Taekwondo Doesn't work on someone skilled

[Gnarlie]

I have been training in it for 28 years, I started when I was 16.

Exactly.

 

[RTKDCMB]

By their logic, the Gemini was in that state because they failed to maintain it.

I maintained the Gemini in that state for a while.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Mistake #1. If someone works in a place with crazy people don't recommend a fighting system that is heavy in punching and kicking. I'm pretty sure that management wouldn't want their staff punching and kicking the crap out of patients lol.

Mistake #2. These guys bought into the hype of Taekwondo as a sport without realizing that there is a difference between sport and self-defense. That should have been very clear if they sparred in their class. If he was a kid when he started then the blame goes to the parents.

The problem that these guys are talking about isn't so much about the style of the martial art as it is about the focus of the training. Training for sport is not the same as training for self-defense. No matter what style or fighting system a person is using, if the training isn't focused on self-defense then the fighting won't be good for self-defense. We all train according to purpose. If those guys knew had the same understanding that they have now, then they would have never stayed at the TKD school because the training there wasn't for the purpose of self-defense.

There statement about the "majority of TKD" rings true in my area. Nearly all TKD schools (and their are a lot) in a 20 mile radius of where I live have training focused on point sparring tournaments and isn't good for the majority of fights that happen on the streets or in hallways. Many of the students from these schools lack the understanding of using it in a real fight scenario and that puts them at a disadvantage if they end up fighting someone who has been in at least 3 or 4 street fights.

I think maybe instead of saying that Taekwondo is useless they should have started out with their statements on what helps TKD to be good for self-defense by training with a person that is going to try to resist and counter the TKD.

 

[Buka]

I've been looking at this all wrong. (not the first time, I know) I'm doing an about face on this. I'm really starting to enjoy these two kids. Kind of a cross between Master Ken and Kevin Smith's film Clerks.

If we can get them to shoot a segment in The Comic Center of Pasadena (Stewart's comic book store on Bang), we might be talking Emmy here.

Rock on, gentlemen.

 

[TrueJim]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not an expert in self-defense, but in my limited experience, it seems to me one rarely receives the luxury of having a one-on-one fight, where both people are unarmed, and they both know ahead of time that they're going to be fighting in a few moments. It seems to me that more often the attackers are muggers, rapists, gang members, etc who came to the fight armed, came as a group, and generally ambush you. As others have pointed out, the best self defense is being aware of your surroundings, not putting yourselves in dangerous situations, and knowing how to de-escalate.

I agree with everything you guys are saying, but even more than that...it seems to me that this video perpetuates the myth of a one-on-one self-defense situation where both people are unarmed and are of roughly the same size and fitness level so that you can have a "fair" fight. In my opinion, not only is this video wrong, it's mostly irrelevant...the self-defense situation these knuckleheads say we should be preparing for via "better" techniques is vanishingly rare. You might as well say we should all be practicing better unicorn-defense in case we run into a unicorn. I suspect that my opinion on this will be somewhat controversial, but I think if you're choosing your martial art or your school based primarily on an interest in self-defense, you've not only missed the point of martial arts, but worse, you've missed the point of self-defense.

 

[JowGaWolf]

it seems to me that this video perpetuates the myth of a one-on-one self-defense situation where both people are unarmed and are of roughly the same size and fitness level so that you can have a "fair" fight.

The good news is that there are schools that actually to multiple attacker sparring drills. We did one at my school yesterday where we had to deal with 2 attackers. Then we did an awareness drill with 6 people in the fight going for themselves at any point in during the drill the person next to you could turn on you or everyone could turn on you.

There are other schools that do similar multiple attacker drill and I would even dare to say that this scenario is a growing one for many martial arts schools. I agree awareness and deescalation are vital skills. My but has been saved more by those 2 things than my fists have saved me. Picking a school just for self defense should be fine, just as long as the school that is picked is actually focused on training for self-defense.

