to the body and head.

As far as the time frame training to own the skills required for 1st dan, and the promotion examination itself.. .

I think most have stated that the established norm from even back in the "old days" was 3-5 years. A disciplined person, with proper practice frequency, with attention to stance, rhythm, and focus, should expect to become proficient with the curriculum in 3-5 years. As for the test, it is only "hard" if you haven't spent adequate time preparing for it. "Brain surgery isn't brain surgery for a brain surgeon." The examination allows for you to demonstrate your proficiency under duress.

I think it's easy to look at organizations that are "different" and see their limitations, but I've seen the same limitations from older "kwan affiliated" schools, ITF schools, and KKW schools alike. I mean, I've seen it from karate schools too. When there is no governing body to regulate it, it is either up to A). each organization to govern itself or B). the consumer choice drives the market.

Organizations grow to a point that governing the standard becomes very challenging.

The consumer doesn't always know what they want. They see the black belt, and assume it holds everything they want. A black belt from one school means something totally different than it does to the school down the street.

Maybe it's time to bring back Dojo Yaburi to come back to popularity, it would certainly "take out the laundry." I jest, as we all know, in this day of litigation, storming your local rival school is fraught with liability!

 

[isshinryuronin18 18]

Organizations grow to a point that governing the standard becomes very challenging.

The head instructor is the determining factor. Whether as an independent or entrusted to carry out an organization's standards (or surpass them).

the consumer choice drives the market.

That the market is consumer driven is a reality few teachers can avoid. But the art as it's taught is strictly the province of the sensei for good or ill. Some things just shouldn't be compromised.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

The head instructor is the determining factor. Whether as an independent or entrusted to carry out an organization's standards (or surpass them).

I totally agree, but running a school, and being promoted to run/help run an organization are not the same things. The Peter Principle probably applies here.

That the market is consumer driven is a reality few teachers can avoid. But the art as it's taught is strictly the province of the sensei for good or ill. Some things just shouldn't be compromised.

I have a small school (about 40 students), and running the school is not my day job. That affords me the luxury of not worrying about the revenue the school brings in, beyond keeping the doors open. IMHO, this allows me to maintain the art without compromising to the market.

 

[Earl Weiss124 24]

To quote one of my Professors: "You get 4 penalties before you're DQ'd, you might as well use them."

The full context: we were doing competition rounds, where we got into groups of 5. Two people fought, two people coached, and one person reffed. I (at the time a white belt, weighing 185) was going against a brown belt around 230. My coach - a good friend of the brown belt - said "Knee him in the balls!"

The aforementioned Professor walked by, I told him my coach's advice. That's when he said, "You get 4 penalties..."

Some competitions have the Penalty is also a "Minus Point" I have won matches because the opponent got several Minus points.

 

[skribs127 148]

Some competitions have the Penalty is also a "Minus Point" I have won matches because the opponent got several Minus points.

In IBJJF penalties are somewhat complicated. However, a gross violation (like the one my coaches suggested) would likely be an instant DQ as a Severe Penalty, as opposed to other penalties that are Serious Penalties.

Serious penalties are marked in the following order for each infraction:

1. 1 penalty point.
2. 1 penalty point, and the opponent receives one advantage point.
3. 1 penalty point, and the opponent receives 2 points.
4. Disqualification.

The IBJJF scoreboard looks like this. Green for points, yellow for advantage points, and red for penalties. Advantages are given for almost scoring or almost submitting your opponent, but not quite doing enough to secure the position to score or the submission to get a tap. The winner of the match is determined in the following order:

1. Stoppage due to DQ or submission. (Points don't matter in this case).
2. Whichever athlete has the most points. (Advantages and penalties don't matter in this case).
3. In a tie score (on the green), then subtract the penalties from the advantages and the person with the highest remainder wins. For example, if the score is 6/3/0 to 6/4/2, the player with 6/3/0 would win because they have 3 advantages - 0 penalties for 3, vs. the 4 advantages - 2 penalties for 2.
4. If the score is still tied, the referee will determine the winner based on whoever has the more Brazilian-sounding name their personal opinion on who was more active during the fight.