Why TKD is not effective for self defense and sometimes rejected

[MJS]

Because it the age-old idea-

Comparing and preferences

True. People will compare A to B all the time. Its the same old argument with a different dressing.

Like I said...if someone prefers not to take TKD, why be concerned with whats being taught? Ultimately it won't effect you at all.

Mike

 

[47MartialMan]

True. People will compare A to B all the time. Its the same old argument with a different dressing.

Like I said...if someone prefers not to take TKD, why be concerned with whats being taught? Ultimately it won't effect you at all.

Mike

Becasue those want to compare, critque, boast, and campaign via politics.

 

[FearlessFreep]

A little late in the game but one thing that occurred to me early on in the conversation was the difference between power and speed in various attacks.

A jab is faster than a reverse punch, which is faster than a 'haymaker'. Now, the power of all three is inversely proportional to the speed. So you can ask two questions. "Why not just throuw all jabs so that they are too fast to block and evade?" or "Why not just throw all 'haymakers' since they have the power to knock someone out?" The answer to the first question is that they may not be powerful enough to do enough damage. The answer to the second is that they are slow and easy to see coming. So, the real answer is that you use them in combinations based on the situation and the response. You use a quick jab or two to distract, and come in with the reverse punch; maybe a jab to the face and a punch to the stomach.

So, carry that on to kicks. Some kicks are faster than others, but some are a lot more powerful. A spinning back kick is slower than a reverse punch, but has a big impact. Even in sport sparring, you don't often see people opening up with spinning kicks; they are usually either counter moves or secondary moves. Same with fighting, a spinning back kick might not be a very smart opening move, but it would probably be pretty effectve as the second or third stike in a combination that started off with a hand stike *if* the situation presented.

And that's the big 'if'. A huge swinging fist won't work on an opponent that's ready for a hand strike. An elbow strike doesn't work against someone out of range. Both can be very effective if used at the right time when your opponent is in a certain position or condition. Same with all strikes. Same with high kicks or spinning kicks or whatever.

It's all a matter of a) having attacks that work for a variety of conditions and b) knowing when to use them.

Any art looks weak if the artist(s) only has a few attacks and they are not well used. Any art looks strong if the artist(s) has a good variety and good execution

 

[arnisador]

Why does it bother people so much? If you're not taking TKD, have no interest in TKD, then why worry what is being taught?

My guess is the unspoken reason for many is an interest in discussing the value of kicking vs. punching n general and in high kicking as a self-defense strategy more particularly.

 

[DeLamar.J]

I hear stories of martial artists who have switched to different martial arts because they got whupped and their previous art was TKD. It's really bothering me and kind of losing my faith not only in TKD but also in the martial arts

The answer is simple. People train in the martial arts for 3 reasons.
1.Self Defence
2.Sport
3.Fitness
Most TKD schools train for sport, not self defence. Although training for sport has alot of good self defence in it, the training is geared for sport. There is nothing wrong with training for sport, its all about what you want out of the arts. If your wanting self defence i recomend you train in muay thai and brazillian jiu jitsu. Thats just my personal choice for self defence, there are alot of other good arts out there.
You see the cardio kickboxing schools all the time, those are geared for fitness, not self defence. However there are some good things you will get out of the cardio thing for self defence.
You just need to ask yourself, WHAT DO I WANT OUT OF MY MARTIAL ARTS TRAINING? 1 2 or 3?

 

[Jerry]

Even though you were perfectly willing to lump every single TKD org into the same boat only two posts back...

I made generalized statements about things common in all three orginizations. It's been asserted that some of those generalizations are inaccurate in regards to one of the three. I'm happy to discuss if there was an error, and where that error was... as soon as I find someone interested in discussing TKD. You do not appear to be such a person as you are far more interested in discussing me.

Yep. Why do you seem to think that nothing's taught on the issue of multiple attackers?

I did not make a claim whether something was taught on MA. I asked "What's your basic approact to multiple-attackers?"

Please answer the question or do not respond to it.

While you are at it, please answer some of the other questions I posed:

"Where is your weapons sparring (have you ever tried your knife/anti-knife work against an FMA practitionr? How does the ITF teach to escape a mount? What's your basic approact to multiple-attackers? How much sparring time do you put into hand work against resisting opponents? How much of your grappling work do you put against resisting opponents? How much time have you spent trying your technique where opponents are allowed to grapple / sweep / attack the limbs?"
​

While you are at it, you may want to see if you have a response to some of my actual criticisms:

To hit a single criticism, TKD spends way to much time on one leg. Follow the shoulder on any spinning kick (a *really* good mule kick being the occasional exception) and you are behind the kicker. A simple lift-kick up the middle (leg, groin, whatever you connect with works) trumps any slower front kick from the cirriculum. The axe kick is a horrible idea combatively as you are trying to move your foot about 12 feet while standing within arms-reach of your opponent.

