Why is Taekwondo always considered weak and ineffective? *conversation included*

sounds like a good idea. for a general view of the board.

 

original TKD is still taught in the Korean military as U.S forces stationed there. the lineage of the military TKD is Oh Do Kwan. it wasnt replaced.

the WTF ruleset concerning olympic sparring is what was added. Kukkiwon and Yong-In university refined the curriculum. when Brazilian Jiujitsu started becoming more reputable

the GMs recognized that and incorporated BJJ into the curriculum to make up for lack of ground game that Yusul doesnt get as deep into.

the way it is, is that its Oh Do Kwan TKD based, but there are influences from other arts due to many of the artists coming from different backgrounds.

depending on who the Chief GM is at a particular base and depending on who his staff instructors are as well as the instructors / practicioners who fall under them the training varies according to thier experiences

and background in other arts but at its core, the foundation is Oh Do Kwan TKD. at my base our influences include ninjutsu, tang soo do, hapkido, BJJ, Judo, taekkyeon, CMA, Filipino knife fighting, Korean Kickboxing, Muay Thai & yungmoodo from Yong-In university.

regardless of the base was is at......its like doing MMA, your doing TKD but its like MMA.



Tukong Musul is the art used by ROK special forces. its a hard and soft style.
my Ninjutsu Instructor is U.S special forces and does alot of work with ROK SF counterparts so sometimes they train with us in ninjutsu classes.

thats how i first came to be familiar with them in person.

 

I do think that its mass popularity has helped contribute to its weak reputation.
However, please do not get me wrong, I LOVE TKD! However the way we try to do TKD is by having a SD focus, pushing students to be better people. We do have a sports aspect as well. But we work hard to find a balance, often failing at it.
I am a strong ITFer, but have come to understand WTF sport TKD & Kukki TKD better. I do appreciate the high level of talent & the very hard work that it takes to be a top player in Olympic TKD. I used to be bothered by the cat & mouse strategy of WTF TKD, until I understood more clearly that it is a counter-kicking game. That is why I also get why they keep their hands down.
As has be correctly pointed out to me in this very thread, these top players are tough, no doubt about it. They bruise & sweat thru their hard training as dedicated atheletes.
Sadly, far too many schools, often by the law of averages, as TKD has more participants in it, have weak training regiments. They cater to kids & familes, which is fine by me. But I just don't look at what they do as a MA. I may be wrong, but that is just my personal view point.

I really do not think there is a way to fix it. As marshmellow puff schools are not going to adopt reality based training. Their customer base simply did not join for that. So I woulod propose additional labels to distinguish the type of TKD that they do. For example, Original TKD, military TKD, sport TKD, Olympic TKD, family TKD, SD TKD, children's play TKD, etc.

 

Sorry b ut my info has that it was. It was replaced in 1975 or the mid 1970s, according to Dr. Kimm He Young, PhD of History, who has been busy working on the complete history of TKD for some 40 years. I really don't know what the exact training entails, but it is not the original or 1st TKD patterns & the Military TKD Manual written by Gen Choi was thrown out a long time ago, because of the aforementioned political problems created by his out spoken criticism of the military dictator & his brutal regime. This book was written in the 1950s. They may be still using a mix of the MAs approach, as did the original TKD instructors did, but it is not the original TKD that these legends developed & trained fellow soldiers in, back in the 1950s & 60s!

 

That is good to know & why the Oh Do kwan was named as it was. it means gym of my way, or my gym, meaning no matter what your background was, this was now your gym, where you could feel at home. In other words it didn't matter if you were jidokwan or moodukwan, now you were able to feel at home. It would not have bene the same, if Gen Choi & Col Nam named it Chungdokwan, as then, others would have felt like outsiders. So they came up with the nuetral name, so all could feel comfortable & they did train as a MMA, incorporating the systems available to them at the time. I am glad to see that this trend in training as a MMA is still there.
One must also know that many look at TKD as an umbrella name for KMAs, especially those of a striking nature. So it is understandable that the well knkw brand name is applied for obvious & many reasons, thanks - good stuff!

 

ive came across that too, ill have to check with my current GM about it, he's been training ROK and U.S troops for over 40 yrs, gonna try to break across that broken english language barrier for some more info

concerning the training manuals LOL

 

There is truth to this. Anyone who has a school probably receives the unsolicited 'business focus' magazines that give this sort of advice and also with a teaser to "become a member to really make your numbers soar..."

