What defines a Martial artist? (Taekwondo)

Sometimes in order to hammer the point home I think people need to hear it from more than one person.

 

Sometimes, even a hammer will not work, if the nail was produced with weak materials to start off and bend too easy upon the first and proper strike

I wonder if the OP "fully understands" what any of this is in terms of defense, esp HAOV

It is no longer effective, because, as I stated, it became a sport. But, the effectiveness of something in its WHOLE, is not judged upon what the majority of what it is currently (abroad). As for the UFC, you do realize, it is still within confines of Rules? As for Vale Tudo, there have been many bouts such as this, many secluded, all over the globe FOR MANY decades. And that not one art (in particular) dominated it. (I'll bet you be surprised that non-martial art type-trained people-per brawlers won these types of bouts) As for self defense, fighting such as MMA or etc., IS not to be considered in as self defense

Well, it seems you got more feedback than you may have bargained for.

I, like others, think your video was too long to watch and many of us did not bother to watch all of it. You need to go back and edit, making series or segments of it

You asked what defines a martial art, yet stayed in TKD (a particular type) to what you think is a high rank. Then you take up another art, only to be biased and slander your previous art (as a whole). Which, btw, isn't the art, but your teacher of it and your incorrect idea that all TKD is likewise. Also, you have the incorrect idea, that a martial art should be about fighting. As well as a incorrect idea, that what you currently study, is fighting and defense

I don't applaud you for:

* Your long video.
* Your slander of TKD
* Your notions of a martial art being ALL about fighting
* That you lump fighting and defense as the same

I do applaud you for:
* Starting a thread
* Sticking with TKD (your type) for all of those years
* Remaining on the forum for discussion

I also suggest, that you find and read the threads about:

* Self defense
* What is a Martial Art
(Note: Could a Mod, or anyone, find and post links for these?)

 

Thank you for all your feedback and responding to all my comments. I do understand that UFC has rules, and does so to protect the fighters. I also understand that on the street anything goes, and there are many variables that could affect anyone, including a trained fighter. I've seen many vale-tudo fights, and while the gracies dominated styles that didn't know how to deal with an opponent taking them down to the ground, the styles that adapted and become more familiar with the ground and submission game made themselves more complete (striking and grappling). However, I do feel like mma offers a variety of different defenses and attacks, taking what's best from each martial art and using it. While there are rules, I do also beleive that those fighters are capable of not fighting with rules, just like any martial artist. I do think that mixed martial artists are heavily conditioned to react to threatining situations and also have an immense amount of cardio due to their training. I also think that there are benefits to learning mma because I wouldn't want to be clueless if someone were to take me to the ground in a street fight.

I do want to discuss more things further , and will definitely post segments of the video so it's easier to watch lol


My tkd instructor was bad and I'm aware of it now. I'm not saying all schools are like mine but I actually went out and took a chance to look into other tkd schools and was not happy with what I saw. They heavily practiced forms, rarely sparred, never adressed non-taekwondo attacks and the self defense was a simple "stick your hand out and I will do 10 finishing moves". Now of course, these techniques may work on someone who doesn't know what the heck is going on which is fine.

However, what I personally believe is that when you train a martial art, you should train to beat someone at their very best. I'd rather cover all my basis and be able to take on a boxer, wrestler, muy thai champion, ect, than practice techniques that would only work on someone who was unskilled. And who knows maybe you'll run into a guy who has a background in wrestling or boxing that wants to pick a fight with you.

As far as the definition of a martial artist goes, we will have to agree to disagree on that matter. I don't care how nice somebody is, if they can't defend themselves (yes I'm lumping fighting and defending together, and I know you may not like that lol but it's my opinion) then they aren't a true martial artist.

 

I think you are spot on in your sentiments tbh.

TKD by and large is trained abysmally (for physical unarmed combat)

MMA by and large is trained very effectively (for the same) as are many other combet sports such as boxing.

Guys like Geoff Thompson advocate boxing and judo for a reason.

I think this particular debate has been done to death.

 

This type of discussion has been around for ages. I.E what is needed for SD, or what type of opponent you may have. No one will disagree that larger skill sets are better, but who, other than professionals truly have the time and energy to devote to a really broad range of both weaponless and weapon skills. (Happens to be one of my retirement dreams.)

