TKD Changes

newGuy12

Master of Arts
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Messages
1,691
Reaction score
63
Location
In the Doggy Pound!
I always think of it in this way: There is a way to "model" kicks in the mind (now, this may just be in MY mind, but it does occur to me):

To kick a target is to give energy to it, to do WORK (in the physics sense) on the target. I can kick to either:

1) BREAK the target (deform it, smash it)

or

2) MOVE it (endow it with some translational energy, some change in position).

Now, say there is some scenario such as this: Some nice person is standing talking to me. Bear with me, this could take many different forms, but I give only specific ideas... We are, in, say, a warehouse, and the person does not notice a mass that is starting to fall down. I have no time to explain to the person. I wish to simply move them out of the way from the falling box/crate/whatever.

Okay, then, I can kick this nice person. But, I can minimize the HARM (deformation/injury) to them. I can kick them near the CENTER OF MASS in such a way as to MOVE them to a different place. Instead of rupturing some internal structure or breaking some rib, say, I need to make the person ACCELERATE across the floor.

With this TKD this can be accomplished! You can kick the opponent into another opponent, or into traffic, say, or down a flight of stairs/out the window/into the swimming pool (it does not matter).

OR, likewise, you can kick the nice person OUT OF THE WAY of harm (again, this is just an example!).

You do not always wish to kick to give some SHOCK, break something.

This type of difference in "energy" (for lack of better words). I believe that it comes from practice with INTIMATE CONTACT with targets. One develops a certain "feeling" for the kicking motions/energy transmission.

Now, it *MAY* be that I am nothing but a foolish middle aged man having some delusional ideas, but I swear to you, that is one way that these kicks are modeled in my mind.





Regards,

Robert
 

foot2face

Green Belt
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
176
Reaction score
19
Define "fight". There are lots of situations I can imagine in which I would need to defend myself without wanting to "hit my adversary as hard as possible", as you put it. If someone grabs me, I want to make them let go, as quickly as possible - but that doesn't necessarily mean hitting as hard as I can - it depends on the situation.
If the situation didnt call for me to hit my adversary as hard a possible then I wouldnt hit them at all, period. Why risk escalating the situation by striking? If you dont perceive a serious threat wouldnt it be preferable not to introduce a higher level of violence, especially if it can be avoided? In a situation like this I would rely on a technique or tactic other than striking.
From a legal standpoint, I want to do the least I possibly can to get out of the situation; doing more than that could lead to me being prosecuted - the law mandates a reasonable response - and hitting someone as hard as possible is not always a reasonable response.
A light punch or a hard kick are both considered assault. Striking someone is a violent act weather its hard or not. As I mention before, I have a high standard as to when I would resort to violence, part of that is due to the legal consequences. However, if that standard is met and I feel my safety or the safety of someone around me is in serious jeopardy then I will act, legal consequences be dammed. Many of the black belts at my school were LEOs. Every one of them had a story of a fellow officer who was killed or seriously injured in the line of duty because he
under reacted when face with a dangerous situation. Those who were fortunate enough to survive told them they acted as they did because they feared the legal ramifications of a more forceful response. These black belts taught me to refrain from the use of violence as best I can, but if the situation should arise where the use of violence is necessary then use it completely, dont hold back. With regards to TKD this meant dont hit anyone unless they absolutely needed hitting and if they needed hitting, hit them hard and dont stop until their unconscious. They told me its better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
I don't disagree with the above - but this part of your rationale was not stated previously, and is very relevant to the discussion.
Forgive me, I didnt think it was relevant. Remember, I entered this conversation by simply advocating the use of protective equipment while sparring. I did not foresee it evolving into the discussion it has become.
I take my TKD skills very seriously too - but I train to respond appropriately, which means I can deliver different levels of response. If you understand that different scenarios require different responses, then we are agreeing using different terminology; if you think you can only use TKD for a serious situation, then you are missing a wide range of possible response scenarios in which your TKD could be used just as well - but with less force in some situations than others.
I find this approach a little troubling. I just dont feel comfortable with hitting someone unless they really needed to be hit, even if I reduced the force of my blow or selected a less vulnerable target. Striking is too unpredictable, you never know how someone will react to being hit. I wouldnt want to invite all the unintended consequences that accompany striking someone if it wasnt absolutely necessary. For example, there is a thread in another forum about a young girl who killed a boy with a little punch to the chest. It was a simple school yard fight. Can you imagine the horror of killing someone like this, especially if there was no real threat of serious harm, you were just trying to dissuade them from taking a course of unappreciated action. Ive also witnessed occasions where someone tried to get the point across, dont mess with me, by landing a blow, not an overly aggressive shot but forceful enough to send the message. Half the time this worked, with the person who got hit deciding they didnt want any and walking away. The other half of the time they snapped, and violently attack the person who hit them. In one instance, pulling a knife and attempting to gut the other man. This situation could have been avoided if the original striker would have refrained from hitting or, if they felt striking was the only option, by going all they way and knocking their adversary out before they have the opportunity to seriously harm them. Its taking the middle ground that led to trouble. The way I see it, youre either in a dangerous situation where you need to hit, so hit hard, or the situation isnt really dangerous, so dont make it dangerous by hitting.
I hope I have explained my position a little better. Im looking forward to your response.

