Traditional tae kwon do in chicago
- Thread starter VICENTE
- Start date
FieldDiscipline
2nd Black Belt
Might be worth looking here: http://sites.google.com/site/ntkdacad/home
Master Weiss is a regular on here.
Master Weiss is a regular on here.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Thanks for the referral.
What do you mean by "traditional?" Do you want Kukkiwon? Chang Hon? Practical fighting is a huge can of worms too, a lot of us will tell you that sparring is the way to learn how to fight.
If Chang Hon interests you, go train with Master Weiss. Can't speak to Kukkiwon in that area but he has a huge amount of knowledge and is very helpful.
If Chang Hon interests you, go train with Master Weiss. Can't speak to Kukkiwon in that area but he has a huge amount of knowledge and is very helpful.
What do you consider 'practical fighting' and how is sparring the best way to learn it? Thank you.
Er, practical fighting is fighting practically. Applying techniques learned through practice and drilling to "win" a match or an altercation. Not sure how else to state it to be honest. Sparring is the way to train it because you're applying techniques to a resisting opponent at full speed who has the same knowledge and goal that you do. Doesn't necessarily mean Olympic Taekwondo style sparring, outside of my competition classes sparring looks more like...hm, probably kickboxing I guess. Sparring doesn't always mean training like an athlete.
^^Thats horribly incoherent, I'm on my phone
Er, practical fighting is fighting practically. Applying techniques learned through practice and drilling to "win" a match or an altercation. Not sure how else to state it to be honest. Sparring is the way to train it because you're applying techniques to a resisting opponent at full speed who has the same knowledge and goal that you do. Doesn't necessarily mean Olympic Taekwondo style sparring, outside of my competition classes sparring looks more like...hm, probably kickboxing I guess. Sparring doesn't always mean training like an athlete.
^^Thats horribly incoherent, I'm on my phone
Thank you for the reply, you did fine
I'd like to take a moment to look at a few things that I think deserve some discussion. I'm going to state in advance that I'm looking at this from a SD perspective which is why I'm tossing some things out there for consideration. I don't want it to be construed as I'm picking apart your post, so please take it in the sincere tone that it is intended. From my perspective, I agree that, as you state, practical fighting is fighting practically. I would however suggest, that there is major differences between drills for winnng a match as opposes to drills for an altercation. For example, you mentioned sparring as an excellent means for training. For competition, I would agree 100%. As far as an altercation, I would humbly disagree. Let me clarify what I mean by sparring, as intended for competition so that we're on the same sheet music for the most part. Sparring, from a competition standpoint, usually entails all/most of the following;
- You have a single opponent, with no possibility of additional opponents jumping in to help.
- This single opponent is unarmed, with no possibility of being armed either with conventional or improvised weapons.
- You both have agree upon a specific rule set prior to the sparring session and/or competition.
- There is a referee/safety person to oversee that the rules are obeyed.
- Both parties are warmed up, stretched out and usually wearing some amount of safety gear.
- The session/competition takes place in a venue that is well lit, level, dry and free of injury causing objects.
- There is plenty of room available for movement.
- The session/competition is begun with both opponents facing each other in an en guard position.
- After an approved strike or kick has been landed, or in some cases a point is scored, the opponents reset to begin again at a prescrived distance.
- Verbalization is not practiced.
And for competition training, in a controlled environment this is fine. However, for an altercation I strongly submit it is detrimental training. Let me pontificate on what I consider an altercation to be; it is a violent, physical assualt that can range anywhere for a fat lip/bloody nose up to deadly force. It may begin at a lower level of violence but esculate upward quickly to deadly force either intentionally or unintentionally. Some considerations using the above points;
- There may or may not be a single attacker, or additional attackers may join in an attempt to over-power you.
- The attacker may be armed with a conventional weapon (edged weapon, firearm, burglary tool etc) or use improvised weapons (broken bottle, rock, broken glass etc).
- There is no mutually agreed upon rule set. The attacker may be trying to cause as much damage as possible to you in as little time as possible.
- There will be no referee, but there may be a crowd egging on the conflict. People are stupid that way.
- The victim will not have the opportunity to warm up, stretch out or don loose, appropriate clothing that allows free movement. The victim may be in tight jeans, a dress and high heels, flip-flops, a suit and dress shoes etc. It can be assumed the victim will not readily have or be wearing safety gear.
- An attack, statistically occurs during dim light hours. The surface you are defending youself on may be wet, greasy/oily, sloping, grassy and have a plethora of people-unfriendly objects that cause injury such as traffic, asphault, curbs, walls, fences, windows, rocks etc.
- The attack may occur on stairs, an elevator, alley, bedroom, between parked cars or other venue with limit room for movement.
- The victim will typically be caught by surprise or at least at a disadvantageous position.
- The fight does not reset after a strike has been scored, it continues until one party is unable to physically continue.