The balance is high, the mobility is low, the "blocks" in the cirriculum are horrible combative ideas (hell, they are taught to be done with only one bone in the forearm; I've personally seen the fractures of that bone in TKD play from "light contact with pads"). Realisitically, the counter-grappling skills are not existant (I'll point you at any NHB venue you like. How did TKD fare? How would it have been different "on the street"?). Where *in the official cirriculum* is falling? fighting from the ground? how about just fighting in heavy clothing?

​

They don't distinctly avoid them, most issues are covered in sparring with your basic hands up position and stonewalling. That's also not saying that the blocks absolutely are not used in sparring. Things change depending on the dynamics of the situation. Would I go out of my way to deliver a down block? No.

Me: Have they abandoned "blocking"
You: During sparring, yes.

Are they abandoned or are they "used based on the dynamics of the situation"?

If abandoned:

Why are they presented at all? Why would you train over and over something you would disctinctly avoid in a fight? They teach blocking, have it in the forms, then tell you to not ever do it?
​

If used:

the "blocks" in the cirriculum are horrible combative ideas (hell, they are taught to be done with only one bone in the forearm; I've personally seen the fractures of that bone in TKD play from "light contact with pads").
​

The real point is, very few arts are complete. You don't take BJJ for its striking for example. I don't see you leaping up and down regarding the combative flaws inherent there. Seems like you've created your own set of strawmen to push around. "TKD must be complete, if it is not, then it is not a combative art. Please test this by challenging other arts that are also not complete combative systems to determine if TKD is suitable for self defense purposes."

BJJ is not at issue here as it is not the topic... though I've been known to take BJJers to task as well.

I've made some very specific criticisms of TKD as a combative art, not simply on the lack of focus in areas, but on poor choices in tactic (flying, spinning, and blocking). You've done very little to address the criticisims. You've complained that I don't know what I'm talking about, but never corrected me. You've complained that I'm lumping, but not illustrated how a different organization solves the critique. You've flip-flopped on some issues (such as bloacking), ignored other issues in favor of what you can take offence at, and gotten to the point that I can essentially respond to your posts without having to write new material. For the sake of everyone else, I'm likely to cease responding unless there is some indication this will be an actual discussion of the topic. Note that in your entire post you put exactly *one* comment on topic ("blocks are not saught, nor are you put in a position that lends to making them, but not distinctly avoided by you").

And BTW: BJJs solution to the boxing problem is to put the boxer on his back. Their punching is more than sufficient to "gound and pound", and they put a great deal of effort and energy into training to survive that entry.

 

[Jerry]

So, carry that on to kicks. Some kicks are faster than others, but some are a lot more powerful. A spinning back kick is slower than a reverse punch, but has a big impact. Even in sport sparring, you don't often see people opening up with spinning kicks; they are usually either counter moves or secondary moves. Same with fighting, a spinning back kick might not be a very smart opening move, but it would probably be pretty effectve as the second or third stike in a combination that started off with a hand stike *if* the situation presented.

Actually the spinning back-kick is the one spinning kick I've seen as a good option . It's certainly a valid line of thought, and requires what becomes a very subjective answer: It's quite true that there are times to sacrifice speed for power (and vice, versa)... why there are crosses as well as jabs, why there are (occasionally) swings like haymakers. The question becomes whether the anology holds to spinning kicks. We know that it's not going to work ad infinitum, that an ultimately powerful technique with no speed at all will never connect, and that an iltimately-fast technique with no power at all will have no effect. I believe / assert, that the vast majority of the kicking I'm discussing (ax kicks, spinning heel kicks, etc) fall into the same group as hand attacks like spinning backfists... things that rarely work in sparring within the art, and essentially never when playing with people from other arts. They are slow enough (and equally important, slow with your back turned while standing on one leg) that they are "low probability" choices that carry a very high risk, and therefore unsited for a fighting art.

 

[MJS]

Mod. Note.
Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-MJS
-MT Moderator-

 

[Marginal]

I made generalized statements about things common in all three orginizations.

