TOG TKD

Because they do not know that teaching and learning this on a regualr basis is just a vaccumm.

I had a Israeli colleague trained from his country's art-military. Against my warnings, he went into a bad part of my town and got shot. He survived, but I guess from all of that training on a "regular basis", he became complacent.

I agree.

 

Absolutely I agree 100%.
My first point would be that I didn't say TKD but ITF TKD. But still you are 100% correct imnsho! That being said I would like to highlight a particularly important point you made:
The quality may have been poor at the time with boxing & wrestling, as well as judo. What we do know about judo was that it was allowed to be trained in. Wrestling, especially sumo wrestling was around as well. So was boxing. I can not speak to the level, quality or depth of training that anyone had.
I can assure you that from a historical perspective Korea was a bad place. It was lawless, with no govt for a period of time. Gangs & thugs ruled & ran the streets, or what street there were.
But original tkd was first developed in the military. As such it is evident that is was created first as a mix of the martial or fighting systems available at the time & in that place. I make no claims to how effective they were or how the mix was stirred. I also don't want to give a mistaken impression that I am saying it was a MMA like we have today. Rather it was a consolidation of what they had available to them.
Certainly we can see that over the years whatever was there was simply left out or not emphasized. Nor has there been much serious realistic SD training. My main point is that if your focus is SD, then your skills will develop if you keep that focus, train under realistic conditions AND seek to supplement the elements of training that your school is weak in or your instructors are not well versed in. Some would call this cross training. I sim,y say that take away the badges, fancy uniforms, orgs, belts etc & train for SD. If you train for SD & I train for SD & both of us do it under realistic conditions & with no rules, we will look pretty much the same.

The problem as I see it with ITF TKD is that few train under realistic conditions & when they fight, they follow silly sports rules & do not have a true SD focus. So elements of these other fighting systems were added, but they no longer are being taught or taught to the depth that is required. So yes judo is there, but it has been 40+ years since a judo man has actually been involved in high level ITF training. So now you have as you rightfully say, occasional ITFers who can do a so-so throw. That of course is not judo. So if ITF tkd wants to get real about SD get realistic about your SD training.

 

Sorry, I missed out a vital point here - in my old org, we didnt learn weapons defences until after BB (And that wasnt even really an org thing, but my own instructors), and we didnt learn any gun related defences at all. Again, no matter your opinion on them, they are listed as part of the syllabus, but only very briefly in Gen Choi's manuals (and I didnt have KBM's book back then either) and those that I saw, like I said , looked outdated. So, knowing this area was part of TKD and wanting to include as much of the system as possible, I sort further instruction, as I wouldnt teach anything I wasnt compedent in. They are just a few close range drills, and I did a number of training sessions with the instructors on them before even those few drills became part of standard training.

You say its the same because its refers to something in the syllabus as what you have said does... but its different, because the stuff you talk about we learned from day 1, but I didnt learn the stuff you are comparing, hence further instruction was required.

Sure.. I already told you I stand by what I say.. but I trust I have clarified the difference for you!

I said thats how you come across.. or if I did say that, its because thats how you come across. Still, thought we was past all that now, no need to keep rehashing it!

Hmmm.. did I say that? As I dont really know anything about you, I can make assumptions that theres certain stuff you havnt been exposed to or that you havnt come across to a decent enough standard for you - thats a fair assessment I'd say, when you say such and such in TKD is crap, but I discintly know different from what Ive seen!

And thats fine (cos its not a thread for that anyway), but thats your opinion... its valid for you, but just cos you feel that way, it doesnt make it correct!

Stuart

 

Hows that then? Please expand Ole Zen one

Maybe. Or he was shot from a distance or distracted... theres numerous reasons and even if not, it doesnt make your point. I could also say theres a thousand more robbery related shootings which have happened, that someone could could have possibly survived if they did some gun defence training! But its conjecture and doesnt prove a point either way!

Wheres the part thing that your expanding on? Are you refering to your 'observations'?

I could discuss this further with you, but as I said, this is not the thread for it. But suffice to say, what say is nothing new or enlighting TBH! Though I'd disagree with anyone who thinks that no training is better than some training (to a decent level) even if you can replicate the adrenaline/mental side of such a thing - as TBH, I think thats true of all training Vs real combat/fighting!

 

I simply disagree that stuff which is already in there is of such poor quality (as you seem to feel) that it needs it - sure, as I said, some clubs might.. but you refer to the whole of TKD.. and I for one, disagree!

The gun stuff, I wasnt taught, so couldnt/wouldnt teach it anyway. Knees/elbows etc. I was and I feel its of a decent standard and practiced regularly - thats all!

Stuart

 

Per my post 276 and 281.

The gunman is unpredictable. In my observations and being a victim a few times, (I guess this depends on the culture/country/the gunman's environment), they do not get into range or are into any stance or with their arms so out-stretched. (post 275)

It is like this;

You can train until the cows come home, but going unarmed against a gunman in belief that your physical training alone is going to help you, you will need some mental preparations as well as "street smarts"

Therefore, I am saying if one is to train for such encounters, they have to also be prepared beyond physical training.

To say that some training is better than none, could be misleading as it depends on the training and the culture/country/the gunman's environment)

 

Maybe I`m being thick (so humour me) as previous posts dont explain to me what you meant by Military people teaching such things "Because they do not know that teaching and learning this on a regualr basis is just a vaccumm."!! Please explain!