- Verbalization before, during and after an attack is a priority.
Sparring, as described at the beginning of this post is detrimental to self-defense because it focuses on the wrong training methodology. Sparring, from the perspective of SD should include;
- The use of verbalization techniques. First, in an attempt, if possible to de-esculate a conflict. Not every altercation will allow that opportunity. However, some will not happen suddenly and will have pre-fight indicators i.e. balling of fists, threats, cursing, heavy breathing, pupils dialating etc. Verbalization during an altercation is a priority i.e. 'get back', 'get down', 'help' or better yet, 'FIRE!'. And proper verbalization after an incident is a necessity. These things need to be practiced just like physical skills.
- Although 'competitive/sport' sparring can be useful from the perspective of movement, breathing, dealing with adrenaline dump (i.e. loss of manual dexterity in the extremities, rise in pulse/blood pressure, tunnel vision, auditory exclusion) as well as 'somewhat' taking a punch, it does not go far enough into the complexities of a chaotic, violient altercation from a determined, resisting attacker. Training needs to take place in clothing other than 'angry white pajamas' at least occassionally. Training needs to take place out of the dojo/dojang, in other environments and with other stimuli at least occassionally. Try training inside of a vehicle, in the woods, on stairs, from a lying position etc.
- Use of conventional/improvised weapons needs to be discussed and trained occassionally. Along with discussion on legal ramifications.
These are just some of the considerations that really need to be taken into consideration when training from a SD training methodology. As a practitioner/instructor that focuses on the SD training methodology, I would never claim to provide the training to enable someone to become a competitive champion. That would be false advertising. SD training methodology would get you DQ'd or banned. It is apples and oranges and would be disrespectful to those that teach from a sport training methodology and a disservice to those seeking competition training. Likewise, someone that focuses on sport training methodology or has only been taught from such should not claim to teach self-defense. That is false advertising. That would be disrespectful to those that do teach from a SD training methodology and a disservice to their students. That is a general statement and I stress is not directed at anyone here in particular.
These are just some things that were on my mind while reading this thread and I wanted to share. Thank you.
I still think sparring is absolutely essential. Take Judo or BJJ, no matter what your focus in training those styles is you're going to do randori or rolling just to help you fully understand what you're training. Same idea. You can spar 3-4 times a week if you want to and it's usually different an needs a different approach. Even with the smooth floor and protective rules, you're applying your skills against another resisting, skilled opponent and seeing how it works in the "real world", or at least trained live, rather than in scripted drills.
I only do continuous sparring as well, not point stop. Although Judo uses point stop sparring.
I've been trained from a Taekwondo perspective, not sport or self defense. One can't be seperate from the other.
I only do continuous sparring as well, not point stop. Although Judo uses point stop sparring.
I've been trained from a Taekwondo perspective, not sport or self defense. One can't be seperate from the other.
Thank you for your reply. With respect, I feel it is essential to separate sport and self-defense for the reasons I've stated above. It is simply two different methodologies of training for two different venues. Applying specific skills by sparring against an opponent in a controlled environment, under an artificial rule set isn't real world. It simply does not address real world consideration i.e. escape/evasion/avoidance, de-esculation, tactical movement under duress on different terrain, stress factors and methods of understanding/controlling them, conventional/improvised weapons, multiple attackers etc. This is the point I'm pontificating on.
:ultracool
I agree that a scripted drill isnt' necessarily the best option. However, what I'm suggesting is a bit different, and again from a SD methodology perspective. For someone only focusing on sports-related competition, and not interested in SD, it would probably be a waste of their time. From the SD perspective, what I'm suggesting is;
- As a part of, or prelude to actual sparring/physical drills, allow for the possibility for de-esculation on the part of the 'attackee'. This demonstrates the type of words, tone, body language to adopt when trying to calm a situation before it gets ugly (as many situations have a pre-attack time frame) as well as allows the 'attackee' to key in on pre-fight indicators as I listed above i.e. clenching fists, threatening speech, increased breathing etc. We can sometimes be prepared for physical confrontations yet have to training in the mental aspects of a pre-attack such as a man having his ego challenged or a woman having her 'delicate sensibilities' challenged. If we prepare for such things in training, we will better handle them in real altercations and thus perhaps not allow our ego or emotions to dictate our actions.
- Free train and/or drill train in different environments, with different stimuli. Turn the lights out or dim them and then have students perform a form or drill or even spar. It can be quite different than in full light which is the normal manner. This allows them to mentally and physically note the differences. Have students train on some stairs or other elevated position (of course taking safety into proper consideration). Have them train, at least occassionally in normal street clothing. Have them train on grass and/or sloping surface. Have them train in the parking lot. Have them train in very tight, confined spaces. My motto is to have the ability to fight inside a phone booth...not that you can find a phone booth these days LOL. This allows them to see if their favorite 'move' is readily usable under less than ideal situations. It allows for the chance to adjust accordingly in a safe environment rather than hoping for the best during a bad situation.