 

[drop bear]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not an expert in self-defense, but in my limited experience, it seems to me one rarely receives the luxury of having a one-on-one fight, where both people are unarmed, and they both know ahead of time that they're going to be fighting in a few moments. It seems to me that more often the attackers are muggers, rapists, gang members, etc who came to the fight armed, came as a group, and generally ambush you. As others have pointed out, the best self defense is being aware of your surroundings, not putting yourselves in dangerous situations, and knowing how to de-escalate.

I agree with everything you guys are saying, but even more than that...it seems to me that this video perpetuates the myth of a one-on-one self-defense situation where both people are unarmed and are of roughly the same size and fitness level so that you can have a "fair" fight. In my opinion, not only is this video wrong, it's mostly irrelevant...the self-defense situation these knuckleheads say we should be preparing for via "better" techniques is vanishingly rare. You might as well say we should all be practicing better unicorn-defense in case we run into a unicorn. I suspect that my opinion on this will be somewhat controversial, but I think if you're choosing your martial art or your school based primarily on an interest in self-defense, you've not only missed the point of martial arts, but worse, you've missed the point of self-defense.

You would hope then that at the very least your defence will work one on one unarmed. Their gripe was their school did not even do that.

It is almost impossible to set up realistic SD situations to train. Because everybody is at about the same level generally. So to pit students in training against other students with the advantages of numbers weapons and ambush would just mean that student would get unfairly beat up.

 

[drop bear]

The stuff you learn and the ways you practice it as an adult are different to the things you do as a kid. These guys might think they have seen everything Taekwondo has to offer in their 15 years training, but only some of those years have been adult training. Many of the people here on the site have been training as adults for many times longer than that 15 years, and have a much better understanding of what the complete adult martial art of Taekwondo covers. That's not an appeal to authority, but an observation that they are perhaps not best placed to make generalisations and not meet resistance.

No problem with skepticism supported by a scientific approach. The issue I have is with people sitting and pontificating about something that they haven't bothered to investigate fully.

Most people are not trained to apply scepticism with a scientific approach and like in this case flail about with the idea. That's fine it is good in a forum context because by flailing about you lean what works and what dosent.

Doing a course in philosophy would be better. But who has the time?

Yes adult training could be different. And I remember when tkd and karate was a street fighting art.

But if we are discussing the concept of a mc dojo with no resistance and no real feedback from reality you could have trained it for a life time and still be doing it wrong. And they make the same claim.

 

[Steve]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not an expert in self-defense, but in my limited experience, it seems to me one rarely receives the luxury of having a one-on-one fight, where both people are unarmed, and they both know ahead of time that they're going to be fighting in a few moments. .

You get into so many fights, that having a one-on-one is a luxury? Whoa.

 

[TrueJim]

You get into so many fights, that having a one-on-one is a luxury? Whoa.

I'm a badass that way!

No seriously, here are some examples:

A couple of years ago my wife was out with some friends. They were in a brightly-lit public retail plaza late at night, having stepped outside from a restaurant (basically, where all the smokers were standing). Somebody runs up from behind her, tackles her into the ground face-down, sits on her back for a moment while punching her in the ribs, then gets up and runs off with her purse. I don't think there's any amount of self-defense training that could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush. There's no warning, your back is turned, then...boom! you're on the ground.

A couple years before that, in a really nice neighborhood near here, an elderly couple was out for their morning walk when two teenagers came up on them and stabbed them both, then ran off. Nothing was stolen. It turns out the two teenagers (who were from a relatively distant neighborhood) were required to stab somebody as part of their gang initiation, and this was their chosen approach. Again, I don't think any amount of self-defense training could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush either, and especially not against knives.

The few "bar fights" I've ever seen have mostly been shoving matches, not even real fights, but it's never been one guy vs one guy. At least one of the guys always has his buddies by his side.

To me, those are "real world" self-defense situations. From the examples I've seen, talking about which style of martial arts would be most effective is pretty much irrelevant. In my experience, if you're choosing your martial art based on a desire for better self-defense, you don't really have a good feel for what real self-defense situations are like. That's just my experience though.