Sure I would agree.. but you can only train for the ones that are in range.. as I said when it was brought up... its not about dodging rifle bullets from snipers. And if in close (ie. a robbery/mugging), then the gun has to be pointed and thus that type of defence can be used - the distance the arm is outstretched is immaterial, to the distance the gun is to the victim.

a) This is the same with any type of training Vs street/real. inc. knife and unarmed!! Its like adrenaline... and until you either feel its effects full force you dont really know how you will react, but you can train against the adrenaline effect to a point. That said, obviously a real gun attack is pretty hard to simulate.

I would say thats a given with all aspects of SD!!!!

I said some 'decent' training. Not some rubbish stuff from some old book (though Fairbairns & Skyes still rate very highly considering their age) - stuff actually taught to military and LEO's as standard!

 

Thats not fully the point I trying to say. Half there. Certain areas areas are of poor quality when comparing it to what it could be and comparing it to the drills and training that others do in relation to those things. There is a lack of depth and fudamentals. I do confidently refer to the whole of TKD as is laid out. Noone has shown or explianed otherwise. I dont refer to those looking outside of the curriculum or changing it.
I am not saying TKD its of poor quality, full stop, without the comparison.

 

Military and LEO both realize that such training is not the end all. They know it is a aspect of training to lower the percentage unfavorable outcomes.

 

So, other than that.. there okay then?!!! Bit like say a 9mm no good compared to a colt45.. yet on its own, it still shoots and is capable of killing people!!

Not always! Not every where! Please list a few fundamentals required for elbow technqiues and I`ll let you know if we miss anything!

What are they meant to be explaining?

Yup, got that!

So.. your saying, incomparison to a main focus art, such as Thai (for knees/elbows - which are one of their main focuses), they are poor in comparion.. but otherwise, they are okay? Right?

 

And a civi can't understand that why?

So you think that non-military/LEO are under some miscomprehension that by leanring/practing such stuff it makes them superman!!! Hmmmm.. isnt all training about lowering percentages of bad outcomes? Nothing is a given after all!

 

Just saying........

 

Making (incorrect) assumptions I`d call it! :hat:

 

Nope. Just saying. Open general commentary

 

.

 

LOL.. i thought it summed up the discussion nicely! :woo:

Heck, we can do that within our own circle.... at things that you feel are 'decent' in TKD already, like kicks... heck, theres always room for improvement in all areas, in all arts! :woo:

Well, I`ll happily state that we have 'progressed' much further in these areas than just 'saying' they are there cos they are in some of the patterns!!! :woo:

I agree. hence why we train them as well :woo:

Well, the conversation may have started with the 'are they or are they not there' bit, but then evolved around to standards of such things - you say the standard is too low (but now say its okay), I said i agree in some cases/clubs (who dont train them), but where they are trained, they are better than you are making out ! :woo:

Either or.. same thing to me! :woo:

Unless the ideas were already taught by a TKD instructor in the first place :woo:

Our class does.. to a degree.. we train the 8 or so different types of elbow associated with TKD, from both close range and clinching.. it is also allowed in one of our types of sparring (albeit controlled as its heavy, but not full contact), we also train them on pads to aid in power development and powr generation principles of the techniques.. so what am I missing! Though TBH, Im sure Thai looks into them in a deeper way, as well as having differing terminology for similar things...so I`m none the wiser on what we are missing?

Some may say that.. not I! I like elbows They are an effective SD tool.. so we train them as such! :woo:

Okay... same with kicks and any other part of TKD or any art for that matter! :woo:

But they are!! :woo: the joke is really on those that arnt practicing such things IMO!:woo:

So you have used effective knees in TKD.. thats good then!

If I got Bill Wallace down to teach a months worth of classes, Im pretty sure most peoples kicks would improve... like I said, its the same with any area for any art.. I simply disagree that how they stand at the moment are that poor.. not that they could be improved.. all things could!

I dont disagree.. as I have said above!

:woo::woo::woo::woo::woo::woo::woo::woo::woo::woo::woo:

Stuart

 

Too many gun smileys?

 

It didnt start like that at all. I have never mentioned them not being there. I have said the standard is low to average and low when compared to how others do it. And even where they are trained I say the same. You havnt shown otherwise. Got some clips of how TKD trains elbows to what you believe is a good standard? Lets see.( Unlikely).

So whatever you do now in 2012 after taking in all sorts of influences knowingly or unkowingly, you are saying is TKD and thats how it was and has been? Thats what I get from that. Delusional or what.

No TKD instructor with no outside influence,just TKD as laid out by pioneers,does not go into that stuff. I confidently say that.

To degree? Thats a no then.
And you allow sparring with elbows? And its heavy? That I would like to see and have explained. My guess is that must be a pretty low intensity and not very realistic sparring.
I say that because even Thais rarely spar with elbows, even in light sparring. Or MMA guys. Something doesnt add up there.


And elbows are not about power. They are about speed.
Theres a fundamental difference. TKD goes for power, which is ok for a start, and if someone just stands there and holds a pad or just stands there and lets you hit them, but it doesnt fit within the context of everything you would need to do like striking, kneeing, kicking, clinching, grapppling to try to power elbows in.

If they were not poor people would never comment on TKD just having kicks or saying lots of other things, or that they are missing from TKD. So on the whole, it is poor.