- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Messages
- 6,545
- Reaction score
- 61
Kem/npo:
I would say communicate with each other in a civil manner.
I would say communicate with each other in a civil manner.
What does your art do poorly?
- Thread starter Andrew Green
- Start date
Shaderon
Master of Arts
Coming in as a minority of ITF TKD, and not being very high ranking, I'll risk stating a few weaknesses of the art as I see and train it.
We don't do ground work, a few times I'll fell over through a slippy floor and thought "what if someone jumped on top of me and pinned me now".
We don't do weapons work, well at least not at our level, I'd love to train with knife techniques and I did love my Jo staff when I did Aikido, I could have used a handy broom handle to do what we did with that.
We do a lot of varied self defence, and it's not all "curriculum" stuff, we have a policeman in our class and he brings his experience in, also my limited Aikido knowledge is called on and our instructor is a devil for researching effective restraint and self defense techniques (including going to a pressure point seminar this year) so our self defence is pretty strong except for against weapons, which is what I would like to learn.
We don't do ground work, a few times I'll fell over through a slippy floor and thought "what if someone jumped on top of me and pinned me now".
We don't do weapons work, well at least not at our level, I'd love to train with knife techniques and I did love my Jo staff when I did Aikido, I could have used a handy broom handle to do what we did with that.
We do a lot of varied self defence, and it's not all "curriculum" stuff, we have a policeman in our class and he brings his experience in, also my limited Aikido knowledge is called on and our instructor is a devil for researching effective restraint and self defense techniques (including going to a pressure point seminar this year) so our self defence is pretty strong except for against weapons, which is what I would like to learn.
As it turned out, I really was too tired to think clearly about these points last night. Having chewed it over for a good chunk of the morning, I have to say that I think you're right about the usefulness of being able to impose restraints on an attacker which don't actually involve the hard linear damaging strikes that implement the `every move must end the fight right now' strategic ideal of karate variant arts. Those arts are really designed for a world in which an attack is likely to represent a deadlythreat, and any level of damage is justified by your right to preserve your own life. In a scenario in which an assailant's use of violence may represent mortal danger to you or yours, first priority is I think maximum damage and explain later, simply because anything less will very likely leave your attacker able to attack again, and maybe even more dangerous because of your effort to defend yourself. But in a case where that level of danger isn't demonstrable, then yes, the consequences you point out are definitely hazards for the defender.
Karate, TKD and TSD all do incorporate grappling moves, as good technical analyses of kata and hyungs makes very clear, but those moves are definitely set-ups for the damaging strikes that finish the encounter, not ends in themselves. So yes: it does seem to be a weakness of all such systems that their strategic core is an all-or-nothing approach to the application of violence. Way back when, that was almost certainly the optimal strategy for survival. Nowadays, well... it's a lot greyer.
Hapkido, anyone?
LawDog
Master Black Belt
I will agree with Hand Sword, poor communication skills within the Kempo/Kempo family.:whip1:
Shotgun Buddha
Brown Belt
Ok have to break this down into two parts.
MMA:
We have two weak areas here. Multiple opponents isnt one of them since we do actually have drills involving multiples.
1. No Weapons
2. Ring focused for one-on-one
1. The no weapons is a pretty straightforward one. We simply do not have time to develop both solid striking skills and solid weapons skills. For three nights a weeks training, you're either gonna do both alright or one really well. Just too much to cover.
2. The ring focused is also straightforward. While the delivery system is applicable to both ring and self-defence, the tactics tend to favour the ring.
Aiki-wa Jitsu
1. Poor delivery system (in comparison to MMA one anyway)
2. No real fitness and conditioning training
3. Occasional impracticality to attract students
1. There's far too much emphasis on techniques rather than on positoning. While there is alot solid techniques, and individual techniques might get drilled well and with resistance, I just don't feel the style
connects-the-dots properly as it were. But thats true of most styles Ive seen.
2. Self-explanatory. I personally figure that one of the most important elements of fighting is ensuring your body is in good enough condition for it, and at the end of the day, it does create an enormous advantage if you are.
3. Mostly its fairly down to earth training, but tends to be every now and then something flashy or silly to attract students and stuff like that. I guess it helps pay the bills but I hate doing stuff like that.