I can't help but flip through it, but I always feel sick afterward. It is all about nickel and diming (actually much more than nickel and diming) the students to death.

It has been my experience that if you are honest, open, challenge them, etc, the students tend to respect you and stick around. And, of course, you have to show that you are willing to step on the mat with them and hold yourself to the same standards. And they understand things cost money. Space cost money. Mats cost money. Utilities cost money. Time is money. They get it. But I don't think they like tricks like 'special black belt club' of 'demo club fee', etc to try and weasel them out of more. That stuff does make me a tad upset...

 

Great post and some well-taken points! I think the only other bit that I would raise would be that of individual aspirations. I had not pressed this point earlier as there was the concern that it might be read as placing the entire responsibility for dedicated "hard" training on the individual and relieving the school of encouraging this. What I am reading, though, is that some folks are taking the reins in their teeth and electing to train on their own, train for particular events, pursue additional instruction to enhance their own (aka: "cross-training) and dig below the surface of what is provided in their classes. My own thought is that these are all indications of a person who wants to "study" their chosen art as compared with someone who simply wants to be instructed.

While we are discussing the nature of TKD in this thread, I didn't want to ignore this variable. For myself, I have seen folks who attend mediocre classes come away with some pretty decent training, not because of the classes but almost inspite of those classes.

I still hold that TKD today is fundamentally flawed, and I too lay that at the doorstep of "martial commercialism". But, I did not want to allow people who do the best with what they have not to get some recognition for their efforts. This also plays a role in the nature of TKD.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

I'd say this is true in just about everything learning related. In higher education there are always those that are thinking during a lecture, "Yeah, yeah, yeah...but is this stuff going to be on the TEST? That is all I really care about..."

 

I think that TKD is as effective as the individual makes it. It requires self motivation and an attitude to make it as effective as possible. Less reliance on grades and apparant masters. I know no one else will be there if I get in trouble so theres no way im trustiing anyone elses ideas untill iv had it proven to me.
Personaly I dont understand everything and I cant make everything work so some areas are ineffective and deserveto be considered weak and ineffective yet others areas dont.

 

Aaron

I like this comparison. This especially applied to TKD where there is almost a 'demand' to grade every three months (or whatever is stipulated / required for that grade). This has always had a smell of commercialism...instructor / chief instructor can calculate income per annum based on number of member / gradings etc. Big problem here is that the average, and even above average, student only has time to learn precisely what is needed for the next belt and nothing more. They barely get the moves, let alone start to understand or apply them.

Drop the gradings (as I have done in the FMA) and people will really have the chance to learn in depth AND can apply it in a wide variety of scenarios.

Respectfully

Peter

 

But if the gradings tested the depth of a students knowledge and how they apply it then they would again be useful I feel.

 

Yes, I fully agree with you here. Unfortunately, when grading are every three months and people are 'encouraged' to test, then they don't have the luxury of time needed to gain that depth of knowledge and application.

 

That depends how you view colour belt grades - in TKD they are ALL considered beginners grades ie. to get the basics right - but what is unfortunate is that for most TKD orgs, post-BB, they still do the same thing really, where as BB gradings have much more time between them, allowing the student to study the art in much deeper detail!

I agree with PASmith that these things should be made mandatory to test, as I have found unless its gradeable, many by-pass things, hence why we require such things as applications, traditional sparring (all in fighting) etc. as part of the BB test and for Dan grades after that.

Stuart

 

Hi Stuart

I fully agree that all coloured belts are beginner grades. I also believe that at least the first three or four Dan grades are beginner grades. There are other ways of testing skills than gradings and maybe that needs to be explored and could perhaps feed into the award of a grade. I teach the FMA (especially stick or knife defences) to TKD groups or individuals on a fairly regular basis and I have often received comments from 3rd, 4th or 5th Dans that TKD BB grades are just more basics, or the same moves in a slightly different sequence. Of course, at that level they should be getting better at those basics, but the comments seem to indicate lost motivation.

Be interesting to see how the TKD community can address the perception which forms the basis of this thread.

