TKD Olympics -Waste of Time?

[Miles]

I actually have no idea who Esther Kim and Kay Poe are. I have never followed Olympic TKD, and never really cared to.

TKD is not a game. It is not a competition. It is a martial art.

I know that it's pretty hard to come up with an accurate ruleset, but I don't see anything wrong with the rulesets used in the tournements in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Why can't we go back to that?

Here is the info on Kay and Esther:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics2000/martial_arts/886113.stm

TKD is a martial art but there is a competitive component that is important.

 

[BrandonLucas]

I'm going to disagree with you on the game of tag comment. Anyone proficient in WTF sparring is not just tagging you. The kicks are the actual taekwondo kicks and if you're good in the dojang and can kick competently, then those kicks are not tag by any stretch.

Its the first comment that I quoted that is the biggest problem with WTF style: it doesn't accurately represent the art.

This problem is two fold: one, it presents a distorted and incomplete picture of taekwondo to those outside and two, it hurts the practitioner's development of their technique because it does not allow for one to spar using the full bredth of the art, but only foot techniques.

I suggested on another thread that the Kukkiwon develope a sparring set for the developmemt of practitioner's self defense and use of taekwondo outside of competition.

Daniel

I agree, and I appologize for generalizing. Most of the tournements that you see around anymore with the "Olympic style sparring" usually means that it's going to be a back and forth, stop action, first to 3 points match with little contact.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Stop action to three points??? What olympic sparring are you watching?

WTF and its olympic variant are continuous fighting, only breaking at the end of the round, and I believe that the point max is like fifteen, if any. The only possible difference is that in WTF, the face is a valid target and I am not certain if the Olympic rules allow for that.

As for apologizing, not necessary. I'm not a big proponent of olympic taekwondo. I just don't agree that tag is an accuarate description, kids and lousy kickers not withstanding.

Daniel

 

[Twin Fist]

i do

those rapid fire roundhouses to the ribs? NO WAY they can have any power when the person throwing them isnt grounded in any way.

the spinning hook kicks? I doubt they have much power since the person throwing them almost always falls over. Those guys are just easy to knock out cuz the dont take many head shots. if they were getting punched in the face all the way up to BB, they could take a head shot better.

I would line up with ANY olympic style guy, under rules that allowed actual fighting and contact, and not be afraid. the rules created the form, and the form itself makes it weak, and not combat oriented.

Sorry Daniel, I love ya, but those pureolympic guys? i dont even consider them blackbelts.

they are kickboxers AT BEST

 

[jarrod]

they are kickboxers AT BEST

that's a little unfair. kickboxers can usually throw a decent punch.

jf

 

[Kwan Jang]

When I first started competing as a teenager in the early '80's, I fought in WTF TKD matches. I fought in the (then AAU which is now USAT) Nationals in the adults division at 15 and placed and then later won gold at the first junior olympics. Back then, the object was to KO your opponent and if you failed to do so, then it went to points scored. But to score those points, you had to displace your opponents body or use "trembling shock". At the time, you had to be 18 to fight in kickboxing, so the TKD competition and the amateur boxing I did were the next best things. After seeing first hand some of the racial and political abuses that were prevalent in sport tae kwon and the rule against punching to the head, I was very ready to switch to full-contact/kickboxing as soon as I was old enough.

I fought in that sport for a while and became frustrated by the lack of exposure and money, but even more by having opponents back out of fights at the last minute after training for them and I would show up to fight. This happened to me four times. Shortly after this, I broke my hand in training and used that as an excuse to never come back. A few years later, a promoter contacted me about a title shot for the ISKA. I asked "how much" and he told me it would pay $1200. I was in shape, but hadn't even sparred regularly for about two years at the time as I was in college. This wouldn't even really cover my expenses so I wasn't really interested. IMO, the main reason that there was so little money in kickboxing/full contact karate was that even for the legitimate orgs. like the ISKA and WKA (and earlier PKA), there was no recognition because there were literally hundreds of smaller orgs. that had their own champions. What is the value of the endorsement of a "world champion" for a product if every town in America has 20 of them?

When WTF TKD got full olympic status, I decided to go back and try my hand at it. I figured that an Olympic medal (esp. gold) was something that would be truly worth winning. This was still back before the UFC had evolved into something I would have wanted to be associated with. The sport tae kwon I came back to was FAR different than the one I had left. To make it acceptable as an Olympic sport, it had now truly become a very specialized game of tag that was more about who could slap the hogu (chest protector) with a cut kick (sloppy cross between a lead leg round and a front kick) and make a popping noise. It really was pathetic and while I enjoyed the full-contact karate/kickboxing ruleset more, the earlier version of sport tae kwon was far closer and still something to be proud of.

