# Taekwondo: is it a sport or a martial art? ( again)



## Markku P

This is one of the common arguments among Taekwondo practitioners. The simple answer is that Taekwondo is a sport and it is a martial art. What is really funny to see is how fanatical we are. Sometimes just for the sake of fun I mention that the sport aspect of Taekwondo is the only unique thing in Taekwondo, which is when I start to receive hate mail, (I actually believe this). I think that we should see the big picture. The audience doesnt care if we are a sport or a martial art; people just care what is to them and how our training can help them or if they have a child who would like to start training in Taekwondo.

When I was younger, I too was really fanatical about the difference between traditional and sport. I did look down at those schools that were focusing only on sparring. I felt that every school should teach the same as we did. We had sparring, self-defence, poomsae, 1 and 3 step sparring and well, pretty much everything.

Today I am older, more experienced and I have learnt that it doesnt matter what I or anyone else is thinking. The teachers of individual schools decide what the style of the school is and if students are happy and satisfied, I think thats enough.

For me, Taekwondo is a martial art and a sport and I dont separate those things. One of the prominent Taekwondo writers asks if we should consider Taekwondo as a martial art because in sparring we dont use many hand techniques only mainly kicking techniques. My question is what is the definition of a martial art? For me, one of the definitions is of course the ability to defend yourself.

Well, boxers dont use kicks and Judo doesnt use strikes but many of them are really good with self-defence and I wouldnt like to fight against them in a real fight (I would prefer run anyway- I am too old for fighting).

Your thoughts?

/Markku


----------



## Cyriacus

I for one only take issue when punching is literally not taught outside of Forms, or weird hand applications (Dont even ask me to elaborate. Its such a minority that it isnt worth it). As long as its trained, even if it isnt used in sparring, thats totally ok. 
So long as theyre trained, it isnt pure sport, and that makes it swell by My standards. You can focus on whatever You want, just at least provide the training to be able to use Your hands, even if its on a backburner.

Other than that, how Traditional You are means nothing to Me, really. A well placed kick works just fine. It isnt always an option but, and some people prefer other methods. You shouldnt have to choose to not do TKD at all just because You want to practice Your punching from time to time, or have to do a whole other system at the same time.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Cyriacus said:


> I for one only take issue when punching is literally not taught outside of Forms, or weird hand applications (Dont even ask me to elaborate. Its such a minority that it isnt worth it). As long as its trained, even if it isnt used in sparring, thats totally ok.
> So long as theyre trained, it isnt pure sport, and that makes it swell by My standards. You can focus on whatever You want, just at least provide the training to be able to use Your hands, even if its on a backburner.
> 
> Other than that, how Traditional You are means nothing to Me, really. A well placed kick works just fine. It isnt always an option but, and some people prefer other methods. You shouldnt have to choose to not do TKD at all just because You want to practice Your punching from time to time, or have to do a whole other system at the same time.


I hate it when I hear of someone leaving tkd or cross training just so they can learn to use their hands. Punching is part of the art and, as you say, as long as it is taught then it doesnt matter as much what ruleset you spar to. BUT, in my opinion for it to be considered a martial art and a sport you cant just focus on sparring.


----------



## ETinCYQX

That video highlights the reason I prefer paddles and another person to a heavy bag. Even black belts tend to "swing" rather than chamber and snap. Round kicks should come up straight and the angle should come from the planted foot. The fact that the bag doesn't really feed back doesn't help, if it was full of water it'd be better.


----------



## Cyriacus

ETinCYQX said:


> That video highlights the reason I prefer paddles and another person to a heavy bag. Even black belts tend to "swing" rather than chamber and snap. Round kicks should come up straight and the angle should come from the planted foot. The fact that the bag doesn't really feed back doesn't help, if it was full of water it'd be better.


That isnt why I posted it, but I happen to prefer Focus Mitts because You can practice wildly barraging against air just fine, *in my opinion*.


----------



## ETinCYQX

Cyriacus said:


> That isnt why I posted it, but I happen to prefer Focus Mitts because You can practice wildly barraging against air just fine, *in my opinion*.



I know, but there really isn't any point to going back through martial art vs sport, might as well be useful. 