MMA:
We have two weak areas here. Multiple opponents isnt one of them since we do actually have drills involving multiples.
1. No Weapons
2. Ring focused for one-on-one
1. The no weapons is a pretty straightforward one. We simply do not have time to develop both solid striking skills and solid weapons skills. For three nights a weeks training, you're either gonna do both alright or one really well. Just too much to cover.
2. The ring focused is also straightforward. While the delivery system is applicable to both ring and self-defence, the tactics tend to favour the ring.
Aiki-wa Jitsu
1. Poor delivery system (in comparison to MMA one anyway)
2. No real fitness and conditioning training
3. Occasional impracticality to attract students
1. There's far too much emphasis on techniques rather than on positoning. While there is alot solid techniques, and individual techniques might get drilled well and with resistance, I just don't feel the style
connects-the-dots properly as it were. But thats true of most styles Ive seen.
2. Self-explanatory. I personally figure that one of the most important elements of fighting is ensuring your body is in good enough condition for it, and at the end of the day, it does create an enormous advantage if you are.
3. Mostly its fairly down to earth training, but tends to be every now and then something flashy or silly to attract students and stuff like that. I guess it helps pay the bills but I hate doing stuff like that.
In Instinctive Response Training we teach a very broad overall curriculum. (http://www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com/curriculum.html) This is difficult in that for a student to get even a little bit of exposure to what we do it will require time. Spend a year or two (or more) with us and you will be more well rounded in your personal protection skills and yet you will have just glimpsed the surface of the overall training. So time in is an issue when you study a very broad based art. This is similar to when you train in Budo Taijutsu. The up side is that every class you will work with:
Physical
Weapons (offensively/defensively)
Kicking
Hand Strikes
Trapping Hands and Joint Manipulation
Grappling
Mental
Awareness
Theory
Legal Issues
Strategy
Tactics
and more...
Spiritual
Moral Conduct
Ritualization
Personal Power Growth
Meditation
and more.......
Time becomes a factor and the more and longer you practice the more your exposure is to the system.
That being said the skills you learn right away will be applicable provided you can apply them in the moment.
Another issue with IRT is that you can only learn it in the middle of Michigan, Lower Michigan and also in Illinois. (around the Chicago area)
So as of right now we have not propogated the system that far. (but we are working on it
)
Physical
Weapons (offensively/defensively)
Kicking
Hand Strikes
Trapping Hands and Joint Manipulation
Grappling
Mental
Awareness
Theory
Legal Issues
Strategy
Tactics
and more...
Spiritual
Moral Conduct
Ritualization
Personal Power Growth
Meditation
and more.......
Time becomes a factor and the more and longer you practice the more your exposure is to the system.
That being said the skills you learn right away will be applicable provided you can apply them in the moment.
Another issue with IRT is that you can only learn it in the middle of Michigan, Lower Michigan and also in Illinois. (around the Chicago area)
So as of right now we have not propogated the system that far. (but we are working on it
Oh and training in IRT can be difficult at times based on the way I teach. I do not always make it simple for the student. I want the student to explore and figure thing's out at times. (not all the time, just some of the time) When a student can accomplish this then they truly can explore and learn martial science at a higher level. However, sometimes it can be difficult.
With my Art it is perspeption that it is all sport nobody really understand TKD anymore except us older guy. It is a shame that it has become that. The other thing is the use of hands, they have all but letf the hands out.
However the older guy's still no how to use them. Right Terry!
For the most part Brian the mind is not as sharpe as it once was but it is still going
CuongNhuka
Senior Master
I didn't really see it as self-congratulatory, Cuong Nhuka. You are saying these are the disadvantages of the system. That's reading to me as if you would rather have a wider base of fellow students to network with and perhaps you wish that the tests weren't so brutal to get you to the same place as many of your counterparts in other arts. Hope I'm not putting words in your mouth.
I was called self congratulatory. And I do wish we had more students. More people, more applicaitons out there. You might run into some body who came up with a wicked application for X move in Y kata. You see it and go "ohh thats awesome, and if I change it like Z, I get something that works awesome for me". See how more people = better?