I won my state competition easily enough and went to the nationals hoping that by placing or winning there, I could be in a position to have a real shot at making the Olympic team the following year. Even after I seriously injured my knee a week prior to the event, I figured that I could have the surgical repair afterwards and still have a good shot. When they were weighing in the heavyweights, one of the officials (IIRC Jay Warwick) came back and announced that the IOC had just told them that they were cutting the available slots (from it's earlier demonstration sport status) in half and that they were not sending ANY heavyweights no matter what our performance was. When asked, he told us that if you want to be a world champion, go to the world championships. This was the Olympics and it was a political event.

 

[jarrod]

that's the sort of thing i'm talking about. i've heard at least half a dozen similar stories from judo players involved in the olympics. & along the way, judo adopted silly rules about gripping, de-emphasized ground techniques, & essentially started to look less & less like a real fight. thanks for sharing.

jf

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

i do

those rapid fire roundhouses to the ribs? NO WAY they can have any power when the person throwing them isnt grounded in any way.

the spinning hook kicks? I doubt they have much power since the person throwing them almost always falls over. Those guys are just easy to knock out cuz the dont take many head shots. if they were getting punched in the face all the way up to BB, they could take a head shot better.

Just to clarify, I speak of the WTF rule set, not the what I saw in the 2008 Olympics. In my personal experience, top competitors are well grounded when they throw their kicks and their kicks have serious power. I say that from having been on the receiving end. My GM was a 1992 Korean national champion (WTF), and he kicks like a freight train. Master Yeo, a 4th dan graduate of the Taekwondo university in Korea could knock people out with a spinning back hook kick and never break his stride, and certainly not fall down. One of our adult first dans (26) can deliver rapid fire roundhouse kicks that will break ribs if you don't wear the hogu. Needless to say, my opinion of the rule set is based less on the olympics and more on personal experience.

Sadly, everything you say about the olympic sport-only crowd is justified. After the olympics, there was a lot of bemoaning the athletes who went. It was said on this board and others that "they really are the best that we have." I do not, under any cirucumstances, agree with this statement. They are the best of those that didn't put the time in at a traditional school, but instead focused on a truncated version of taekwondo, a version that shouldn't even rightly be called taekwondo. Perhaps they started off in a typical taekwondo school and have a traditional grounding, but their focus for at least four years up to the olympics has been olympic training, not fighting. When you focus on getting points, you suffer in other areas. Getting the point while falling on your' a$$ is pathetic.

I would line up with ANY olympic style guy, under rules that allowed actual fighting and contact, and not be afraid. the rules created the form, and the form itself makes it weak, and not combat oriented.

If Olympic style is all that they do, then yes, I'd agree with you.

Sorry Daniel, I love ya, but those pureolympic guys? i dont even consider them blackbelts.

Thanks for the kind sentiments. Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. Pure olympic or more specifically, pure sport competitors shouldn't even be using belts, not with any rank attached to them at least. They should use a rating system like sport fencing, which makes no pretentions that their fencers are duelists (though believe me, some of the sport fencers I've met are very solid in their classical training).

they are kickboxers AT BEST

Actually, not even that. I call it a form of 'kickboxing' because I don't really know what else to call it, but someone pointed out on another thread (MIght have been Brad Dunne) that it really isn't kickboxing. Since punches are rarely if ever scored, they're rarely, if ever used, so I'm not even sure what term best describes it. Perhaps Tae + the Korean word for sport?

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

When I first started competing as a teenager in the early '80's, I fought in WTF TKD matches. I fought in the (then AAU which is now USAT) Nationals in the adults division at 15 and placed and then later won gold at the first junior olympics.

Just a nit pick: The AAU is still the AAU to my knowledge, but if not, they didn't turn into USAT. The USTU (United States Taekwondo Union) turned into USAT. I still have a Dynamics USTU dobok with olympic rings on it. Looked very slick back in the day. Still does, but the red logos have all turned pink.

Daniel

 

[Twin Fist]

When you focus on getting points, you suffer in other areas. Getting the point while falling on your' a$$ is pathetic.

so very true. And all those olympic style TKD knockout videos? watch them, the guy kicking almost ALWAYS falls over.....