My focus mitts are too stiff for that, at least for most people without instep guards on, and people tend to do the same thing-swing their leg like in muay Thai which isn't correct. Thai pads and kick shields exacerbate the problem even more.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Before people can have an intelligent discussion they must agree on how terms are defined. 
What is a "Martial Art'. Saw an article on thathttps://1c47d0f0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites...w60Py6TDrQ9ORMGL1a62OBJbGdghab&attredirects=0
What is "TKD" - a loaded question. 

If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? It has 4. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg. 

As per the linked article, Martial Arts may have a sport aspect.  Martial Sports  only have a rule set that needs to be adhered to. Nothing else matters.  
I there fore submit that the sport is neccessarily encompassed in the art, but the art is not neccessarily encompasssed in the sport.


----------



## Cyriacus

ETinCYQX said:


> I know, but there really isn't any point to going back through martial art vs sport, might as well be useful.
> 
> My focus mitts are too stiff for that, at least for most people without instep guards on, and people tend to do the same thing-swing their leg like in muay Thai which isn't correct. Thai pads and kick shields exacerbate the problem even more.


Yeah, good point. Ill gladly let us get a bit derailed.

I find that Focus Mitts work fine, but theyre more for accuracy, and angle. For power, yeah, you need something like a shield, but for technique? Generally, Ive seen it done best with Focus Mitts or BOBs for Speed, and touch contact to the body for form. Im sure theres better ways, but Im not exactly writing an article here


----------



## ETinCYQX

Cyriacus said:


> Yeah, good point. Ill gladly let us get a bit derailed.
> 
> I find that Focus Mitts work fine, but theyre more for accuracy, and angle. For power, yeah, you need something like a shield, but for technique? Generally, Ive seen it done best with Focus Mitts or BOBs for Speed, and touch contact to the body for form. Im sure theres better ways, but Im not exactly writing an article here



I'm half looking for a powair bag like mastercole uses, I think that would be the best balance since its full of water. 

Focus mitts are great if you use them right-the way kickboxers and MMA fighters use them isn't conducive to good Taekwondo kicks, where they hit both with their kick. Holding it out for the instep is a good bet though.


----------



## Cyriacus

ETinCYQX said:


> I'm half looking for a powair bag like mastercole uses, I think that would be the best balance since its full of water.
> 
> Focus mitts are great if you use them right-the way kickboxers and MMA fighters use them isn't conducive to good Taekwondo kicks, where they hit both with their kick. Holding it out for the instep is a good bet though.



Of course - Kickboxers and MMA guys are training for their methods, so using the pads in a way suited for their systems. For TKD, You have to hold it differently for the systems kicks. And it could probably help reflexes. Mitt comes out > Kick Mitt ASAP.

Ive seen Powair bags, but never used them. I must admit Im curious to know how stable They are.


----------



## ETinCYQX

The kind I'm thinking of is a hanging bag that uses water instead of foam, I would guess its just as stable as a normal one. 

I usually use paddles for that, unless its sparring night and they have instep guards on. My focus mitts are pretty hard, I use the Mudo ones


----------



## Cyriacus

ETinCYQX said:


> The kind I'm thinking of is a hanging bag that uses water instead of foam, I would guess its just as stable as a normal one.
> 
> I usually use paddles for that, unless its sparring night and they have instep guards on. My focus mitts are pretty hard, I use the Mudo ones


It seems that given the time of night here, I totally forgot Paddles existed  I knew I was missing something there. 
Ive only ever used Boxing (As in, thats what it says on the back. Im not sure if its a brand or a range) Mitts.
Paddles, I find, are also good for moving around with them, since They dont really resist when You kick through them, making it possible to set up multiple kicks while moving around, which can be good for practicing round kicks.


----------



## ETinCYQX

Lack of resistance is exactly why I like them-not being able to kick through the heavy bag creates bad habits. To be able to follow up on a paddle, you have to kick properly.


----------



## bluewaveschool

I have a water filled hanging bag, love it.


----------



## Gorilla

Kick bags kick,paddles.....TKD is a Martial Art that is also a sport...karate is the same thing....they have the best of both Worlds.... Markku at least you to get it....Martial Art vs Sport I don't know why it is always such at topic...it can sure make for a lively discussion....excluding a few on this BBS most have no clue about the sport...