Except that it's not true.

I did not make a claim whether something was taught on MA. I asked "What's your basic approact to multiple-attackers?"

Why ask unless you think nothing is presented?

While you are at it, please answer some of the other questions I posed:

"Where is your weapons sparring (have you ever tried your knife/anti-knife work against an FMA practitionr?​

Answered already. TKD's an empty handed art. There is no weapons sparring. (Weird you ask this when you responded to this exact response already. It's like it registered, but managed also not to make any impression at all.) There are knife/weapons seminars and tactics and techniques come up in self defense segments.

How does the ITF teach to escape a mount?

Bridge.

What's your basic approact to multiple-attackers?

Stacking. (Not the wrestling term.)

How much sparring time do you put into hand work against resisting opponents?

Already answered. EVERY TIME WE SPAR.

How much of your grappling work do you put against resisting opponents?

Periodically. Necessaray to practice since a self defense demonstration is required when testing for 1st dan.

How much time have you spent trying your technique where opponents are allowed to grapple / sweep / attack the limbs?"

See above.

While you are at it, you may want to see if you have a response to some of my actual criticisms:

Where you claim that WTF rules sparring is not a valid self defense technique? Not applicable since ITF does not employ that rule set, nor are axe kicks, flying kicks etc presented as sensible (or even good) self defense tools.ITF style TKD does tend to encourage a deeper base as well.

The balance is high, the mobility is low, the "blocks" in the cirriculum are horrible combative ideas (hell, they are taught to be done with only one bone in the forearm; I've personally seen the fractures of that bone in TKD play from "light contact with pads"). Realisitically, the counter-grappling skills are not existant (I'll point you at any NHB venue you like. How did TKD fare? How would it have been different "on the street"?). Where *in the official cirriculum* is falling? fighting from the ground? how about just fighting in heavy clothing?

I've seen TKD'ers fare well in smaller venues. (LIke the avi I tried to link to would've illustrated.

Are they abandoned or are they "used based on the dynamics of the situation"?

Both.

the "blocks" in the cirriculum are horrible combative ideas (hell, they are taught to be done with only one bone in the forearm;

All of them? Really? This is why I say you have to stop arguing from generializations and actually get some detail before you make wild (and false) claims.

BJJ is not at issue here as it is not the topic... though I've been known to take BJJers to task as well.

It is since your only real criticism is that TKD's not a complete combatitive system. As I'm not making, and will not make the claim that it is, (I am merely arguing that it's still useful for self-defense purposes, and that you know nothing about the ITF) arguing against TKD as a complete system while asking me to defend it only as a complete system when there are plenty of viable arts out there that are also not complete systems is nothing but a poorly disguised double standard. It's also totally pointless since you're trying argue against garbage you think I should be saying rather than what's been said.

I've made some very specific criticisms of TKD as a combative art,

No, you've made generialiations based on olympic rules sparring. You make no distinction between differing competition rules between the various orgs (else you wold not have asked if hands are used against resisting opponents etc) As your mind was made up 15 years ago, further discussion's pointless.

You've done very little to address the criticisims.

If you say so.

You've complained that I don't know what I'm talking about, but never corrected me.

I beleive I did point out that there was a standardized stand up grappling syllabus for color belts in my org.

I beleive this contradicts your previous assertion that no major TKD org teaches such techniques before BB.

You've complained that I'm lumping, but not illustrated how a different organization solves the critique.

ITF sparring rules allow punches to the face, and scores hand techniques consistently in competition, (which encourages their use). I beleive I've already pointed out that we do regularly employ hand techniques against a resisting opponent during sparring.

You've flip-flopped on some issues (such as bloacking),

I've said nothing about "bloacking" at all. What I said about blocking hasn't confused anyone but you.

Basic sparring typically involves a standard hands up boxeresque stance. If a situation arises where the stonewall tactics are disrupted, those blocks from a pattern may emerge. You're getting huffy because I won't put the way we train into your particualr logic trap. It's not dithering. It's just how it is. Sorry if that doesn't match with your preconceptions. It's not a question that has a binary approach. Call it flip-flopping if you like. That don't make it so.

ignored other issues in favor of what you can take offence at, and gotten to the point that I can essentially respond to your posts without having to write new material.

Yeah, you pretending I never answered your questions was an incredible feat of arguer's acumen.

For the sake of everyone else, I'm likely to cease responding unless there is some indication this will be an actual discussion of the topic.