 

[Gnarlie]

Most people are not trained to apply scepticism with a scientific approach and like in this case flail about with the idea. That's fine it is good in a forum context because by flailing about you lean what works and what dosent.

Doing a course in philosophy would be better. But who has the time?

Yes adult training could be different. And I remember when tkd and karate was a street fighting art.

But if we are discussing the concept of a mc dojo with no resistance and no real feedback from reality you could have trained it for a life time and still be doing it wrong. And they make the same claim.

Yes, but they go a step further, and try to say that all of of Taekwondo is like that. This claim does not stand up to critical examination. There is a clear difference between kids training and adults training. There is also a difference between training with whoever is at the end of your street, and seeking out the core and root of the art. Until one has done the latter, generalisations about the art are just so much hot air, and really aren't worth discussing as they are not based in truth.

The majority of the discussion here on this forum originates out of people making false statements about martial arts based on their own limited experience. If people actually tried hard to find their own answers, there would be a lot more competent martial artists around.

People seem to want to be given knowledge and skill like a gift. It doesn't work like that, because those are things that have to be actively worked at, not passively received.

Saying that Taekwondo as a whole doesn't work is like taking a language course where you only read and never speak, then being disappointed and claiming 'French doesn't work for real communication' when you can't speak fluently at the end of it. It is not a flaw with the language, it's a flaw with the training methodology, but one that can easily be solved by the student. Either speak with a training partner, or find a school where speaking is part of the practice. Both of those require the student to take responsibility for their own progress and goals.

Guess what one of the main differences is past black belt?

 

[Gnarlie]

I'm a badass that way!

No seriously, here are some examples:

A couple of years ago my wife was out with some friends. They were in a brightly-lit public retail plaza late at night, having stepped outside from a restaurant (basically, where all the smokers were standing). Somebody runs up from behind her, tackles her into the ground face-down, sits on her back for a moment while punching her in the ribs, then gets up and runs off with her purse. I don't think there's any amount of self-defense training that could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush. There's no warning, your back is turned, then...boom! you're on the ground.

A couple years before that, in a really nice neighborhood near here, an elderly couple was out for their morning walk when two teenagers came up on them and stabbed them both, then ran off. Nothing was stolen. It turns out the two teenagers (who were from a relatively distant neighborhood) were required to stab somebody as part of their gang initiation, and this was their chosen approach. Again, I don't think any amount of self-defense training could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush either, and especially not against knives.

The few "bar fights" I've ever seen have mostly been shoving matches, not even real fights, but it's never been one guy vs one guy. At least one of the guys always has his buddies by his side.

To me, those are "real world" self-defense situations. From the examples I've seen, talking about which style of martial arts would be most effective is pretty much irrelevant. In my experience, if you're choosing your martial art based on a desire for better self-defense, you don't really have a good feel for what real self-defense situations are like. That's just my experience though.

Mine too.

If I am a bad guy, be it career criminal or drunken buffoon, if I give you the opportunity to defend yourself, I am not a very good bad guy.

In all but a few of the physical encounters I have had, the opportunity to defend myself using physical means has not been present due to the nature of the encounter. Those where the opportunity presented itself, my Taekwondo was definitely an asset.

I have managed to avoid many, many problems through non physical means such as avoidance.

 

[JowGaWolf]

A couple of years ago my wife was out with some friends. They were in a brightly-lit public retail plaza late at night, having stepped outside from a restaurant (basically, where all the smokers were standing). Somebody runs up from behind her, tackles her into the ground face-down, sits on her back for a moment while punching her in the ribs, then gets up and runs off with her purse. I don't think there's any amount of self-defense training that could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush. There's no warning, your back is turned, then...boom! you're on the ground.