----------



## Gorilla

Great article...I completely agree with your statements....




Earl Weiss said:


> Before people can have an intelligent discussion they must agree on how terms are defined.
> What is a "Martial Art'. Saw an article on thathttps://1c47d0f0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites...w60Py6TDrQ9ORMGL1a62OBJbGdghab&attredirects=0
> What is "TKD" - a loaded question.
> 
> If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? It has 4. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.
> 
> As per the linked article, Martial Arts may have a sport aspect.  Martial Sports  only have a rule set that needs to be adhered to. Nothing else matters.
> I there fore submit that the sport is neccessarily encompassed in the art, but the art is not neccessarily encompasssed in the sport.


----------



## Manny

Well tks is a martial artthat has evolved in a sport martial art competition thing. Yes we foc us on kicks as judo focuses on trows, as karate focus on empty hand techs, as boxers focus on punches.

Leaving the sport kyorugy thing, you can see in the pommsae, in the ho-shin-sul and in one and three steps for example that kicks don't dominate this areas, kicks are a part and this areas are what I consider the martial art core of TKD.

We use a ste of rules and a set of safery gear when doing kyorugy for many things, safety is one, and gair play is another.

I want to say that for example Shotokan karate is heavily directed to sport too, they use a set rules do kumite and judo is another example. In judo they play with a rules set and if we go to any martial arts tournaments the figts are not for honour or for life so we can conclude that most of the martial arts have a sport side.

The way I do TKD is not the olimpic way, I am in favor of the clasic martial art of TKD where it resembles a little just a little some karate (we must remeber TKD was influenced by karate) so my way of doing and teaching tkd is a mixup of traditional with light sport version of tkd.

I like to use my hands, like to block,like to evade, like to kick and like to sweep and trow and aply some bars and locks.

Manny


----------



## tshadowchaser

I believe that Taekwondo is a martial art that has a sport aspect within it. Unfortunately most instructors today have learned only the sport aspect of the art from instructors that also where taught more of the sport aspect then the combat aspect. 
With today's laws (at lest in the USA) if the more violent aspects of the art (and most arts) where being taught and practiced instructors would be being sued or going to jail more often. As an example, kicks to the knees, groin, etc. are not allowed in most Taekwondo schools that I have seen. The pulling of most techniques is encouraged in most schools thereby not giving the person being struck the full opportunity to learn what it is like to be hit and how to absorb that impact or at least ignore the pain.
The violent methods of combat and the viciousness that must be applied for combat is not encouraged in most places. Kicking high and trowing aerial kicks looks good good in forms and when competing but how many of us are going to use these kicks if we are out in the streets or in a wooded area?
A sport may exist with an art but sometimes it starts taking over and becoming the art rather than being a portion of the art.
Notice no mention of bags, pads, etc. just a straight answer to the opening question.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

[h=2]Taekwondo: is it a sport or a martial art?[/h]Yes.


----------



## Gwai Lo Dan

ETinCYQX said:


> My focus mitts are pretty hard, I use the Mudo ones


Mudo is a Canadian brand from Captain Sports right?  I've never seen them anywhere else.  I figured I'd mention it since no one else probably recognises the name.


----------



## ETinCYQX

Gwai Lo Dan said:


> Mudo is a Canadian brand from Captain Sports right?  I've never seen them anywhere else.  I figured I'd mention it since no one else probably recognises the name.



I think so. My instructor deals with the supplier for me. Our other main brand is Adidas if that makes a difference.


----------



## Gentle Fist

Both...  Heck it's an olympic sport!  The only other art that can say that is Judo...  and wrestling I guess...


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Gentle Fist said:


> Both...  Heck it's an olympic sport!  The only other art that can say that is Judo...  and wrestling I guess...


Judo, boxing, fencing, wrestling, archery, and marksmanship are all fighting/martial arts that have attained Olympic status.


----------



## Manny

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Judo, boxing, fencing, wrestling, archery, and marksmanship are all fighting/martial arts that have attained Olympic status.