Silly request given that you had no intention of engaging in any better discussion than "TKD is (list of fallacoius preconceptions and third hand info)."

Note that in your entire post you put exactly *one* comment on topic ("blocks are not saught, nor are you put in a position that lends to making them, but not distinctly avoided by you").

If you're going to paraphrase, at least get the gist correct.

BJJs solution to the boxing problem is to put the boxer on his back.

I asked what a BJJ guy would do vs a knife wielding FMA player. I don't care what a BJJ guy does against a boxer.

Their punching is more than sufficient to "gound and pound", and they put a great deal of effort and energy into training to survive that entry.

Great. We know what happened in UFC 1 now. Answer my question. You haven't yet. Since you haven't, obviously I am right. (You think this is productive conversation?)​

 

[47MartialMan]

In short, Ive seen TKD martial artists perform well and not so well, in bar room brawls, some leading into the street.

It is not entirely the art.

Versitility in many martial arts is the key.

 

[Jerry]

Restricting to where you've actually discussed the topic:

Answered already. TKD's an empty handed art. There is no weapons sparring. (Weird you ask this when you responded to this exact response already. It's like it registered, but managed also not to make any impression at all.) There are knife/weapons seminars and tactics and techniques come up in self defense segments.

OK. TKD has no appriciable anti-weapons work. This is one example of it's lack of combative focus.

Bridge.

Can you point me to an ITF source that shows the cirriculum for escaping the mount? Or is this a "my school does it" thing?

"Taekwondo is famed for its employment of leg and jumping techniques, which many believe distinguishes it from martial arts such as Karate or Kung Fu. The rationale behind this is that the leg is the longest and strongest weapon a martial artist has, and kicks thus have the greatest potential to strike without retaliation. Despite this, hand techniques, and at the higher levels, some grappling and anti-weapon techniques are taught and emphasized (which techniques are taught vary from instructor to instructor)." - http://www.ukmao.co.uk/enc_taekwondo.asp


​

"some grappling" is taught "at higher levels"... perhaps they have no idea what they are talking about either?

"Though practitioners of grappling martial arts have a clear advantage once the fight hits the ground, a competent tae kwon do practitioner wouldn't allow that to happen. Furthermore, unlike grappling, which requires full contact with the opponent, tae kwon do practitioners can deliver a knock-out kick from several feet away."

"As well, some grappling techniques that are found in TKD lean toward aikido more than true grappling." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Taekwondo

​

"[TKD], unlike grappling" - Another source with no clue I suppose? Recall that both of these people are TKD practitioners promoting the system.

Could you please actually point me to a grappling cirriculum in a major TKD body? I've still not seen it.

Stacking. (Not the wrestling term.)

What is it, in your term?

Periodically. Necessaray to practice since a self defense demonstration is required when testing for 1st dan.

So grappling, sweeping, and limb attacks are an "add on" for a first-dan test, but not part of regular work?

Where you claim that WTF rules sparring is not a valid self defense technique? Not applicable since ITF does not employ that rule set[

A fair response. Let's look at the ITF sparring rules (trimmed down from http://www.itf-information.com/information10c.htm).

Targets: Front and side of head. Front of torso above the navel to the base of the neck.

Disqualifications: Heavy contact

Fouls: [font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif]biting/scratching/clawing, [/font][font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif]attacking with the knee, elbow or forehead,[/font][font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif] attacking a fallen opponent[/font]

Warnings: holding/grabbing/pushing,[font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif] sweeping, [/font][font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif]faking a blow, pretending to be injured to gain an advantage[/font]
​

Considering that you fight how you practice, let's look at these. You are only allowed to punch and kick, and only to the head and chest of an opponent facing you. You cannot blind-side (nor need worry about it), there are no knees, no elbows, no grapples, no limb attacks, no feints, no decoys, no shoves, no sweeps, and no heavy contact.



This is why TKD is not a combative art... because it does not train to be one. The syllibus is, I believe, far less comprehensive that you assert (I don't believe that ITF TKD has a ground-grappling syllibus, but invite you to prove me wrong), and the sparring is far to restrictive to be reasonable.

nor are axe kicks, flying kicks etc presented as sensible (or even good) self defense tools.ITF style TKD does tend to encourage a deeper base as well.

So you teach them and then tell people not to use them? Again it underscores my point about being non-combative.

I've seen TKD'ers fare well in smaller venues.

Can you suggest a reson why they are unheard of in larger venues open to mixed arts?

