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

If we actually spent time looking at the application of patterns, it would be a good start - for instance, how embarrassing is it to watch the Korean ITF team do an application and they're actually using a low block to block a kick, and crouch on the floor to kick someone to the groin >.<

We have Master Willie Lim come and show us all the "real" applications (bunkai), the type they do in Kissaki kai karate for example, which are actually used as effective self defence when broken down properly.
But we have a seminar every couple of year and never take it into class. There is too much pressure to get people to learn the "syllabus" which gets you your next belt.

I think that is partly due to Western culture needing those little goals to keep going. Wasn't it always just white to black?

As a TKD instructor myself (although I teach for my master, so I go mostly by his methods as a mark of respect, until I get my own place) I already find it hard to get people to learn everything TKD encompasses. You just end up being all right at kicking, all right at this and that, but never amazing at anything, unless you put in the training yourself or you're just one of those naturals.
I can't believe I'm a third dan sometimes, just because I can do some patterns and have some knowledge, sure I do know a lot, but 3rd dan is a fairly high grade, and I think I should know more!

At the end of the day, the majority of people do martial arts as a hobby now, like breakdancing, and only very few students remain the hardcore group that encompass every single aspect of it, self defence, training in your own time and all that responsibility talk.

Personally I am one of them. I took it up as a hobby, which I love so much that it is now pretty much the number one priority in my life - training, teaching and competing. I don't care about self defence, that's not what i do it for, i'm really quite happy with it as it is, even though i am aware of its flaws. If i didnt have TKD in my life, it wouldn't be worth living, but at the end of the day, I have a very demanding job and a life, and no time to do any training outside of the dojang. But hopefully you can still see that I have a massive passion for it and I don't see how that could ever be such an awful thing

 

Question:

Isn't TKD pretty much generic kickboxing with Korean terminology and symbols?

If so what's wrong with it other than that it isn't as extensive as, say, Muay Thai?

 

I don't think kick boxing has patterns does it? I know no-thing

 

Kickboxing is about as varied a description as you can get in martial arts. I've never seen any patterns but I'm sure they will be out there.

 

Depends on the school. The kickboxing school I went to certainly had patterns...I remember complaining because I was told to focus on patterns for my grading while the guys knocked the crap out of each other.

 

no, it's shotokan with korean terminology and symbols

the problem is it got commercialized, as old school tkd was rather hardcore

here's a tkd guy beating the <beep> out of a kyokushin guy:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-UjhxnnMdE"]YouTube - Allstyle Mastercup Paul Doumbia[/ame]

 

Nice!!

That looks kinda MMAish though, did he do any other style besides TKD?

 

yes I do. and the problem isn't with "some" schools watering it down and teaching crap. in my opinion its with MOST schools. Irregardless of what people think TKD is and is not, what is actually getting taught in most TKD places just does not work under any context except the particular sparring ruleset that each gym has.

 

judo, afaik.

actually judo and early TKD are very much tied, the same as early shotokan, since many of the first exponents of both styles were versed in it, and taught or demonstrated elements of it along with the "standard" syllabus.

 

So much wrong with this one simple innocent statement that it's hard to know where to start. Actually, for the very few TKD guys that I've seen who've trained correctly, they do very much resemble each other. They've even got very similar basic ruleset structures. But if I were to simplify it down, rinse it out, reduce it and concentrate it, then what would be left would be two very simple and very HUGE differences.

1) training methodology and attitude

2) boxing skill.

neither of which you're very likely to find in the average TKD dojang.

 

Yes. It's called ITF-Pro and it's most popular in Eastern Europe.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=941O-cka_M4"]YouTube - Taekwondo ITF PRO (taekwondo ITF full contact on the ring or tatami)[/ame]

 

I've seen quite a bit of that but is it just a competition circuit type thing or are there clubs or an org. out there?

 

My collegiate TKD club's approach WAS almost entirely padwork and sparring-oriented. Stuff like forms and breaking took up perhaps five minutes of every hour, on average.

This is the problem I highlighted in the "aliveness" thread when people from MMA/SBGi/etc background start bashing a monolothic "taekwondo" training methodology. There ISN'T one monolithic "taekwondo" training methodology.

 

Honestly, I have no idea.

 

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10628872 slightly relevant thread is slightly relevant

prior (and similar) discussion of TKD and the stuff it's "missing"

 

From previous conversations on here with Van Zandt it is clear that he had trained using pattern and one- step sparring etc as part of his class structure that he was dissallusioned/bored with that as part of his training and that he failed to see the nessessity of it... consequently he broke away from that and did his own thing (please correct me if I'm mistaken there van zandt). I bought it up to illustrate that TKD should not be held beyond critical evaluation and that to do so is not an exercise in 'dick swinging' and that it is something that he himself has done.

People bash TKD because plenty of places train using pattern, one-step spar, and utilise a poor ruleset for continuous sparring which has negative carry over into the curriculum it teaches. Plenty of TKD places do this... enough for it to be considered the majority hence why I said 'modal' (in the mathmatical sense).

If I'm not mistaken the club you attended was a WTF club? They are mostly geared towards the sportive aspects of TKD are they not? so it would make sense for them to base training on pad work and sparring because it is great preparation for WTF sparring/olympic TKD competition. However WTF sparring is a joke as a preparatory method for fighting.

 

It's the opposite here in Noth Wales. The TKD is mainly patterns based

 

My collegiate TKD club used WTF sparring rules, ITF forms, and did not have a membership with either organization.

You say that dojangs that prefer patterns and one-step to padwork and free sparring are the majority...what's your evidence? WTF membership vastly exceeds ITF membership, if I recall correctly, and you agree that WTF clubs would likely focus on padwork and sparring. So regardless of what the ITF does (I'm not implying that all ITF clubs focus primarily on patterns and one-step), you're still talking about a minority of dojangs.

As for WTF sparring not being a close proxy to a streetfight...no kidding. But you made a sweeping comment about training methodology, and that's what I was responding to. Training methodology is not at all the same thing as rules reflecting a street fight.

 

Mmmmm.... I was interested in the discussion, and would continue to be until said "swinging" begins. At that point I usually determine I have better things to do. As long as things remain a matter of critical thinking and informed observation, I have a heartfelt vested interest in listening to what folks have to share. Individuals who are addicted to pat generalizations need not apply (in my humble opinion). But even the Koreans have begun to rethink things in terms of various experiences. I can even mention that my late teacher, MYUNG Kwang Sik expressed MUCH interest in what could be learned from NHB/MMA events as did his fellow student, the late HAN Bong Soo. As I have said many times before, I have little interest in training in many of the MMA variants, but thats not to say that I refuse to listen to a reasoned POV. TKD is a work in progress as are many MA traditions and the more highly regarded teachers will readily support this view. IMHO, MA training is about learning and study and not merely robotic-ly repeating the same thing over and over. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

I think Mitch is close to the mark. Comparing your average TKD instructor to a UFC fighter is pretty much like comparing your average high school football coach to an NFL player. Actually even less so because your average TKD instructor teaches a range of ages (including juniors). So more like an NFLer versus the average boys and girls club through high school coach.

And the fact of the matter is that is exactly what we need. Our health epidemic isn't that elite level athletes (or even high school athletes) aren't getting enough exercise it is 'the rest', which is the vast majority.