Well done! Even boxing is a sport I would rather not piss of a boxer, even Judo is a super sport martial art, I know deep in my heart I would have some troubles trying to defend myself agaisnt a judoka, ans I can go on on this.

A couple of weekend ago I heard a comentary from a shotokan karate sensei when he was shwoing us the hiden movement inside the kata, this sensei tends to be a little coky and he said he thanks god for karate not to be an aolimpic sport. Wisely I just stayed calm and did not say anithing, but I kow deep in my heart that karate organizations have been working to make Karate a olimpic sport, however these organizations haven't had the strenght and are not as unified as the KIKIWOIN/WTF so maybe karate will never be a olimpic sport.

So I oly laugh inside when this coky karate sensei trying to show us traditional karate spoke that way and in some way I though poor guy, and remeber that Karate Do is a panamerican sport too, so karate is as sporty as tkd.

Manny


----------



## Cyriacus

Manny said:


> Well done! Even boxing is a sport I would rather not piss of a boxer, even Judo is a super sport martial art, I know deep in my heart I would have some troubles trying to defend myself agaisnt a judoka, ans I can go on on this.
> 
> A couple of weekend ago I heard a comentary from a shotokan karate sensei when he was shwoing us the hiden movement inside the kata, this sensei tends to be a little coky and he said he thanks god for karate not to be an aolimpic sport. Wisely I just stayed calm and did not say anithing, but I kow deep in my heart that karate organizations have been working to make Karate a olimpic sport, however these organizations haven't had the strenght and are not as unified as the KIKIWOIN/WTF so maybe karate will never be a olimpic sport.
> 
> So I oly laugh inside when this coky karate sensei trying to show us traditional karate spoke that way and in some way I though poor guy, and remeber that Karate Do is a panamerican sport too, so karate is as sporty as tkd.
> 
> Manny



Well, to be fair, Shotokan has its own major competitive organisations.
The WKA, if I remember right?

They dont really need to be in the Olympics, They already have Their own System.
But They probably do have those who want it to be.


----------



## dancingalone

Manny said:


> Well done! Even boxing is a sport I would rather not piss of a boxer, even Judo is a super sport martial art, I know deep in my heart I would have some troubles trying to defend myself agaisnt a judoka, ans I can go on on this.
> 
> A couple of weekend ago I heard a comentary from a shotokan karate sensei when he was shwoing us the hiden movement inside the kata, this sensei tends to be a little coky and he said he thanks god for karate not to be an aolimpic sport. Wisely I just stayed calm and did not say anithing, but I kow deep in my heart that karate organizations have been working to make Karate a olimpic sport, however these organizations haven't had the strenght and are not as unified as the KIKIWOIN/WTF so maybe karate will never be a olimpic sport.
> 
> So I oly laugh inside when this coky karate sensei trying to show us traditional karate spoke that way and in some way I though poor guy, and remeber that Karate Do is a panamerican sport too, so karate is as sporty as tkd.
> 
> Manny



There are ample karate-ka who think adding karate to the Olympics would be the worst thing possible for it.  It's a valid enough perspective when we look at what they train in and why.


----------



## dancingalone

Cyriacus said:


> Well, to be fair, Shotokan has its own major competitive organisations.
> The WKA, if I remember right?
> 
> They dont really need to be in the Olympics, They already have Their own System.
> But They probably do have those who want it to be.



Do you mean the WKF (World Karate Federation)?  If so, the WKF is one of the groups striving to get karate added in the Olympics.


----------



## msmitht

both. It depends on your instructor/coach and the experiences that they have had. Like everything else, it all depends on your point of view.


----------



## Gnarlie

I have never heard a convincing argument against it being either, so I consider it both.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> There are ample karate-ka who think adding karate to the Olympics would be the worst thing possible for it.  It's a valid enough perspective when we look at what they train in and why.


