Why is Taekwondo looked down on?

Nice way of viewing the issues we face.. I like it!

Stuart

 

I fall in that category!

Dont wanna blow my own trumpet, but i feel we do things pretty competently!

Ive seen some kick boxers who are dire at both kicking and/or punching!! Theres good and bad at all levels, in all arts!


Stuart

 

This has been around way before MMA. I've taken TKD since I was 12. I'm 36 now. And I remember back in the 90s I'd see these schools that would have a sign in their window that said: Karate, Taekwon-do, Ju Jutsu, Kung Fu, Judo, Hap Kido, and Aikido.

And I'd be so impressed. Here was a school that incorporated multiple disciplines into their practice. But when I'd go to the free trail class it would be a disorganized mess. They might have a wider base of knowledge but they couldn't do one thing well. And our Korean master would laugh when he found out we'd went to these schools and say, "Better one sharp knife than 1000 dull ones."

One of the guys from Sambo asked me the other day if I was incorporating any ground techniques into my TKD class. There are a lot of good and useful things to teach. Just how to properly bridge would be a good one. Sweeps as well. Heck even the concept of the 'guard' (control from the bottom). Yet still I told him 'No'. They are there for TKD. I want to focus on what I consider the core TKD techniques. The only 'outside' thing I include is more boxing styled hand techniques (stolen from Bas Rutten).

If they want to cross-train they can study another art separately.

Now I also should say that I've seen Stuart's videos. His students are very proficient at what I consider the core TKD techniques (they have good kicks, good footwork, and decent hands). So I'm not accusing him of being the old jack of all trades master of none school. In fact I want to visit his school if I'm ever in England again so I can see how he organizes his curriculum to include the extra without watering down the core.

 

This is very true. Our Korean master has a BB in Judo as well as TKD. Many of the early karate guys cross-trained in Judo.

Of course this was 'lost'. Our Korean master never really encouraged us to cross-train Judo and the only thing he taught us from it was to fall. And we never were as good as he was at falling on that wood floor.

 

A martial art is by my definition, a system of combat which uses the most efficiant and direct methods to obtain a result.
taekwondo is a sport (wouldnt callit a combat system) which is inefficiant, shortsighted and overtly complicated.

some poor points on taekwondo

1. point sparring is a typical emphasis on applying technique, not full contact.

2. very little emphasis on physical conditioning and almost no emphasis on strength building.

3. forms .... need I say more ?

4. vast majority of taekwondo is based on kicks, how can a martial art be respected when it focuses on very little of what the body can use and utilize as weapons.

5. most taekwondo kicks are weak, overly complex and too much emphasis on attack above the waist (in mauy thai we practice basic 3 kicks over and over and over again and again, we do practice a range of other practical kicks but the most basic moves are ALWAYS the best moves)

6. no western boxing techniques, pad drills which is no being cross trained in non traditional martial arts ie. karate, muay thai even kung fu etc.

7. taekwondo practitioners dont even hold any kind of guard protecting their face.

taekwondo is a weak martialart and only people who waste their time studying would argue with that point. I respect many other martial arts, the only martial art I dont respec is taekwondo.

 

I'm not implying you are saying these things are TKD either, I was actually replying to TKDMitch's statement that:

I know there are instructors who pick up on these things and then pass them on as TKD. All good, except that if these things are to be passed on as a part of TKD I also think they should be included in the testing for new grades.

No, but instructors who teach their students a technique should be experienced in it. I think, if these things are to be passed on as a part of TKD they should also be included in the testing for new grades.

No, and that is not at all what I said. As I said, as an instructor, a high dan rank implies you have a great understanding about the techniques you teach, and that is all well and good with the regular TKD techniques, but what about those techniques that high ranking instructors are never even required to demonstrate to get their degrees? There is no standardisation whatsoever. You have to decide, either you have the gradings and test their full knowledge, or you skip gradings or even grades and don't test anything. Because a high rank implies you have been tested and found proficient in the techniques you are teaching your student, and this is not always the case. I am not pointing fingers at anybody specific, I'm just saying it's my experience that even a rather high dan rank doesn't guarantee that you even know how to punch properly. And why? For example I don't think I've seen that regular punching is in the gradings. I'm in ITF, I know you can get to black belt without knowing the basics of an uppercut, which is what I'm having a problem with.