Both.

So blocks are both never used and used sometimes? That would be a neat trick.

All of them? Really? This is why I say you have to stop arguing from generializations and actually get some detail before you make wild (and false) claims.

There are four primary blocks in the TKD cirriculums. They are the "down, up, inward, and outward" (figures 2, 6, and 14).

**MODERATOR NOTE: IMAGE REMOVED DUE TO VIOLATION OF IMAGE POSTING POLICY - G KETCHMARK / SHESULSA**

It is since your only real criticism is that TKD's not a complete combatitive system.

Actually, I'm responding to a question regarding why TKD is rejected as a self-defense art. I've pointed out both the large holes in the cirriculum (grappling, weapons work, ground work), as well as the basic flaws in the approach (blocking, spinning attacks, ax kicks) to illustrate why many leave TKD for other arts on the grounds of it not being "effective for self-defense".

I beleive I did point out that there was a standardized stand up grappling syllabus for color belts in my org.

He would bleed to death.

 

[Marginal]

Restricting to where you've actually discussed the topic:

OK. TKD has no appriciable anti-weapons work. This is one example of it's lack of combative focus.

Thanks for repeating what I just stated. At least your kinda paying attention.

Can you point me to an ITF source that shows the cirriculum for escaping the mount?

Why did you ask if you didn't really want an answer?

[irrelevant WTF quotation snipped]

[/indent]"some grappling" is taught "at higher levels"... perhaps they have no idea what they are talking about either?

"

Are they even ITF?

"As well, some grappling techniques that are found in TKD lean toward aikido more than true grappling." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Taekwondo

Not especially meaningful given how hoshin sul is presented.

[/quote]"[TKD], unlike grappling" - Another source with no clue I suppose? Recall that both of these people are TKD practitioners promoting the system.[/quote]You're still not bothering to differientiate between orgs.

So grappling, sweeping, and limb attacks are an "add on" for a first-dan test, but not part of regular work?

A testing requirement's not an add on.

Disqualifications: Heavy contact

Laxly enforced.

Fouls: [font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif]biting/scratching/clawing, [/font][font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif]attacking with the knee, elbow or forehead,[/font][font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif] attacking a fallen opponent[/font]

Warnings: holding/grabbing/pushing,[font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif] sweeping, [/font][font=Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, Sans Serif]faking a blow, pretending to be injured to gain an advantage[/font]

Yep. In sparring.

Considering that you fight how you practice,

Nope. Sparring's not the sum total of practice.

I don't believe that ITF TKD has a ground-grappling syllibus, but invite you to prove me wrong

Don't care since I never said it did. You generically asked for a mount escape.

So you teach them and then tell people not to use them? Again it underscores my point about being non-combative.

You keep getting it wrong. It's like you can't read.

There are four primary blocks in the TKD cirriculums. They are the "down, up, inward, and outward" (figures 2, 6, and 14).
**MODERATOR NOTE: IMAGE REMOVED DUE TO VIOLATION OF IMAGE POSTING POLICY - G KETCHMARK / SHESULSA**

Wow. Another WTF source.

 

[Jerry]

You didn't answer a single question. You didn't point me to a single requested reasource. You didn't link me to any ITF grappling, you didn't link me to a single other type of block, you didn't address the complaint that these score points put TKD in the "non-combative" group.

Your posts seem to contain primarily a mix of "we don't do that", and slurs. I took a look at your last 5 posts (the past 3 pages) and found not one single referral to an ITF (or any body's) cirriculum. You did not cite or link to a single bit of source material. You rarely, if ever, discussed my claims (such as the problems with blocking), merely asserted they were wrong.

Actually, the blocking issue would be an excellent example of your complete lack of saying anything (we've had two threads on it).

Me: Have they abandoned "blocking",
You: During sparring, yes.
Me: They teach blocking, have it in the forms, then tell you to not ever do it?
You: That's also not saying that the blocks absolutely are not used in sparring.
Me: Are they abandoned or are they "used based on the dynamics of the situation"?
You: Both.
Me: So blocks are both never used and used sometimes?
​

At this point you stopped responding. You've never clarified whether blocks are abandoned or in use (you've given me contrary information). You also never answered the question of why they are taught (if they are not used) nor delt with the problem of them (if they are)... here's the conversation on the problem with them.