Same in kendo.  There is a movement to get kendo into the olympics, but I believe that it is spearheaded by Korean kumdo groups, not by the ZNKR.  L

A Just has even made electric bogu for the purpose.  No socks involved, so that wouldn't be an issue, but there is a lot more to scoring in kendo than just the striking of a valid target.  Most kendoka feel that Olympic inclusion and electric scoring would eliminate all of the traditional elements of kendo, leaving only the competitive sport element.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Same in kendo. There is a movement to get kendo into the olympics, but I believe that it is spearheaded by Korean kumdo groups, not by the ZNKR.
> 
> *LA Just has even made electric bogu for the purpose.* No socks involved, so that wouldn't be an issue, but there is a lot more to scoring in kendo than just the striking of a valid target. Most kendoka feel that Olympic inclusion and electric scoring would eliminate all of the traditional elements of kendo, leaving only the competitive sport element.


I just realized that I had split LA between two lines.  Way too late to edit though.


----------



## Marcy Shoberg

I used to worry if I should consider taekwondo to be a martial art or a sport.  Then, I tried to define martial art and got confused.  Is it self-defense?  then it would not be "art." Is it physical fitness? Then it might as well be sport.  Sometimes I wonder if martial art is anything more than a bunch of people in funny outfits pretending to do battle with each other and telling each other they do pretend battle wrong. 

Then, I learned to teach RBSD and decided I am very happy to consider taekwondo nothing but a sport, and the best sport in the world.


----------



## Marcy Shoberg

Marcy Shoberg said:


> Sometimes I wonder if martial art is anything more than a bunch of people in funny outfits pretending to do battle with each other and telling each other they do pretend battle wrong.



I can't believe I just admitted that on this forum.  I hope I don't get my butt kicked. Can I say butt on the forum?


----------



## Cyriacus

Marcy Shoberg said:


> I used to worry if I should consider taekwondo to be a martial art or a sport.  Then, I tried to define martial art and got confused.  Is it self-defense?  then it would not be "art." Is it physical fitness? Then it might as well be sport.  Sometimes I wonder if martial art is anything more than a bunch of people in funny outfits pretending to do battle with each other and telling each other they do pretend battle wrong.
> 
> Then, I learned to teach RBSD and decided I am very happy to consider taekwondo nothing but a sport, and the best sport in the world.


"The term _martial art has become heavily associated with the fighting arts of eastern Asia, but was originally used in regard to the combat systems of Europe as early as the 1550s. An English fencing manual of 1639 used the term in reference specifically to the "Science and Art" of swordplay. The term is ultimately derived from Latin, martial arts being the "Arts of Mars," the Roman god of war.[SUP][1][/SUP] Some martial arts are considered 'traditional' and are tied to an ethnic, cultural or religious background, while others are modern systems developed either by a founder or an association."

_Be careful not to blur Your interpritation of what a Martial Art is, with what the words can mean.


Another interpretation is
Martial, being the nature of what the System is based around.
Art, for the fact that an Artist uses the Paint/Brushes/Colors provided to Him or Her to create Art. Its where You decide how You apply what You have been taught. The Palette could be... Punch A and B, and Kick A and B, and Throw A and B. The Art, could be defined as You deciding that Kick B, Punch A, Throw A is a functional application. Or it may be the teacher who creates the 'Art', and teaches You to paint the same way He or She does.

Then apparently some online dictionaries allow You to look up both words, and get "Asian Sport".

Dont try and support Your view on Martial Arts with the world. Just herald a viewpoint. Taekwondo is a Martial Art. It happens to be used as a way to compete in a point-score based competitive fighting system. Much like Boxing. Or Karate. Or Judo. Or MMA. Or Muay Thai.
The only issues arise when the other stuff isnt taught outside of forms, unless that happens to be what Youre looking for.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Cyriacus said:


> The only issues arise when the other stuff isnt taught outside of forms, unless that happens to be what Youre looking for.



Beg to differ. Lots more cr*p out there than just those issues.


----------



## Cyriacus

Earl Weiss said:


> Beg to differ. Lots more cr*p out there than just those issues.


I apologise - I wasnt writing an article on ALL the problems - Just the main issue on that particular part of the subject.


----------



## Christian Soldier

I think TKD has the potential to be either a very effective martial art, or just a sport designed to win trophies at tournaments. Most of the schools I've seen are either on the fence or on the latter. There's a lot of varitation between schools on this one.

TKD differs from other MAs like Krav Maga or MCMAP, in that it can easily be modified from it's 'martial art' stage to a sport stage.