 

[Kwan Jang]

Actually Daniel, I am correct. The old AAU lost it's charter because it was too diverse an org. to handle so many sports. This caused a splintering across the board of all the former AAU sports and what was AAU TKD became the USTU and later the USAT. Years later, a different AAU TKD was formed. I had already moved on to kickboxing by the time this all happened, so my memories are a bit vague on all the details, but I'm sure there are other "ol' school" guys around here who were in the middle of it who can fill in the blanks or correct anything I'm hazy on.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

so very true. And all those olympic style TKD knockout videos? watch them, the guy kicking almost ALWAYS falls over.....

One of the problems that I see in such instances is that the kicker, in falling down as he delivers the knockout, is doing something that in sports, is held up as dedication and commitment. Sacrificing his very footing to win the point.

It is like the football player who jumps up and catches the ball, then rolls over the back of the guy trying to stop im and lands on his butt in the end zone.

Or the baseball player who 'slides' into home to avoid being tagged. Yes, he gets to home plate safe, but he's still lying on his butt.

Or the sport fencer who purposefully goes off ballance to get that extra extention in order to score the point. He scores, but he's left prone, unable to attack or defend. And his opponent certainly isn't knocked out or otherwise helpless, as such a point is litterally just a touch and even if the blade were real, would not injure the opponent or even get through his jacket.

Or even like Ali's rope-a-dope move, where he leaned on the ropes and took a ton of punishment because between the opponent's gloves and the give of the ropes, he knew he could let his opponent tire out. Obviously, in an actual fight, such a move would be foolishness, bordering on suicidal. But he won the match.... and now has Parkinsons syndrom from too many blows to the head.

In the case of such moves where the athlete puts him or herself at obvious risk in order to prevail in a contest, the sports caster will say what a "valliant effort" the athlete made. Or what stamina and pain tollerance the athlete has! Going for the gusto! Or some other sports-centric dribble.

The major difference is that except for the Ali example, none of the other examples are intended to approximate a 'real fight.' Even sport fencing has moved away from trying to approximate an actual sword fight, with modern materials allowing for blades with such flexibility that a fencer can score a touch with a flick that his opponent barely feels, and which wouldn't even penetrate a thick jacket were the point sharp. But they aint weain' black belts either.

A martial artist should know better than to go for a knockout with move that robs them of stability. In a real life fight, if I want to knock out a guy, I'll keep my stability and use my fists. I'd keep my kicks no higher than midline and keep my guard up at a reasonable level.

Only the artificial incentive of a greater point value of the head, the disallowing of hand techniques above the torso, and the fact that you can't kick or otherwise strike a downed opponent make such actions in sport TKD even viable.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Actually Daniel, I am correct. The old AAU lost it's charter because it was too diverse an org. to handle so many sports. This caused a splintering across the board of all the former AAU sports and what was AAU TKD became the USTU and later the USAT. Years later, a different AAU TKD was formed. I had already moved on to kickboxing by the time this all happened, so my memories are a bit vague on all the details, but I'm sure there are other "ol' school" guys around here who were in the middle of it who can fill in the blanks or correct anything I'm hazy on.

My thanks! I was unaware of that detail.

Daniel

 

[taekwondodo]

No, TKD in the Olympics is not a waste of time. It can be tremendous good publicity for all martial arts when the traditions of the martial arts are observed. Who does not recall the inspiring story of Esther Kim and Kay Poe?

I do not believe it is a waste of time. For me chasing the dream was a journey that taught me so much along the way. The highest I got was team trial in 89, and didn't make it, but then it was the highest achievement ever.

The journey was very important to me more so then to make it to the team. Now at the golden age of 44, I enjoy my TKD experiences tremendously because I applied what I learned in my "journey" to my current training.

So it is not a waste of time after all.

 

[BrandonLucas]

Here is the info on Kay and Esther:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics2000/martial_arts/886113.stm

TKD is a martial art but there is a competitive component that is important.

The story on that link is very inspiring. I love to see that kind of self-sacrifice.


The part of your quote that I've bolded is something that I want to touch on for a minute or two...

The first part of that statement, "TKD is a martial art," is the backbone of what I'm talking about with this whole sentiment. You hit the nail on the head. TKD is a martial art. A martial art. Meaning that it teaches one in the art of martial defense, or defense against opponents that you are at "war" with. "War" is a relative term here. It could mean the act of someone attacking you and you must defend yourself, or it could be an actual war setting. Either way, TKD is used to defend yourself from someone else attempting to do you harm with ill intent.

Now, the second part of that statement, "...but there is a competitive component," is not a statement that I would agree with 100%...it's all a matter of perception.

In terms of the state of the martial art now, yes, there is indeed a competitive component. But it was not always this way. TKD was first and foremost taught to be a self defense art. In the aspect of having to defending yourself, the only competition that you are in is with your opponent, and the goal is to survive and prevent. The goal is not to win a match, a trophy, a ribbon, a medal, or any other shiny, dangley object. You are competing against someone who wants to do you harm, and your goal is to survive their attack and prevent them from doing any further harm than what has already been caused.