I do want the tests to be hard, it makes it more of a way of saying "I deserve this rank". But alot of people don't like that, so it limits how many stay in. The time between does the same.
CuongNhuka
Senior Master
You could have said that was your problem. Mostly because it is. We try to addres every thing equally well. We fail like every other style out there, but we try. This (like I said) draggs out test time (we want you to do it perfectly and all). This makes people mad, and they quite. But because we do try to a jack of all trades, which allows people to develop an intrest in of the differnit ideas out there, and makes it a little easier to start up. In fact, we incourage cross-training for that very reason.
Any better?
CuongNhuka
Senior Master
I think theres some confusion. Here is the original question.
Time for some honesty, what is it that your art just doesn't do very well? And yes, there is something, probably a few things.
There is far too much "Mine is the best for everything" attitude in the martial arts, probably partially responsible for some of the style vs style nonsense. IMO part of knowing what you do well, is part of knowing what you do poorly. So lets be honest, what system do you do, and what does it suck at?
Anyone that says "Nothing" gets 10 lashes for lieing
I take that as discussing things, yes, technique wise, ie: lack of grappling, lack of weapon work, lack of sparring, etc.
Your reply was this:
So basically, I read this as everything is perfect in the system as far as techniques go. The things that lack are the time frame to black belt?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #55
MMA also lacks much in the way of performance art and acrobatics. Those Wushu guys run circles around us in that area. XMA as well, but I don't find that form as enjoyable, the facial contortions and screaming put me off. But thats just a matter of taste, I mean some people like Jar Jar Biggs, doesn't mean I have too.
My view is that anyone that thinks there system has everything, probably has a pretty shallow view of everything, or is training in a pretty shallow system and hasn't really experienced anything in depth yet.
My view is that anyone that thinks there system has everything, probably has a pretty shallow view of everything, or is training in a pretty shallow system and hasn't really experienced anything in depth yet.
RED
Blue Belt
The ground...you mean fights can go to the ground...hmmm...
I've taken TKD for a while (it's my first love). Instructors have taught me different things to handle different situations. But I've tried to suppliment my TKD with different styles to compensate for TKD's weak spots. Wrestling clubs, Karate classes, pressure points, even reading a lot on Aikido and spiritual aspects. With my varied experiences I've learned one thing; I'm one punch away from getting knocked out at any given moment no matter if the guy or gal is unexperienced and unskilled or an elite martial artist.
I've taken TKD for a while (it's my first love). Instructors have taught me different things to handle different situations. But I've tried to suppliment my TKD with different styles to compensate for TKD's weak spots. Wrestling clubs, Karate classes, pressure points, even reading a lot on Aikido and spiritual aspects. With my varied experiences I've learned one thing; I'm one punch away from getting knocked out at any given moment no matter if the guy or gal is unexperienced and unskilled or an elite martial artist.
kidswarrior
Senior Master
The Kung Fu San Soo side of my art doesn't really teach distinction between a combat scenario (as in overseas, military combat) and the proverbial bar fly throwing a John Wayne haymaker. KFSS response to both: maim or kill--fast. My theory is this lack of distinction is because first gen. masters have been careful not to deviate from Jimmy Woo's teachings--which he began commercially in late 50s early 60s, when times were much less litigious, and police would often let a 'fair' fight go. So, a good side (honoring Jimmy's art) and a bad side (times have changed) both come from the art not evolving.
What I do badly in KFSS is the groundwork. It's there, but I'm basically a stand-up guy, and just haven't really mastered it. No excuse.
The Shaolin Kempo side of my art, I guess like most kenpo (?), is essentially an American-streets system of self defense. While mostly very effective, I can sometimes see a slight bit of wasted motion: two movements where there could be one (again, this is 'my' art, my experience, so certainly not saying all ken/mpo is this way). I guess I would say, the art as I learned it could sometimes be more economical. That's where the KFSS cross-training comes in: it's totally economical (but to connect the dots back to the beginning, maybe doesn't use total discretion in applying that physical economy).
What I do badly in Kempo is not spend more time and focus on the precision aspects. I know they're there, and are valuable. Again, no excuse.