----------



## Cyriacus

Christian Soldier said:


> I think TKD has the potential to be either a very effective martial art, or just a sport designed to win trophies at tournaments. Most of the schools I've seen are either on the fence or on the latter. There's a lot of varitation between schools on this one.
> 
> TKD differs from other MAs like Krav Maga or MCMAP, in that it can easily be modified from it's 'martial art' stage to a sport stage.


...Like many Karate Systems.


----------



## Marcy Shoberg

Christian Soldier said:


> I think TKD has the potential to be either a very effective martial art, or just a sport designed to win trophies at tournaments. Most of the schools I've seen are either on the fence or on the latter. There's a lot of varitation between schools on this one.
> 
> TKD differs from other MAs like Krav Maga or MCMAP, in that it can easily be modified from it's 'martial art' stage to a sport stage.




I hope this doesn't come off as argumentative, I mean no disrespect, but 

1. Could you clarify what you mean by "effective martial art"?

2. Krav Maga is an integrated tactical self-defense and combat system.  Not a martial art.


----------



## Cyriacus

Marcy Shoberg said:


> I hope this doesn't come off as argumentative, I mean no disrespect, but
> 
> 1. Could you clarify what you mean by "effective martial art"?
> 
> 2. Krav Maga is an integrated tactical self-defense and combat system.  Not a martial art.


By definition, Krav Maga, along with Boxing, and other such things, are Martial Arts by definition.
If You prefer to be specific to a tee, Martial System will thusly encompass every single System out there and more.


----------



## Christian Soldier

Marcy Shoberg said:


> I hope this doesn't come off as argumentative, I mean no disrespect, but
> 
> 1. Could you clarify what you mean by "effective martial art"?
> 
> 2. Krav Maga is an integrated tactical self-defense and combat system. Not a martial art.



Cyracious pretty much covered 2. and MCMAP stands for Marine Corp Martial Art Program and is very similar to krav so I think that one counts too, I'm sure the deffinition of effective martial art varies a lot. But for me, the way I figure it is if you could use it in battle while wearing full uniform/tac vest/boots etc. There are other scenarios as well that these effective martial arts can fit into but that's a pretty good general quallifier. 

For instance this,  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3zIrS36U4k&feature=relmfu move will work superbly in tournaments, but not in full battle gear or most scenearios on the street.

Okay, I'm having trouble finding the 'battle ready' TKD techniques on YT becuase most of the videos are demos designed for flash and such. But I assure you, those techniques do exist.


----------



## Cyriacus

Christian Soldier said:


> Okay, I'm having trouble finding the 'battle ready' TKD techniques on YT becuase most of the videos are demos designed for flash and such. But I assure you, those techniques do exist.






Straight Punches.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Marcy Shoberg said:


> I hope this doesn't come off as argumentative, I mean no disrespect, but
> 
> 1. Could you clarify what you mean by "effective martial art"?
> 
> 2. Krav Maga is an integrated tactical self-defense and combat system.  Not a martial art.


Martial art means war science.  In this case, art is not being used in the fine arts sense, but in the science/method sense.   Technically, no unarmed self defense system is a martial art, and most of what are considered effective self defense systems are designed for civilian rather than military application.    

If you use 'martial' in the general sense to mean 'fighting' which would include self defense, and if it is being taught in a systematized and scientific way, the Krav Maga certainly is a martial art.  If it is not taught in a scientific way, then you're just brawling, in which case there would be no need to have a formal system with a name.

The term martial art, as it is used almost universally, is interchangeable with 'fighting system,' regardless of the application (sport, self defense, etc.).


----------



## Dobbelsteen

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Martial art means war science.  In this case, art is not being used in the fine arts sense, but in the science/method sense.   Technically, no unarmed self defense system is a martial art, and most of what are considered effective self defense systems are designed for civilian rather than military application.



Martial refers to the Roman god of war, not to war itself. It seems more logical to me that Martial arts would refer to the god´s fighting skills.´Combat science´ seems like a more fitting description then ´war science´. In that case it would´t make a difference if it is meant for civilian or military application.