I'm not so sure about that. I know when I'm out with friends I listen for irregular footsteps and visual cue from peoples face. People may get a funny look in their face as the person is running towards you from behind. Martial arts that focus on sensing pressure may have prevented the take down. Or at least prevent someone from mounting the person on the back. I would like to think that my trained response to that scenario would be to flow with the energy that his hitting me from behind and then getting into a position where I can redirect that energy. I know that my footing is solid and I'm always mindful that I walk and stand with a solid footing. The solid footing isn't for stopping someone from taking me to the ground as it is for to always retain some kind of balance. I can only assume that the grappling fighting systems out there have a similar ability to recognize shifts in force and pressure. I'm not saying any of this would have stopped it but it would have definitely given her a much better chance to deal with it.

A couple years before that, in a really nice neighborhood near here, an elderly couple was out for their morning walk when two teenagers came up on them and stabbed them both, then ran off.

This would be a difficult one on any given day. I think of knives as stealth weapons where the goal is to get close to people and surprise them with a couple of sticks. These attacks are difficult because most people can hid their intent to do harm. In cases where it's a surprise attack with a weapon the chances are small that anything is going to help out. Self-defense training won't stop every attack and no one trains in it, with the assumption that it will. All of the self-defense techniques that are out there, are based on the defender being aware that they are being attack, which is another reason for being sensitive to one's surroundings. Stay alert, Be aware. You can't defend against something that you can't see.

The few "bar fights" I've ever seen have mostly been shoving matches, not even real fights, but it's never been one guy vs one guy. At least one of the guys always has his buddies by his side.

To me, those are "real world" self-defense situations. From the examples I've seen, talking about which style of martial arts would be most effective is pretty much irrelevant. In my experience, if you're choosing your martial art based on a desire for better self-defense, you don't really have a good feel for what real self-defense situations are like. That's just my experience though.

The fact that there are tons of videos on youtube of people fighting in the street or fighting against an attacker should give you a good idea of what's possible. I have never seen or been in a bar fight or a club fight. I've seen and have been in more school fights than I probably should have been in. Most of the stuff I've been in as an adult, I've been able to deescalate or avoid completely. With the exception of the 2 times guns were pulled on me. All of the other times I've been able to take an "Alpha position" which was only backed by the comfort and understanding that if it came to punches, that I had a really good chance of coming out on top. The way a person stands, the body language that the person sends, the intent in his or her eyes, all plays a part at keeping someone at bay. But I wouldn't try recommend bluffing those type of things if their is no ability to back it up. Think of the "Alpha position" as a snake that is coiled and ready to strike. Think of it as a large dog starring at you and watching you closely. Literally making you think twice about approaching. No words were said, no yelling was done. No huffing and puffing of the chest was needed to community intent and ability. There's a lot more that comes with Martial Arts than just punching and kicking.

 

[drop bear]

A couple of years ago my wife was out with some friends. They were in a brightly-lit public retail plaza late at night, having stepped outside from a restaurant (basically, where all the smokers were standing). Somebody runs up from behind her, tackles her into the ground face-down, sits on her back for a moment while punching her in the ribs, then gets up and runs off with her purse. I don't think there's any amount of self-defense training that could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush. There's no warning, your back is turned, then...boom! you're on the ground.

Yeah this is a theme I do a bit. Not to the point where I would scrap martial arts all together. But at least the realisation that you don't know what you don't know.

And that includes the ambush you don't see coming.

We played a game on a site I did once over a couple of years to see if we could ambush another work mate during security patrols. Just whenever we could find the opportunities. There were water bombs rubber knives and wegies done. People almost got killed when guys would think it was for real and find the nearest brick or steel bar to arm themselves with. Fun times all round.

But it is really hard to pick a dedicated ambush.

 

[Steve]

I'm a badass that way!

No seriously, here are some examples:

A couple of years ago my wife was out with some friends. They were in a brightly-lit public retail plaza late at night, having stepped outside from a restaurant (basically, where all the smokers were standing). Somebody runs up from behind her, tackles her into the ground face-down, sits on her back for a moment while punching her in the ribs, then gets up and runs off with her purse. I don't think there's any amount of self-defense training that could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush. There's no warning, your back is turned, then...boom! you're on the ground.