Good luck

Peter

 

Hi Peter,

This I disagree with - the 'change' from beginner has to occur somewhere and in a good school its at BB - hence the BB kudo's - though I wouldnt say its expert or anything, it is the end of the beginning I feel.

Sure - perhaps something similar to coursework as used at uni's and within many GCSE's - though Im not to big on that TBH, I simply feel it should be tested at the next dan grading and you either perfrom properly or fail. I know of some groups who even split the 3 BB patterns up into 'part gradings' for some reason - hate all that TBH! One group even has a half dan grade, a student from them once told me they were a 1.5 dan (seriously) - and thats based on the basic patterns/sparring/breaking (sometimes) syllabus, not even an expanded one.

Many orgs are like that sadly! I see their point quite well (boredom), but then maybe they should expand themselves a bit as well!!! If it wasnt for some of the things I do now, I would be bored also and not see the point of even carry on up the grades or even doing TKD as opposed to starting something new, but as it is, I try to expand my horizons everytime I train and that makes my TKD much more enjoyable and something I see payinmg off with my students eg. They come up with applications and training methods themselves now + other bits and bobs that show they have a more opened view.

It wont - because many orgs are quite happy making money from watered down syllabus's, easy to reach BB grades and reputations gained through a few students tournament wins, rather than following the path of what martial arts are really about.

In essence - TKD is seen as weak and ineffective as many orgs/clubs/instructors have made it that way and simply are ostriches that don't give a crap. For the few that care, TKD (the art/system) is neither weak nor ineffective and we make sure it remains so, if only via our own students!

Stuart

 

Ghandi said it best - "Be the change you want to see in the world"

When it comes to TKD, we can only lead by example and hope others perhaps remove some of the blinkers handed down to them!

Stuart

 

Hi Stuart

My thinking behind the thought that the first three or four Dan grades are still beginner grades is that the transition is not finite. We cannot state that for all people, they are no longer a beginner after 'x' grade. Some BB's should never be at that grade if we view their physical attributes and some white belts could give many BB's a good run for their money. This is based on my own observations of how some 1st, 2nd, 3rd or even 4th Dans have the ability to adapt, apply and transfer their knowledge to a slightly different scenario. The analytical skills seem to be lacking.

hahahahaha 1.5 Dan Now I've heard it all!!! That's a classic.

I am sure that with the efforts of people like yourself and open discussions, things may improve, albeit slowly.

Respectfully

Peter

 

I agree to a point (though would probibly limit it to 1st degree TBH), but a BB isnt just about physical attributes, but that, combined with knowledge of the system and more importantly, how that knowledge of the system is used - with that in mind, no white belt can give a BB a run for their money - sure they may be able to throw a few kicks and punches out in gusto in 'comp style sparring' but could they show me how the 1st moves of Ge-Baek can be used to destroy an attacker, how to use tactics against certain types of fighters, describe why both 2 & 3 step sparring are used, tell me who Ahn Chang Ho is, show me what a 'fence' is or tell me why a side kick has the word 'jirugi' in it + plus many other things that are learned and trained through the years!

Yes - but it shouldnt be - not to a properly trained student!

I know - I felt the same when I first heard it - had to bite my lip!

They are S-l-o-w-l-y, but Im pretty convinced there will be no great big leaps before I die sadly - still, I view it as those that dont are simply missing out and doing martial sport/dance as opposed to martial arts! Still, maybe they will wake up when they have to use their system for real and realise that 'middle block' didnt actually 'block' the attackers knife after all or that all those years bouncing around on one leg winning medals at comps counts for jack in a real fight!

There are 3 types of TKD instructors around - those that embrace changes and acknowledge those who instituted certain ideas/forward thinking - a small group indeed, then there are those that add things to their original stuff they taught in 'piece meal' mode and claim they always did it that way (ha ha) and those that dont change at all - unfortunatly those in the power positions within TKD orgs are mostly in the last two groups!

Stuart

 

Going by the BJJ maxim a BB should be able to hold their own against someone of a similar size I feel. Someone like Usain Bolt wold give MANY people trouble in a fight, just through sheer physicality and explosiveness alone. We need to seperate "winning" through attributes compared to winning through skill.

All I require of a black belt is that I would not undertake fighting them lightly.
A black belt should be someone that can motor in a fight.
Not an expert, not superman/woman, not some blood soaked warrior. But someone I give a nod to for help if it kicked off.