Is Tae Kwon Do actually "useless" against other styles?

I don't have a problem with what Badger is saying. As he says the same is true for boxing and it is true for BJJ and Judo as well. Sport styles evolve (or devolve) towards their specialized rule set. The main thing is to be aware of it and try to understand how things change when the rule set disappears.

To change the perspective there are grappling techniques that I like that I'd never use outside of a sport setting (because there is too much of a chance the guy could tee off on my face while I was applying it). It doesn't make the technique a bad one, but you just have to realize its more sport application.

 

Apologies if I misread it. But there is also the opposite side of the coin, that not all of TKD has to be devoted towards fighting.. sure many things are kept in TKD simply for the sake of its part of the whole system.. My opinions on patterns aside, many clubs do them simply as they are a big part of TKD and do not consider them to have benefits towards fighting at all.

Perhaps you simply want something different to what TKD 'technically' is... take Self-Defence for example... if it was my one and only concern, I`d drop TKD and take pure SD classes.. but its not, its part of what I want out of Martial Arts...

If you are refering to the side on, L-Stance thing.. then I agree with you (and did earlier in the thread I think).. its good for TKD comp sparring, but when it gets more involved, it needs to change. To me, thats logical as well!

Thats if you are viewing whats being done as something to be used against another fighter... as I said above, some practices in TKD are not meant in that mold.. like 3 step sparring... though it uses the term sparring.. it doesnt really have anything to do with sparring/fighting...

Stuart

 

I had a question to Badger Ladder. You seem to focused on the "fighting" aspect of martial art along with self-defense. And arguably, Taekwondo is hindered in that regard. The side stance was brought up, and over-reliance on ranged techniques.

My question is: What fighting does accurately cover all aspects of fighting? Boxing lacks grappling and ranged fighting (kicks). Wrestlers have an open-armed stance that leaves them vulnerable to any striking style. Boxers tend to keep their heads forward, which leaves them vulnerable to head kicks.

Does any style cover all aspects of fighting? Or are you saying that every style lends something useful, but nothing works completely? (And how do you define fighting? Anything goes with no rules at all?)

 

I realise everyones different so this is just my view...for me its all fighting. SD is still a fight, if you wanted a fight or not, theres just no rules. Also you dont know how good someone is untill they attack so its better to be training to fight other skilled fighters at as many ranges as possible. And im still learning too so dont take anything as gospel.

Saying all that, my responces have been just give my view on why TKD might lack against other styles and point out its just sense and logic and not that its a bad martial art and say that a good discussion can be had as long as its analitical, honest and not ''TKD is crap'' or TKD is so deadly if applied right'' or TKD has everything''. And I realise some just want to do TKD as its what they enjoy and that you can get a fair level of fighting ability and SD or whatever abilty if training in a good place.

No style covers it all but MMA attempts to and is evolving as it trys to.
Some styles have better basic fundamentals for certain areas that are important to succes in that style that also crosses over to fighting. A basic example would be in boxing you use your shoulder to cover your chin at all times and need to have good contstant head movement. Thats a fundamental in all good boxing clubs.
In TKD (and other styles like Judo or wrestling ) thats not essential to have success although some will incorporate it from boxing. But its not an absolute basic thats got to be taught in all TKD gyms to make it good TKD.

BUT if you standing like a boxer,your not set to defend grappling or attack with grappling. So not all of boxing crosses over.
BUT not all MMA covers weapons or covers not being an idiot in the first place to not get into fights or how to be friendly enough to stop a fight or awareness etc etc.
So for me I learn to fight at all ranges,I understand what genuine, chaotic violence is, I understand any limitations, I be aware of how knifes and weapons and multiples might fit in, I dontbe an idiot on nights out, I be aware etc etc. Yet still understanding I might get into a genuine SD situation where its just bad luck or good luck that helps me.

 

I see. I wasn't trying to attack your opinion. I was just curious to see how you defined self-defense and fighting.

Different martial arts seem to cover different ranges of attack, and I believe boxing can be of great value. Taekwondo seems to cover long range fairly well in my eyes, and we train some light boxing at the Taekwondo school I attend. We also train grappling in mostly wrestling techniques and a little brazillian jiu-jitsu. Personally, I'm not a big fan of grappling and never take part in the grappling classes. I think it's about what you enjoy above all else, but also simply recognizing what's useful and what's not. And knowing when to apply a certain technique and when not to.