The last part of your statement, "...that is important," is in pretty much the same regard as the previous section of your statement. It's all a matter of perception. Yes, it is important that you compete with your opponent to make sure that you survive their attack and that they cannot cause any more harm. But, I do not consider it important to compete against others for the sake of bragging rights or shiny objects.

If you stop to consider it, each time you or any other student spars in class, they are competing against an opponent. But, in class, does your instructor present the "winner" of the match with a trophy or anything else of the like? In my dojang, we don't even declare a winner to the match. I know some schools and dojangs do this, and I'm not knocking it, because it has its place...but we consider it more important for us to be able to make your own conclusion on who won the match. If something were to go down in real life, there isn't going to be somebody there to raise your hand in victory if you happen to best your opponent. Fighting for survival and defense is something that leaves glory at the door.

I do, however, think that it is a necessary thing to compete in an open forum, such as an open tournement. But, to me, the things you win at a tournement are for the spectators, not the competitors.

I look at it this way: A heavy weight championship belt is not awarded to a heavy weight who successfully defends his date from being raped by a group of drunks at a bar. The only satisifaction the heavy weight is going to have is knowing that his date is safe, and the drunks are no longer able to attempt to cause harm...at that time, anyway.

So why put so much stock into winning an award saying that you were the best on thus and such day? Why not put all of your stock into training to make sure you are able to defend yourself and your loved ones?

I do understand that winning trophies is a great thing to work for. Hell, I have quite a few myself. But I'm not trying to make a career out of stocking my house full of them. I thought it was worthwhile to test my skill on a few occaisions against other opponents that I have never tested myself against before...which is what competing in an open forum should be about.

If you look at the state of things now, it's far, far more important for the folks who compete in the Olympics in TKD to be able to say that they even competed than it is to make sure they can actually kick correctly. The blackbelts that end up going to the Olympics....for as long as I've actually been able to track the TKD Olympic footage back....have not shown much, if any, martial skill. It seems that all they are concerned with is scoring the next point. And that is highlighted by the fact that punches don't even score. Oh, sure, they say that a punch delivered with "trembling force" will receive a point. So when do these guys and gals punch? When do they even have their hands up at all?

Now, WTF sparring may differ from Olympic sparring, but I wonder why that is exactly? If someone were to spar in a match with WTF rules, would they be encouraged to use their hands? I'm honestly not sure, since I'm not familier with the WTF's rules...but I do know that punching is not encouraged in the least at the Olympic level...which is technically the "pinacle" of competition, right? So, if you aren't encouraged to use your hands at the competition to end competitions, then why bother training that way in class?

Why can't Olympic rules reflect what TKD is all about? Why can't any tournements reflect what TKD is all about? What ever happened to tournements where knockouts were the goal, and competitors actually tried to knock their opponent out? Or, if not a knockout, what about ensuring that your opponent does not harm you and is no longer able to fight you? That would be the ultimate goal, right?

TKD isn't a game. It's a martial art. Those that train for the game competition alone taint the name of the art. Those that create the rules for the game also taint the art. I agree, competitions do need to have some kind of ruleset. But why can't someone at least take the time to come up with a ruleset that at the very least reflects what TKD should look like? Who decided that kicking to the head was the only effective way to "score a point" against your opponent? Who put that guy in charge?

I'm not saying that I'm some "hardcore" guy who goes in a pounds the heavy bag for 6 hours after eating a bowl of Wheaties...I'm far from that. But what I am saying is that I worked very hard to learn as much of the art as I have learned, and I would very much like to pass my knowledge of this art on to others at some point. Beyond that, I would like for others to actually want to learn this art. But the TKD that is publicized...such as putting it in the Olympics...is turning everyone away from something that is a valuable tool. That's why I always get on this soap box, and I make no appologies to anyone for getting on it.

TKD is not a game. It is not a toy. To those who only train to compete for their next trophy, stop playing with my art, stop wearing a blackbelt, and stop calling what you do Tae Kwon Do.

To bring this back around to where I started, I do think that competition in TKD is important. But the competition that is important is the competition with yourself and your opponent, with the goal of stopping your opponent from harming you and/or others, and to prevent them from continuing to try. Any other competition is take-it-or-leave-it. If you consider the game competition more important, where the goal is to be the first to acheive the most number of points to win a really cool trophy, read my bolded statement above.

Thank you...end of soapbox.