A couple years before that, in a really nice neighborhood near here, an elderly couple was out for their morning walk when two teenagers came up on them and stabbed them both, then ran off. Nothing was stolen. It turns out the two teenagers (who were from a relatively distant neighborhood) were required to stab somebody as part of their gang initiation, and this was their chosen approach. Again, I don't think any amount of self-defense training could prepare somebody for that kind of ambush either, and especially not against knives.

The few "bar fights" I've ever seen have mostly been shoving matches, not even real fights, but it's never been one guy vs one guy. At least one of the guys always has his buddies by his side.

To me, those are "real world" self-defense situations. From the examples I've seen, talking about which style of martial arts would be most effective is pretty much irrelevant. In my experience, if you're choosing your martial art based on a desire for better self-defense, you don't really have a good feel for what real self-defense situations are like. That's just my experience though.

Thanks for the reply, and I'm very sorry to hear that about your wife. If your wife was with friends, in a well lit, heavily populated area, outside of a restaurant and still got ambushed from behind, I have to think that's an extremely odd thing to happen. I presume she's okay, and hope that sort of thing is very rare around where you live.

I also appreciate the rest of your examples. I'll ask for forgiveness in advance for a rambling post. I have a few points to make, and don't have any time to review or edit to ensure it makes sense. Hopefully it does, at least a little. The point I want to emphasize is that, yes, these things do occur. In some areas, they may occur more frequently than in others. But they remain very, very rare. Truly, we who train in martial arts exaggerate the practical usefulness of what we are learning to an absurd level. I mean, people are attacked by sharks, and we hear about them. And, yeah, it may be a good idea as a surfer to try and mitigate your risk for shark attacks. But, did you know that between 1916 and 2013 (the most recent stats I could find) there were a grand total of 13 fatal, unprovoked shark attacks in the USA? That's not a typo. We average just over 1 attack per year nationwide, and less than about 1.3 per decade are fatal. Most of those have been in California.

Crime statistics are a lot like this. We talk a lot about self defense, but really, most stories you read about where someone is mugged sound a lot more like the one you relate regarding your wife, in that they are ambushes, scary but not life threatening and offer very little in the way of opportunity to execute a well timed roundhouse kick to the temple.

So, all of that said, I don't think you and I are far off in the end. I agree that style vs style arguments about which is better or worse for self defense are largely pointless. But, I think I get there differently. I think most true self defense scenarios hinge around many things that have nothing to do with fighting, and in which there is little to no opportunity for us to use our martial arts. And secondly, that with few exceptions, physical altercations are choices to engage and not random, unavoidable encounters.

I also think we waste a lot of time justifying our pursuit of something we enjoy doing out of a desire to make it seem more legitimate. It's enough, in my opinion, to train in a martial arts style because we like it.

And finally, because we are so entrenched in justifying what we do and why we do it, we become embroiled in the style vs style arguments that everyone alleges to be annoyed by.

 

[drop bear]

I'm not so sure about that. I know when I'm out with friends I listen for irregular footsteps and visual cue from peoples face. People may get a funny look in their face as the person is running towards you from behind. Martial arts that focus on sensing pressure may have prevented the take down. Or at least prevent someone from mounting the person on the back. I would like to think that my trained response to that scenario would be to flow with the energy that his hitting me from behind and then getting into a position where I can redirect that energy. I know that my footing is solid and I'm always mindful that I walk and stand with a solid footing. The solid footing isn't for stopping someone from taking me to the ground as it is for to always retain some kind of balance. I can only assume that the grappling fighting systems out there have a similar ability to recognize shifts in force and pressure. I'm not saying any of this would have stopped it but it would have definitely given her a much better chance to deal with it.

You are not being attacked.

 

[Steve]

I'm not so sure about that. I know when I'm out with friends I listen for irregular footsteps and visual cue from peoples face. People may get a funny look in their face as the person is running towards you from behind. Martial arts that focus on sensing pressure may have prevented the take down. Or at least prevent someone from mounting the person on the back. I would like to think that my trained response to that scenario would be to flow with the energy that his hitting me from behind and then getting into a position where I can redirect that energy. I know that my footing is solid and I'm always mindful that I walk and stand with a solid footing. The solid footing isn't for stopping someone from taking me to the ground as it is for to always retain some kind of balance. I can only assume that the grappling fighting systems out there have a similar ability to recognize shifts in force and pressure. I'm not saying any of this would have stopped it but it would have definitely given her a much better chance to deal with it.