 

I'm going to be real here I've trained in multiple styles of Japanese martial arts I've spared with a 2nd dan and 3rd dan in hapkido and tkd who recived training from a grand master in korea on top of the military training they were givin upon joining the army. I lost badly the first time I spared with them. So then I trained insainly hard put in 6 hours a day into training every day and beat them when they came back state side. Like it has been said before on this thread it's not about what you train in it's about how hard you're willing to push yourself to achieve what you set out for. However when you start talking about sd and real world applications you're better off joining a running club or learn how to talk your way out of bad situations. If you can't get away they have a song strike the "head,shoulders,knees,and toes." then go for the "mouth,ears,eyes,and nose." Of course if you did do a sd class they should teach you about other effective targets like the kidneys, throat, and solar plexis. You could have opened any martial arts book and learned that the basic of sd is killing or hurting your opponent to a point where they can no longer attack you if you however are not ready to do this and are not ready to live with the consequences of these actions then you should do martial arts for the fun and discipline it provides not to try to protect yourself from an unkown threat that may or may not ever occur.

 

Great thread and some very interesting points of view. I think that any art is only as good (or bad) as the people training in it. During the 1980's there was an awesome event in the Midlands with participants from many styles, including Lau Gar Kung Fu, Wado Ryu, Shukokai, Mugendo and Tae Kwon Do competing. In this event, the TKD participants were excellent and held their own in the main. The area where things were less effective was close range, especially against foot sweeps. This was the 'Best of the Best' at the time and so the standard of participants from all arts was very high.

Ultimately, we all believe that the art that we practice is 'The Best'...this is what motivates us to train hard and reach for great heights. That makes us good at our own arts. Just keep on training and if you are honest enough and knowledgeable enough to see gaps in your skills, recognize that it may not be the art! Do something about it and train in other techniques and / or other arts to close the skills and competency gaps!

 

TKD vs. Muay Thai: (Not saying this is typical mind you...)
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPNoGhdhKyw"]Taekwondo vs Muay Thai (Crazy KO) - YouTube[/ame]

I am not a TKD practioner but I have a few very good friends who are. Two of which are black belts. One who was 4th Dan. The 4th Dan trained in Korea and he said that it was a totally different world then training in the United States. The Koreans train this MUCH harder.

He also commented on the fact that part of the problem with TKD's reputation is that the market is so saturated with TKD and there are so many schools out there with very little work being done to ensure that it's strong TKD. Basically it's "McDojo"ed so often that few people have really informed opinions.

Bruce Lee apparently added a good deal of it to JKD, but also Muay Thai and Savate.

This video seems a bit more reasonable.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-YOBSH3vcI&feature=related"]Andy vs Thai Boxer - YouTube[/ame]

 

Yeah they told me in Korea if a kid acted out the Master would either kick them extremely hard in the stomach or throw them so they would either learn respect and discipline really fast or quit really fast. Sadly because of laws and stupidity of parents martial arts in the states has become less about martial arts and more about baby sitting. If you want to actually get good and you live state side you're better off learning technique from books or movies and learn practical application through all around full contact sparing at a mma place or in the back of a gym. (when I say movies I don't mean enter the dragon. I mean films that teach kata.)

 

No one can be "better off" this way

 

Kicking children in the stomach is pretty much child abuse. We can dress it up as 'toughening the kids up' but yeah, I don't think kids should be scared of going to martial arts classes. I wouldn't go to a dojang, gym, dojo where the teacher used corporal punishment on me.

 

come on dude. toughen the kid up!

<sarcasm>

 

I'm actually all for not beating the kids in karate class. I'm starting to teach kids on my own soon, and have been doing it along side my sensei for a while. I can honestly say I wouldn't be able to train them any better if I was allowed to kick them. In fact, if I where allowed to I wouldn't because I'm not a sociopath

 

In Korea you will find all manner of training. You will find elite level athlete clubs with college scholarship level athletes. You will also find the equivalent of 'kids little league baseball' clubs. And actually they view it a lot like baseball over there. If you are good you stick with it and see how high you can go. If you are a 'typical athlete' your career ends when you become an adult. They are often surprised when you say, as an adult, that you still train TKD (or any other martial arts for that matter). And it really isn't that much different state side (if you think about it). You tell someone you train martial arts and you are in your 40s and they are like, "What? Really? Why don't you do a 'grown up' activity like golf?"

In Korea it can be even more like this as their culture can be pretty work obsessed. I've been to Korea, btw, many times.

EDIT: I obviously disagree with this attitude (obviously since I still train), but I'm sure we've all seen it.