Sorry, I don't see at all how this is a problem. In fact, I think it would be good for TKD if gradings were more far between and required more of its practitioners.

You might, I wouldn't know because I don't know how good you are or how good your students are. But I know that you are only one instructor out of many, many TKD instructors around the world, and the problems still exist even though you and a few others do your best to take it in a better direction. But you have my respect for trying to do the best of TKD. And oh, I just remembered I have seen punching taught very good within TKD. But only experienced it from one instructor first hand out of maybe 10-20 different instructors I've trained with at different occasions.

Yes, that is a common reply and there are extremes in every art, naturally. The problem is, once again, I've seen second, third degree black belts who doesn't know how to throw a good punch. I've seen people get to black belt without knowing even the basics of a jab or an uppercut. And a majority of practitioners in my area of the world I'd imagine could be called below average in relation to the time they have spent training when compared to other standing styles.

People in the ITF especially like to say we use both punching and holding our hands up when someone mentions the WTF, but I can't say I have seen a high percentage of good punchers in the ITF either. And many of those that keep their hands up in some sort of guard also tend to flail their hands wildly when someone's hitting them or just unconsciously dropping them a lot. I attribute that to bad instructors, not bad practitioners. Which is why I once again get back to the point I've made a couple of times in this post. If things like a guard or the mechanics of a jab, cross, hook and uppercut were required to know to pass a certain grade (like 8th/7th gup) and more advanced things like being good with the guard etc were required for 1st dan or so then we would probably have a whole other situation.

I mean, people have to know their patterns (at least in ITF) to grade, why are simple things like punches not looked upon as equally important?

 

Thought I'd just sum your post up for you there.

 

<<Snip>>

 

No need for that sunshine. Your sig. is out of order too.

I've seen a TKD black belt drop many a muay thai fighter. Filmed it as well.

 

Can I suggest that:
1. You're still missing my original point.

Sorry man...lost track of your original point (this is turning into an involved thread).
Care to make it again?

2. We take this to another thread just to avoid muddying the waters of the original one here? Maybe the TAGB thread? Just cut and paste your points in there because I think there's much to be addressed and which should be addressed.

I don't want my points to be viewed as to TAGB specific to be honest and don't think I'm muddying the waters.

My view can be summed up like this...

1. I trained with a LARGE TKD organisation (that therefore represents a reasonable guide to a LARGE proportion of TKD in this country).
2. I trained with multiple instructor within that organisation (from "club" black belts to high grade committe members).
3. I trained in different areas of the country within that organisation (so got to see that training practices and structures were very similar from club to club).
4. I completed the full grading structure of that organisation from beginner to black belt (and therefore gained exposure to what was expected of a TAGB blackbelt).
5. I was not particularly lucky, unlucky, unique or special (although many people only trained at one club the whole time...I at least moved clubs for a wider view).

With that in mind I feel I represent a completely average experience of training TKD in the UK (in my view).

Having gone through that I felt (and still feel) that many fundamental, pivotal, substantial and important areas of martial arts knowledge had passed me by or been ommitted from my training. Not because my clubs or instructors were "crap". Not because I missed the session that day. Not because it was kept secret until I'd got my black belt.
It was because those areas just plainly weren't there.

The original poster asked why TKD gets bashed so much?
The preceeding paragraph sums it up.
By and large TKD as an institution just doesn't deliver the goods.
Sorry but that's just the truth.

Put every TKD club into a hat, draw one at random, train there for a few years and chance are you won't be getting very good training.
You might be lucky and pull out Stuarts or Mitch's club.
But sadly for each one of those there's a hundred others that don't cover half the material they do.
TKD is a lottery where the odds just aren't in favour of the beginning student.

3. I'd love contact details for the guys you mention because if they're nearby, or you are, I'd love to cross train with you.

Sorry man...I don't have contact details for anyone I trained with previously. As I mentioned before John Black, Ray Gayle, Mark Ogbourne and Gary Bradshaw are now with PUMA.
Terry Gill no longer teaches although I think the Progressive Hapkido club is still going in Mansfield (although I'm not even sure it is).
I don't even live in Notts anymore (I live in York) so can't just drop into your club for a bit of cross training.
Thanks for the offer though.