All the best - F2F
 

Kacey

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
16,462
Reaction score
227
Location
Denver, CO
Here's the part I'm not sure I made clear: my TKD skills include a good chunk of Hapkido, as well - and there are time when releases, pressure points, controls, and throws are more applicable to a situation than hand and foot strikes, and many of those techniques are lower on the intensity scale than hand and foot strikes.

In addition - to return to the original question of protective gear - I can punch and kick at someone with sufficient focus to stop at the tip of the other person's nose... and there have been occasions when that has provided enough of a demonstration to prevent the need to go further; having someone suddenly throw a full speed, full power punch at your face and stop on the tip of your nose is an attention-getter. I attained that level of focus by training without protective gear - now, certainly, there are times when I do use protective gear, for various reasons (tournament rules, insurance regulations, juniors who have not yet attained a sufficient level of control, etc.) - but I also do a fair amount of without pads; after all, how often are you attacked while wearing your sparring gear?

Also, if you've only been hit by someone wearing pads, then no matter how hard you've been hit, you don't know what it's like to be hit barehanded - I've experienced both, and I have to say that, no matter how hard someone hits you wearing pads, being hit barehanded is worse. The pads, by their very nature, spread the power to a larger surface, thereby reducing the intensity of the strike somewhat. And if you've never hit someone barehanded (or barefooted - although the foot pads we use don't cover the sole of the foot, so for some kicks it doesn't matter) then you are less likely to understand how to use the correct surface of your fist - specifically, the first two knuckles, closest to the back of the hand - to inflict the maximum damage, because it's much harder to use a tool that small while wearing hand pads; even if you do it correctly, it's hard to tell, either as striker or receiver.
 

Hollywood1340

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Messages
808
Reaction score
15
Location
Missoula, Montana
Pads or no pads, in the end if your not trained to take ANY kind of shot, the first one will be the worst. At least hit each other every now and then. :)
 

foot2face

Green Belt
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
176
Reaction score
19
Here's the part I'm not sure I made clear: my TKD skills include a good chunk of Hapkido, as well - and there are time when releases, pressure points, controls, and throws are more applicable to a situation than hand and foot strikes, and many of those techniques are lower on the intensity scale than hand and foot strikes.
You didnt make this clear at all. You consistently referred to your ability to control the amount of force you deliver with a blow so that you can use your striking across a variety of situations, appropriately. A practice I consider to be impractical and somewhat dangerous.

In addition - to return to the original question of protective gear - I can punch and kick at someone with sufficient focus to stop at the tip of the other person's nose... and there have been occasions when that has provided enough of a demonstration to prevent the need to go further; having someone suddenly throw a full speed, full power punch at your face and stop on the tip of your nose is an attention-getter.
Ive always thought that displays like this are rather silly. Its one thing to exude confidence, letting them know you not an easy target, but to go into a demo of your MA skills in order to intimidated a would be attacker. Its just not my way. It also doesnt seem that safe or smart to me. I liken it to trying to intimidate someone by flashing you holstered piece when theirs is already drawn. Why give them the heads up?

I attained that level of focus by training without protective gear - now, certainly, there are times when I do use protective gear, for various reasons (tournament rules, insurance regulations, juniors who have not yet attained a sufficient level of control, etc.) - but I also do a fair amount of without pads;
I attained focus by training with protective gear. The type of focus that allows me to remain calm and in control when faced with violent aggression, someone really trying to hit me, hard. There was no sporting aspect to the training in my school. When we donned our protective gear it was to reduced the likelihood of injury when hit, which it did.

after all, how often are you attacked while wearing your sparring gear?
Shows what you know. I sport a full suit of armor 24/7. Besides, how often are you attacked while barefoot wearing a dobak?