 

There have been a couple of variations of this question which don't seem to have been answered. Most pre-20th century arts address more than one range, and several do cover all. There are also more modern versions that do as well. JJJ is an obvious answer, Kali is a very complete system addressing weapons, kicking (Pananjakman/Sikaran), striking (Panantukan), hand fighting (Hubud), wrestling and joint locking (Dumog), and "dirty tactics" (Kino Mutai). Silat typically involves kicking and punching, takedowns and joint manipulations. The 4 essential skills of Chinese martial arts Tui Da Shuai Na are kicking, punching, throwing and controlling.
On a more modern front Combat Sambo has striking, throwing and submission, Kyokushin derivatives such as Kudo and Enshin have striking, throwing and submission, and the Japanese integrated proto MMA systems such as Shooto and Pancrase do as well.
As I said, the vast majority of arts address at least two phases, Muay Thai has striking and standing grappling, as does pretty much every Kung Fu style (which is why San Shou is a format that allows striking and throwing) (I would argue that they should all also have fast wrestling on the ground, but that's another conversation), even Karate has a fair amount of attached striking and standing grappling. Historically boxing had lots of standing grappling, and also was often cross trained with CACC to offer a complete skillset.
Now, are these styles as good in every range in isolation against specialist styles? Probably not, but then in fights they're much better at the other 3, so chances are it's going to go their way.

 

I am a black belt in Taekwondo.
I feel it is up to the individual, but the martial art that has a comprehensive conditioning routine and the individual embraces that, that is a solid yet flexible edge that they would have.

I mean, if you strike someone, and they block with their arm, and you get hurt, because they have conditioned their arms.

Or you kick them in the sack, and they don't go down, not because they are high on coke, but because they have done that iron conditioning,(?)

Or you hit them in the head, and you break your hand, because they are conditioned to break metal bars over their head, like Shaolin monks, your pretty well screwed.

Most people don't usually end up using their martial art in a real fight anyway.

The people that do on the regular, probably, hang out in clubs.

I lived in bad neighbor hoods for years, and only came close to fighting maybe 2 times.

The only time I got punched, I was so drunk, I barely felt it, and just walked away.

I haven't actually ever been in a real knock down, full out fight in my life.

Hard sparring doesn't count.

 

Yes I agree & have heard them say, oh you still "PLAY" tkd! In SK TKD is considered a sport & often viewed as a children's activity. Like stated above, if you are good & like it, you see where it can take you, ie scholarships etc. After all it is their national sport that they were successful in making it an Olympic sport.
The civilians developed it with the emphasis on the new SPORTS RULES they devised to make it different from the karate base they were trained in. This was what they also rallied around, that became the common bond. In the military, Gen. Choi & his soldiers were unifying under the new Korean patterns they were designing with patriotic Korean names that promoted Korean history. Dr. Kim had a 3 part strategy:
1- Make it their national sport
2- Promote it internationally
3- Gain Olympic sport status
As we know, he was very, very successful & deserves great credit as the father of Olympic TKD. Now many Koreans went abroad & taught it was a MA, as that was what the trend was in the "old days". Besides how many back then wanted to participate in a brand new foreign, little known sport. But now many small countries, 3rd world countries & some others, focus on TKD as a sport as well. Iran & Afghanistan are 2 nations that come to mind that support TKD training as a sport, because it has afforded them their 1st or only Olympic medals. At one time China's training did not even include Poomsae, as that was not in the Olympics. I am not sure if that changed, once the WTF set up Poomsae WCs.

So TKD can be useless against other styles depending on the setting. I think it is up to the individual & the focus of their training. As far as SD goes, if SD is not the focus of the training, I would imagine that efficiency with that aspect may be somewhat lacking & suffer when contrasted with a pure 100% focus on reality based SD.
Of course for me ITF TKD is a KMA of SD that seeks to impart much more to a student, than just SD. Therefore by both definition & design, SD will not be the 100% focus.

 

Reading all these posts, it's as if my country is isolated from the outside world, MA wise. Hardly anybody knows about TKD here in Malta, except, possibly, during olympic season, after which its popularity decays once more. The younger generation are actually quite familiar with the name( with all the internet and hard work by the national fed) but I would usually have to substitute tkd with karate while talking to the older gen. Malta is quite a tough market for tkd though :

first of all we manage to rank very high in the wrong statistics; laziness and obesity etc. then we have the population issue.

We're hardly 450k , and the alltime popular sport is football. The most popular MA is karate of which we have a bunch of clubs. Anyway, basically, tkd is still not well known down here.

My conclusion and probably most relevant sentence : I have a very dedicated sabomnim! Yay!