Well, have tried to be honest without stepping on toes. Hope that doesn't make this just a wishy-washy response. But hey, it's my reply, so what the hey...eh? :ultracool
What I do badly in KFSS is the groundwork. It's there, but I'm basically a stand-up guy, and just haven't really mastered it. No excuse.
The Shaolin Kempo side of my art, I guess like most kenpo (?), is essentially an American-streets system of self defense. While mostly very effective, I can sometimes see a slight bit of wasted motion: two movements where there could be one (again, this is 'my' art, my experience, so certainly not saying all ken/mpo is this way). I guess I would say, the art as I learned it could sometimes be more economical. That's where the KFSS cross-training comes in: it's totally economical (but to connect the dots back to the beginning, maybe doesn't use total discretion in applying that physical economy).
What I do badly in Kempo is not spend more time and focus on the precision aspects. I know they're there, and are valuable. Again, no excuse.
Well, have tried to be honest without stepping on toes. Hope that doesn't make this just a wishy-washy response. But hey, it's my reply, so what the hey...eh? :ultracool
Last Fearner
2nd Black Belt
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2006
- Messages
- 712
- Reaction score
- 17
I study Taekwondo, and I am but a lowly student so I will try to address the one main weak spot.
Taekwondo is not very good with kicks, so make sure that if you fight a Taekdondoist, stand just outside of their punching range where they can't reach you with their hands. If I try to kick you, just grab my leg because my kicks are known to be weak and slow! :lfao:
Ok, now for the rest of my answer - - get ready to give me lashes if you think you can catch me! :ultracool
I find nothing missing from "Taekwondo" when it is taught properly, and in its entirety. The problem is that most Taekwondo Dojang (by my estimate) are in the same boat as many other Martial Art variations (Karate, Judo, Aikido, etc, etc). The founders of many systems intentionally left specific techniques, and entire categories of techniques out of their curriculum. Some believed they were not necessary for self defense (the point that I believe Exile was making). Others simply said from time to time, "I don't like this move, or that one, so I'm not going to teach it."
These days, what you tend to get are people realizing that there are "holes" in their training, and attempting to patch them in a random order (somewhat like Bruce Lee's concept) by looking at what others are doing and "borrowing" this and that from them. I don't agree with this notion of "Mixed Martial Art." What I see is the whole of Martial Art education having been ripped apart over the past several centuries, and is now in scattered pieces all over the place. People are beginning to re-assemble what was once a complete system, and thinking they are discovering something new. Some think you must train in this + that + the other thing in order to get a full balanced curriculum.
In my experience, this has already existed in many schools under various names. Taekwondo is one of them, but not the modern sport aspect (Taekwondo itself has not become a sport), nor in the family/fun/fitness health club "McDojangs." I'm talking about old school Taekwondo that was intended to re-organize, and gather together all of Korean Martial knowledge. Hand strikes, kicking, joint locks, pressure points, throws, take-downs, chokes, bone breaks, holds, grappling, reversals, escapes, weapons (all kinds as the art is designed to adapt and grow with the times), single attackers, multiple attackers in a variety of environments, weather conditions, etc.
The biggest weakness that I see among Taekwondo schools is that many of them just don't practice all of those things. Because so many in recent times were focused on the kicks, sparring, board breaking, tournaments, etc., they neglected to train in skillful throwing, how to fall properly, and what to do on the ground (save a few rapid strikes to escape). The typical strategy of Taekwondo is to damage and get away - not giving the grappler any opportunity to throw or choke or hold. It might very well work in most cases, so I would say that Taekwondo as a whole is not weak as an art of self defense.
Where many schools and instructors tend to be weak in specific techniques is not knowing how to do proper throws (foot sweeps, leg reaps, hip throws, flips, etc), nor how to grapple well against a good grappler. I don't believe a Taekwondoist needs to be as good as, or better than a Judo player when it comes to throwing, but you had better study the concept thoroughly in order to know how to avoid a throw, which can end a fight quickly. You don't have to be the best on the ground to know how to escape from virtually any hold, but most Taekwondo students don't get enough work there. Not their fault. Not the fault of Taekwondo. It is the instructor who neglects to realize this is missing and go get it. Not "cross-train" - - not "mix your martial art." Go to Taekwondo Masters who have retained this portion of Korean Martial Art in their Taekwondo curriculum.