 

Thats interesting.. so if we called what we teach Progressive TKD.. then that would allieviate SSB's issue with it no longer being TKD anymore (his opinion)

Erm...yeah it would (to me anyway).
The whole reason that Terry chose the name Progressive Hapkido was because he wanted to distance himself from his traditional Hapkido roots.
Hapkido was the core but it was no longer really Hapkido (and he was told that by senior Hapkido people if memory serves).
There were enough additions (and in some instances removals...patterns and the like...) to warrant a different emphasis on the name.

I think "Progressive Taekwon do" would be a great name for your club.
You never know...in a few years we could all be discussing how Progressive TKD is what TKD should really be about!

 

Keep it civil..... seanboy Im talking to you specifically.

 

Hey your intitled to your opinion, from my own experience I think MT is next to useless for self defence.

 

Please start a new thread on why. (So we can tell you, you're wrong)

 

Dont worry Aaron, I know exactly what your saying. And as ive said before, Id be honour to have a visit from you. Your welcome anytime.

Stuart

 

Do you know why punches don't score that highly in muay thai?

 

Actually its not.. the term martial comes from Mars the god of War, art is self explanitory and according to noted martial hisorians the whole term of "Martial Art" should really only be applied to a combat system that has been used by an active military force... TKD furfils that criteria ten fold!

No.. that would be you... sorry, I mean your view of it!

Since Ive been training, in TKD, point sparring has been the type of sparring used by junior grades up to yellow belt!! In ch'ang Hon (even the sport side) continious sparring is its main type. Contact in clubs (and competition) can vary a lot. I dont know any full contact arts that train full contact every training session btw!

LOL.. surely you jest. The first hour of every class is based on fitness & conditioning!

Yes..

Wild generalization.. theres many more hand techniques in TKD than kicks.. so its down to what the instructor chooses to focus on. the only point I will conceed is that some do seem to focus too much on kicks as opposed to the other elements.

You mean you had trouble with them!!

Competition and safety aspects. once controlis learnt, senior grades can kick where-ever!

Another jest.. western boxing has been part of TKD ever since ive been doing it! Pad drills are utilized often! [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB9K6ljoy-c"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB9K6ljoy-c[/ame]&

Wild generalization No 2

I take it you had a bad experience with TKD then! Im sorry for that.. but as they say, a bad workman always blames his tools!

Stuart

 

Okay... apologies to jumping in. Ill leave TKDMitch to respond himself.

Fair enough.. a valid opinion.

As long as they are taught well.. i dont see an issue as to whether they should be gradable or not.

I agree this is not always the case and if possible, should be recified.

TKD never claimed to be western boxing, though I kinda get your point, but feel if the examination board do not require it and your instructor deems it importnat, then its your instructor that you should satisfy.

Yes.. the WHOLE of TKD.. but thats not gonna happen so it comes down to sematics and the fact that before a student develops the skills required they would have left for Joe Blogs school that gradeds every 6 weeks, as opposed to one a year if lucky! Fickle perhaps.. but thats the way it is!

I know that too, but my No 1 commitment and priority is to the students who pay me to teach them.. the rest of the world is up to them! I would like to see things in TKD actively taught more often etc. but i dont control the ITF/s or any of the orgs, so can only do what I can.

I agree and this goes back to my earlier point about orgs watering down what is required for BB.. again, its not TKD per se, but the orgs themselves.

I get your point but from a Korean instructors POV I doubt they see it the same. TKD introduced western boxing simply because it was deemed so good.. but, I doubt it will ever be formerly recognised in the same vein, as they would imply TKD hand techniques are not worthy, when the real fact are that they are, but they have a different approach to western boxing.

Here I disagree.. they know how to perform their patterns... they do not KNOW them, only the shell!

Stuart

 

Sorry, disagree.. it represents you training with the TAGB.. not a cross-section of UK TKD, as the TAGB do thinsg there way, the same as the UKTA do thinsg there way.

Ill step out again now



Stuart