- Allow them to have and use the surrounding terrain. For example, too many times have I seen a 'knife drill' where the student goes into the 'knife defense stance' and awaits the attack. A better solution for someone pulling a knife is putting a big, solid, heavy object between you and the attacker. They need to have this in mind. Can they simply get to a door and close it before the attacker closes the distance? Is that the best option available? Is there something long and solid like a lamp/chair/stick/broom etc that they can grab and keep between them and the attacker? Are they calling for help or trying to attract the attention of people that could help or call the police? Do they have a pocket full of change they can throw into the eyes of the attacker long enough to make them flinch so they can either pre-emptively strike or escape as the situation dictates?
- Are they sparring or drilling with one 'attacker' only to have one or more additional attackers jump it? If so, what do they do? What can they do?
- What do they do after the attack is over and they've escaped or the attacker is incapacitated? What is their level of responsibility at this point? What are the applicable laws in their State?
- What if they're knocked to the ground or slip and fall to the ground? What do they do then? What is the best, tactical way to get back up?
Not every 'drill' has to be a knock-down-drag-out pscho-altercation. Training should be mixed up from time to time. This keeps it interesting because the student receives various stimuli in which they can apply and adapt their training. This way some classes can be straight up line drills, forms training, dynamic drills and sparring and sometimes the student can walk in and you say, 'Okay...lights out'! Or, 'okay everyone...out in the parking lot or everyone in the alley behind the school'. Sometimes it can be announced ahead of time, 'next Thursday night everyone leave your Gi at home and wear street clothes'. You can then be creative as an instructor and do things like video tape some sessions and then play them back to point out areas that were done well as well as areas that a different approach could have/should have been taken.
The reason I stress these things as important is due to my vocation and what I see on an almost daily basis. I'm not special, and as I've mentioned many times, I don't have a big red S on my chest. But I've trained now for 37 years with the last 27 years being in one uniform or another. If I had to take a ballpark guess at the number of times I've used physical force on violent, determined, resisting felons I'd have to estimate 500 times. And that is just a wild conservative estimate. That includes five deadly force situations. Hell, my last violent encounter was yesterday afternoon when an out-of-control suicidal/homicidal sex offender attacked my partner and my Sgt. It was Kong Soo Do to the rescue
My point being that I'm around this stuff and have been for a long time. I enjoy teaching and if I can pass on something that a fellow instructor can grab ahold of and use to their benefit then mission accomplished.
I'm enjoying discussing this with you, thank you.
ralphmcpherson
Senior Master
I believe sparring can be useful in learning self defence, but its the type of sparring that will determine just how beneficial it is. Any sparring is better than nothing, but really sparring should be geared toward the types of things you will face in a real situation.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
For those interested in tactics and mindset for real world attacks (Awareness, avoidance, de escalation etc. I highly reccommend "Real Fighting" by Peyton Quinn. "The Bouncer's guide to barroom brawling is good as well.)
For a recent example of unexpected weapons and attacker see: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012...els-stabbed-after-robbery/UPI-42221337191232/
For a recent example of unexpected weapons and attacker see: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012...els-stabbed-after-robbery/UPI-42221337191232/
I would recommend the 'Fighter's Fact Book' and 'Fighter's Fact Book 2' as well by Loren Christensen. The second volume also has additional contributors such as Iain Abernethy and Alan Burress (who also has an excellent Lock-On DVD series that I've reviewed).
vikings827
Yellow Belt
You should look up Al's Black Belt Club (ABBC) in Lombard. He is the best in the city.
My younger brother has trained with him for 8 years, I have met him and been to his dojo, first rate!!!
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
From their website FAQ:
http://www.alsblackbeltclub.com/index.html
When do we begin learning to spar and is it required to earn a black belt?
Sparring is strongly recommended at our school but not required!
How long will it take to earn black belt?
For students committed to their training and attending class a minimum of two to three times each week, a black belt can be achieved in two or two and half years.
miguksaram
Master of Arts
A question for the OP, are you in the City proper or are you in one of its burbs? That will also make a difference in where to study, unless distance is not a factor to you. As it has already been stated, if you are looking for a good ITF school, you cannot beat GM Weiss's school. Very knowledgeable and practical. If you are looking for a good KKW/WTF school I would suggest American Academy of Martial Arts in Naperville, IL, Chang's Taekwondo Academy in Waukegan or Morton Grove.
If you can let me know where about in Chicago you live, I can help suggest the schools that I know that may work for you.
If you can let me know where about in Chicago you live, I can help suggest the schools that I know that may work for you.
vikings827
Yellow Belt
For the children in his school, this would apply. My "little" brother tested for his second degree last year, after 30 years being a first Dan.
Take what you will from verbage. The only reason he "tested" for his second Dan.........he was diagnosed with ALS 2 years ago.....