Me: the "blocks" in the cirriculum are horrible combative ideas (hell, they are taught to be done with only one bone in the forearm; I've personally seen the fractures of that bone in TKD play from "light contact with pads")
You: All of them? Really?
Me: There are four primary blocks in the TKD cirriculums. (I link to a Poomse to illustrate)
You: Wow. Another WTF source.
​

Note that you did not link to an ITF source. You did not offer up any other blocks. You did not support a reason why these four blocks were not "foundational" (making the critique relevent whether others exist or not). In short, you mocked me but put up absolutely nothing in response.

This has just gotten assinine. Your not talking about TKD at all, you are just talking about my posts... and you are doing so without reference, without support, and without contributing. If you would like to discuss the subject at hand, I'm happy to, but I'm done simply bickering.

 

[searcher]

Becasue those want to compare, critque, boast, and campaign via politics.

And don't forget marketing strategy. If you have 2 schools competing for students and one is TKD then there will be style bashing. This can occur more often than not with the large number of TKD schools.

 

[Brad Dunne]

If I may, the WTF lists only a Minimum core for promotion. It allows the school/instructor to formulate the full curriculum for his/her school. They even go so far as to show self defense techniques for consideration. But nowhere is it written, that they dictate what should or should not be taught in this venue. I would assume that the ITF's (3), would be somewhat similar.

http://www.kukkiwon.or.kr/eng/TKskill/kyor...i=304&serial=63
These are not the best in the world, but they may offer some practical value for what TKD can do.

:asian:

 

[tshadowchaser]

Moderator Warning
Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

Sheldon Bedell
-MT Moderator-

 

[shesulsa]

I'll further state that Tshadowchaser's warning is the THIRD warning in this thread.

Any further disrespectful, impolite conversation and this thread will be locked.

FINAL WARNING!

G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Senior Moderator

 

[Marginal]

This has just gotten assinine. Your not talking about TKD at all, you are just talking about my posts... and you are doing so without reference, without support, and without contributing. If you would like to discuss the subject at hand, I'm happy to, but I'm done simply bickering.

Last post before I update my ignore list. I will not argue about what the ITF does vs WTF sources you provide. It's an utter waste of time. It doesn't work on any level. This has been my complaint against your info from post 1. Again, apoligies if this upsets you.

Burden of proof does not fall to me when you're the one who made the initial claim.

 

[Mark Lynn]

I hear stories of martial artists who have switched to different martial arts because they got whupped and their previous art was TKD. It's really bothering me and kind of losing my faith not only in TKD but also in the martial arts

My background was in American style of TKD (it was bastardized ITF), I also studied other systems along ther way and I've switched to the Filipino martial arts. However I still practiced and taught over the years the American TKD only I blended in anything that worked when it came to self defense training in the classes I taught.

Bottom line I believe two things will help in SD training.
1) Proper attitude (be serious about it, study about it, explore other arts and adapt similar techniques into your personal SD training).

2) Don't believe the hype or the marketing that this system or that is supreme (no matter if it is karate, TKD, BJJ, Muay Thai, or any of the filipino systems) system and by taking that system you cannot be defeated by anyone.

Why does TKD have a bad rap sometimes in SD? I submit it is because of the above 2) points. Poor attitude among teachers and students in regards to SD training. And the belief that their system is the best and it will defeat all comers.

A couple of weeks ago I went to a test at a TKD school (Amercianized version) and in all honesty the self defesne section was the weakest part of the whole test. I saw techniques that wouldn't work on a resisting opponent, no attitude in them, and poor responses. 20 years ago I went to a (Korean) TKD school and was told that they believe in kicking to the head for SD because the leg had more power than the hand and therefore you could KO the assailent easier.

However the TKD training I recieved from my instructor we were taught to fight and use anything to win in self defense. So when taken to the ground we sought out the eyes. Standing upright we used sweeps, TDs, Muay Thai leg kicks, elbows, locks whatever it took.

Mark

 

[CuongNhuka]

the main reason that taekwondoka (i think) is because teakwon do focuses on high kicks and in training that is free style their is little to no similaritly to real life situation. what is a real life situaton? for most that means kicking the gut and punching the head. both of which are frond upon in taekwondo freestyle. now donn't get me wrong some taekwondoka train in very realistic situations. taekwondo, in general, is really only good against other teakwondoka. know if you were to train in korea, then very few people would be able to much against you here in the states. why? the reason is when they spar, you donn't score a point unless you acculy knok your opponent back with the force of your kick. now personaly, i don't like point sparring at all, but what ever floats your boat.

sweet Brighit bless your blade

john