Alright - lash away! :whip: Hey! I'm over here >>> :lol: hee-hee-hee
CM D.J. Eisenhart
Taekwondo is not very good with kicks, so make sure that if you fight a Taekdondoist, stand just outside of their punching range where they can't reach you with their hands. If I try to kick you, just grab my leg because my kicks are known to be weak and slow! :lfao:
Ok, now for the rest of my answer - - get ready to give me lashes if you think you can catch me! :ultracool
I find nothing missing from "Taekwondo" when it is taught properly, and in its entirety. The problem is that most Taekwondo Dojang (by my estimate) are in the same boat as many other Martial Art variations (Karate, Judo, Aikido, etc, etc). The founders of many systems intentionally left specific techniques, and entire categories of techniques out of their curriculum. Some believed they were not necessary for self defense (the point that I believe Exile was making). Others simply said from time to time, "I don't like this move, or that one, so I'm not going to teach it."
These days, what you tend to get are people realizing that there are "holes" in their training, and attempting to patch them in a random order (somewhat like Bruce Lee's concept) by looking at what others are doing and "borrowing" this and that from them. I don't agree with this notion of "Mixed Martial Art." What I see is the whole of Martial Art education having been ripped apart over the past several centuries, and is now in scattered pieces all over the place. People are beginning to re-assemble what was once a complete system, and thinking they are discovering something new. Some think you must train in this + that + the other thing in order to get a full balanced curriculum.
In my experience, this has already existed in many schools under various names. Taekwondo is one of them, but not the modern sport aspect (Taekwondo itself has not become a sport), nor in the family/fun/fitness health club "McDojangs." I'm talking about old school Taekwondo that was intended to re-organize, and gather together all of Korean Martial knowledge. Hand strikes, kicking, joint locks, pressure points, throws, take-downs, chokes, bone breaks, holds, grappling, reversals, escapes, weapons (all kinds as the art is designed to adapt and grow with the times), single attackers, multiple attackers in a variety of environments, weather conditions, etc.
The biggest weakness that I see among Taekwondo schools is that many of them just don't practice all of those things. Because so many in recent times were focused on the kicks, sparring, board breaking, tournaments, etc., they neglected to train in skillful throwing, how to fall properly, and what to do on the ground (save a few rapid strikes to escape). The typical strategy of Taekwondo is to damage and get away - not giving the grappler any opportunity to throw or choke or hold. It might very well work in most cases, so I would say that Taekwondo as a whole is not weak as an art of self defense.
Where many schools and instructors tend to be weak in specific techniques is not knowing how to do proper throws (foot sweeps, leg reaps, hip throws, flips, etc), nor how to grapple well against a good grappler. I don't believe a Taekwondoist needs to be as good as, or better than a Judo player when it comes to throwing, but you had better study the concept thoroughly in order to know how to avoid a throw, which can end a fight quickly. You don't have to be the best on the ground to know how to escape from virtually any hold, but most Taekwondo students don't get enough work there. Not their fault. Not the fault of Taekwondo. It is the instructor who neglects to realize this is missing and go get it. Not "cross-train" - - not "mix your martial art." Go to Taekwondo Masters who have retained this portion of Korean Martial Art in their Taekwondo curriculum.
Alright - lash away! :whip: Hey! I'm over here >>> :lol: hee-hee-hee
CM D.J. Eisenhart
Shaderon
Master of Arts
As am I, and having read this post I would like to change the last post I wrote to say that it's not my ART that's lacking, it's my experience of it.
I'm already running with ya Last!
*round of applause* I'm glad people do realise that TKD isn't just a sporting event, it IS for fighting othewise the Korean Military would never have used it. After all you don't teach the SAS dodgeball do you?
CuongNhuka
Senior Master
O.k. did you not read the post before that post? I'm not rying to be rude, but I explained what I meant by that. We try to be a jack of all trades, and include a good base in a little bit of every thing. And since you have to do it more or less perfectly that drags out test time. It also means we are a jack of all trades. We have a good understanding of how to use hand and leg strikes, grappling on the ground and standing, using weapons, defending against them, and so. But this makes it so we don't master any of these areas.
Am I getting better?