Now, how things have changed over time is there is more competition allowing a broader range of skills, but is it really needed for self defense? The answer now is found on the net. Do a search for real world attacks. 90+% still start with the "overhand right."

FWIW I started in Judo in 1970, moved to TKD in 1972 and when a JJ came to the school to improve his striking (He later became head of the USJA JJ division) and we saw what he could do if he got a hold of us we decided to suck up all the grappling wisdom he could impart.

So, I am a big believer in the need for striking and grappling skills.

Still, I never met a JJ guy worth his salt that says you want to go to the ground in a street SD encounter.

 

Agree!

It's not proper to put up a 38 minutes video if he can just put up 5 minutes video and still pass the right information. This way he can save everybody 33 minutes of their valuable life time that they can do other meaningful things.

If he doesn't mind to download the YouTube, edit it to contain the information by cutting away the head and tail, duplicate it several times if needed. This way it's much easier for forum members to see his point.

 

Having watched as much of your video as I could take (About 6 minutes) and having looked at your other posts. I think that you have simply reached a learning point in your martial arts career that every martial artists gets to eventually.

You are no longer letting teachers be in control of your learning. You are beginning to take responsibility for your own learning.

This is a good thing.

In the light of this new outlook you are reviewing your martial arts progress and re-evaluating the choices that you made along the way as well as what you have learned.

This is a good thing.

But, there is no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. You no-doubt have a wealth of skills and understanding. You simply have to find a way to re-frame those skills and that understanding to fill the gaps that you can now see.

But there is no need to over react. MMA provides many practical solutions to the problems that you have identified but it by no means the only art that does this.

Even within a single art there can be a huge variation in the way that it is applied. I don't know about tykwando but in kung fu there are many clubs that have all the problems that you describe but their are many other that don't. It is quite possible that you might find what you want within Tykwando if you look hard enough ( and adding a little something extra to cover the ground work).

It's been a very long time since I read it but i think Geoff Thompson mentions meeting a practical tykwando fighter in "whatch my back".

 

You.... I like you.

 

You got it wrong. Nobody on this forum would disagree with your definition of a martial art.

What some would dis-agree with is that you appear to be arguing that MMA is the only way to learn how to fight. It is a way to learn how to fight but in many peoples experience it is not the only way. In addition MMA does not completely prepare you for fighting in the real world. It is unlikely that any single art does. If there is one that does I don't know its name.

 

I would.

I think it's silly. Some people always want to redefine "martial art" to distance themselves from other people who fall under the definition of martial artists.

9 year-old black belts are martial artists. Old people who take up Tai Chi at the community centre are martial artists. Ashida Kim is a martial artist.

You can't change the definition of a word just because you're annoyed a cool-sounding title you want to give yourself gets tarnished by people who can't fight. Deal with it.

Funny thing is, I've never heard people who actually fight going on about the definition of a martial artist. They just get on with training to fight.

 

I think it's because some people see a clear demarcation between very different groups. Martial = relating to war/combat. Without that essential element of having training geared toward developing the ability to use force on another human being I wouldn't call it martial arts. I see a clear separation there. I mean 'tai chi for health only' is about as much martial arts as playing Call of Duty is fighting a war. The same with (sport) wushu which is gymnastics with movements taken from martial arts but has no martial quality at all.

Sure some of them originate from martial arts but lumping everything under a single label seems illogical. I mean the people in the park doing the health tai chi, no one would term what they're doing "combative" and I see no reason the term martial fits. It's certainly exercise but it's not practice of a fighting art.

 

If Ashida Kim is a martial artist then making a pot noodle means I am a chef

 

Being a chef is a profession.

Martial arts are largely seen as a hobby for folks who like wearing pyjamas.

I just think it's far too late to drag back any credibility or value to the term. It's been meaningless pretty much since it became popularly attached to asian MA when they started showing up in films.

 

You ask 1000 people to describe what wushu is after showing them a video of it. I bet around 900 will say "it's martial arts".

Definitions aren't what we choose them to be. It's just common usage. It really doesn't matter.

 

Alright, I am a Cordon Bleu cook then....

 

Have you cooked professionally?

Ashida Kim has been paid to teach MA, right? That makes him a professional martial arts teacher. Doesn't matter how distasteful that may sound.

I've eaten food in a restaurant that I reckon isn't as good as my cooking. That still doesn't make me a chef.

It's just words. The labels don't matter.