 

[martialartstutor]

As I stated in the video, not every single taekwondo school is like mine. I would say that most of them are, and the only legitimate schools that I found either offered more than taekwondo (look up master kwon's full contact taekwondo) or were an mma school that applied taekwondo or karate in their techniques. There are many many bad schools out there and its very evident if you simply just look it up. The vast majority of taekwondo schools have very young black belts, don't spar regularly, and have a self-defense system that consists of "here I'll hold my hand out" and you imagine what the moves are. This is why I suggest a school that offers something like brazilian jiu jitsu or kick boxing since they have proven time and time again their effectiveness against other martial arts. Now, you can take things from taekwondo and use them, but to soley rely on that martial art isn't the best way to go. Its like learning to wrestle but never learning how to punch. I would say my front kicks would definitly come in handy on a street fight and that was a move I learned from taekwondo. Now, if a big guy wanted to take me down and punch my face in, I know my taekwondo would not stand a chance, which is why I believe going into gaurd and either doing an elbow escape , upa, or triangle choke would benefit my situation no body can argue that having a vast multitude of skills will make you a better fighter. People who believe they don't need to know how to grapple are mistaken because alot of street fights end up on the ground. And even when it comes to striking, you'll never see a straight karate/taekwondo punch, you'll see an overhand right coming right for your face and if you try to use things like hapkido and excpect them to let themselves be thrown you're very mistaken. They will resist and all I see in taekwondo schools and hapkido schools in the united states (and even korea, just look up some korean schools and you'll only see demonstration, no real training for resistance). is fake techniques that work on someone who doesn't know what is going on or is complying with the techniques.

 

[drop bear]

As I stated in the video, not every single taekwondo school is like mine. I would say that most of them are, and the only legitimate schools that I found either offered more than taekwondo (look up master kwon's full contact taekwondo) or were an mma school that applied taekwondo or karate in their techniques. There are many many bad schools out there and its very evident if you simply just look it up. The vast majority of taekwondo schools have very young black belts, don't spar regularly, and have a self-defense system that consists of "here I'll hold my hand out" and you imagine what the moves are. This is why I suggest a school that offers something like brazilian jiu jitsu or kick boxing since they have proven time and time again their effectiveness against other martial arts. Now, you can take things from taekwondo and use them, but to soley rely on that martial art isn't the best way to go. Its like learning to wrestle but never learning how to punch. I would say my front kicks would definitly come in handy on a street fight and that was a move I learned from taekwondo. Now, if a big guy wanted to take me down and punch my face in, I know my taekwondo would not stand a chance, which is why I believe going into gaurd and either doing an elbow escape , upa, or triangle choke would benefit my situation no body can argue that having a vast multitude of skills will make you a better fighter. People who believe they don't need to know how to grapple are mistaken because alot of street fights end up on the ground. And even when it comes to striking, you'll never see a straight karate/taekwondo punch, you'll see an overhand right coming right for your face and if you try to use things like hapkido and excpect them to let themselves be thrown you're very mistaken. They will resist and all I see in taekwondo schools and hapkido schools in the united states (and even korea, just look up some korean schools and you'll only see demonstration, no real training for resistance). is fake techniques that work on someone who doesn't know what is going on or is complying with the techniques.

Look for a school that does not have tons of child black belts train with resistance offers a wide range of styles or sets up against other systems. This is all good advice.

Otherwise I can take your advice and still get a garbage system if I am just looking at the label of the school.

I mean a kickboxing school would have to self defence better right?

 

[Tez3]

And even when it comes to striking, you'll never see a straight karate/taekwondo punch, you'll see an overhand right coming right for your face

so, how many fights ( real ones) have you been in or even witnessed in person, not on video?