Also, if you've only been hit by someone wearing pads, then no matter how hard you've been hit, you don't know what it's like to be hit barehanded - I've experienced both, and I have to say that, no matter how hard someone hits you wearing pads, being hit barehanded is worse. The pads, by their very nature, spread the power to a larger surface, thereby reducing the intensity of the strike somewhat. And if you've never hit someone barehanded (or barefooted - although the foot pads we use don't cover the sole of the foot, so for some kicks it doesn't matter) then you are less likely to understand how to use the correct surface of your fist - specifically, the first two knuckles, closest to the back of the hand - to inflict the maximum damage, because it's much harder to use a tool that small while wearing hand pads; even if you do it correctly, it's hard to tell, either as striker or receiver.
Its not as if I had no contact training without pads. At my school we did weapon conditioning, were we would hit various target barefooted and bare fisted. We also practiced body conditioning, where one would pose in various stances, front stance, horse back stance, fighting stance and so on, while another BB would hit you. There was a high level of control that allowed for safety. The person getting hit stood very still, they knew when, where and with what they were getting hit. While sparring, part of our goal was to simulate the random chaos of being violently attacked. Under these conditions extra precautions have to be taken, i.e. protective equipment.

I hope you havent taken any of my comments as being mean spirited. If you could see my face it would have a friendly smile not a mocking sneer. :)

Be well- F2F
 

Kacey

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
16,462
Reaction score
227
Location
Denver, CO
Obviously, what you're doing works for you - but I know too many people who can do exactly what you describe as "the random chaos of being violently attacked", except they do it full speed, full power, with balance, focus, and control, and they don't use - or need - pads. Unless you've seen it done, it's hard to understand, and harder to comprehend.
 

MikeSlisher

White Belt
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
FWIW, I started my martial arts career in 1974 and received my 1st Dan in ITF TaeKwon-Do in October of 1978.

In those days, TaeKwon-Do and Tang Soo Do were the only martial art schools in a 50 mile radius of where I lived with there being only one GM for each style. TKD had (Robert) B.C. Yu and TSD had Sun Hwan Chung, both out of Kalamazoo, MI with both having satellite schools in my area.

We did not use any safety gear for sparring, no pads or chest protectors. Punches were not only allowed to the head, they were taught as the most effective head strikes. Pad started coming on the scene somewhere around '77 IIRC.

Tournament sparring was light to medium contact to the body, no contact to the head.

Korean arts were virtually ignored in the national press. The big MA magazines were Black Belt and Karate Illustrated. Black Belt covered aikido, judo, and other arts with a few articles on the Chinese styles as Bruce Lee's movies and the tv series Kung Fu were gaining popularity. The movie Billy Jack engendered a few articles on Hapkido and Bong Soo Han, but that was pretty much it for Korean arts for quite some time.

TKD advertised itself as "Korean Karate" on storefronts. Most everyone knew what karate was, but they had no clue what TaeKwon-Do was.

Gradually over the years TKD gained recognition, but karateka looked down on it as a weak imitation of their arts.

With Bruce Lee and the beginning acceptance of mixed martial arts like Jeet Kune Do, many top ranked national martial artists began promoting full contact tournaments and organizations. Hand techniques from boxing were mixed with Korean kicking techniques (IMHO) and used for the matches with effect. Bill "Superfoot" Wallace proved that kicking could be used effectively for these full contact matches. TKD capitalized on that to bring the art further into the mainstream MA world.

For a long time Tang Soo Do maintained that their art was NOT TaeKwon-Do despite superficial similarities. I can seem to recall Grandmaster Chung making that point many times... that he taught Tang Soo Do, not TKD, and that TKD was inferior to TSD.

ITF fell out of favor. WTF, with the South Korean government's backing successfully became an Olympic sport.

After being out of the MA scene pretty much entirely for five years, I understand that TKD is now THE single most popular martial art being taught in the United States.

For those of you who may not have the decades worth of experience THAT is probably the single largest change that I would say. WOW!!! What has "my" art come too when that Japanese karate stuff is playing second fiddle????:ultracool
 

Mark Lynn

Master Black Belt
Joined
Apr 21, 2003
Messages
1,345
Reaction score
184
Location
Roanoke TX USA
What has been some of the most practical changes in TKD over the last twenty five year in your opinion and why have those changes been good or bad for TKD?

Terry

Speaking in a general sense, not limited to just TKD.

1) The emphasis on kids, when I started in 1981 there weren't many kids classes and the schools were opened mainly in the evenings. Now with trying to get the younger kids (market) schools are staying open longer and run more of like a business.

2) The starting of running schools as a business and not just as a hobby. Adopting business practices in schools, thinking about the customer, marketing (besides just a yellow page ad or a sign on the door) etc. etc.

3) The invention and use of sparring gear (leading to students safety)

4) The opening up the mindset of the schools in regards to self defense. This has lead to schools teaching different arts i.e. grappeling, arnis, weaponery, hapkido, etc. etc. in TKD schools.

5) The resurrgence of learning about forms and the applications of the forms. Which I think has been great for the more traditional TKD schools.

These are just some of the changes over the last 25-35 years that have occured in the MAs and TKD in general.
 

Latest Discussions

Top