----------



## Cyriacus

Dobbelsteen said:


> Martial refers to the Roman god of war, not to war itself. It seems more logical to me that Martial arts would refer to the god´s fighting skills.´Combat science´ seems like a more fitting description then ´war science´. In that case it would´t make a difference if it is meant for civilian or military application.


The term _martial art has become heavily associated with the fighting arts of eastern Asia, but was originally used in regard to the combat systems of Europe as early as the 1550s. An English fencing manual of 1639 used the term in reference specifically to the "Science and Art" of swordplay. The term is ultimately derived from Latin, and means "Arts of Mars," where Mars is the Roman god of war.[SUP][1][/SUP] Some martial arts are considered 'traditional' and are tied to an ethnic, cultural or religious background, while others are modern systems developed either by a founder or an association._


----------



## Archtkd

Cyriacus said:


> "The term _martial art has become heavily associated with the fighting arts of eastern Asia, but was originally used in regard to the combat systems of Europe as early as the 1550s. An English fencing manual of 1639 used the term in reference specifically to the "Science and Art" of swordplay. The term is ultimately derived from Latin, martial arts being the "Arts of Mars," the Roman god of war.[SUP][1][/SUP] Some martial arts are considered 'traditional' and are tied to an ethnic, cultural or religious background, while others are modern systems developed either by a founder or an association."
> 
> _Be careful not to blur Your interpritation of what a Martial Art is, with what the words can mean.



It's interesting to note that the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, the world's leading guide on the English language, describes martial arts thus: "various sports or skills, mainly of Japanese origin, which originated as forms of self defence or attack, such as judo, karate and kendo."


----------



## Cyriacus

Archtkd said:


> It's interesting to note that the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, the world's leading guide on the English language, describes martial arts thus: "various sports or skills, mainly of Japanese origin, which originated as forms of self defence or attack, such as judo, karate and kendo."


Yeah - Its kinda like how Martial Arts, a blend of two words, can be searched for in a Dictionary. If You look up both individual words, it gets You a different definition.
Also, since We're having fun:



*

Email
Cite
*
*karate Pronunciation: /k&#601;&#712;r&#593;&#720;ti/*

Translate *karate* into French | into German | into Italian | into SpanishDefinition of *karate*
*noun*

*[mass noun]

an oriental system of unarmed combat using the hands and feet to deliver and block blows, widely practised as a sport.


It was formalized in Okinawa in the 17th century, and popularized via Japan after about 1920. Karate is performed barefoot in loose padded clothing, with a coloured belt indicating the level of skill, and involves mental as well as physical training


Ok, so the following is true, of all Karate:
1; You use Your hands and feet only to deliver and block blows.
2; It is widely practiced as a sport


sport Pronunciation: /sp&#596;&#720;t/

Translate sport into French | into German | into Italian | into SpanishDefinition of sport
noun



1an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment:






3; Colored Belts indicate level of skill.
*4; There is ALWAYS mental as well as physical training.

Also, sorry about the Bold. I literally cant edit it into normal text for some reason.

Lets also define Judo.



*

Email
Cite
*
*judo Pronunciation: /&#712;d&#658;u&#720;d&#601;&#650;/*

Translate *judo* into French | into German | into Italian | into SpanishDefinition of *judo*
*noun*

*[mass noun]

a sport of unarmed combat derived from ju-jitsu and intended to train the body and mind. It involves using holds and leverage to unbalance the opponent.
**
judoist

noun

*O*rigin:**
late 19th century: Japanese, from j&#363; 'gentle' + d&#333; 'way'

And so on.

Point is, Dictionaries can be fickle things. And defining Martial Arts as being one name, as oppose to being two words, can cause a blurry definition to arise. And sticking to dictionaries blurs it more and more.
And arent They called Judoka, or was I misinformed? As oppose to Judoist.
*
And dont a fair few Japenese Systems come from China?




​


----------



## Manny

For me TKD is a martial art in the firsth place and a sport in the second place. For the regular people AND other martial artists like for example karatekas or aikidokas and lima lama and kenpo practiciones TKD is a SPORT wiht traces of martial art.

All the karate senseis or budo taijutsu, or aikido says TKD is only a sport where no punches allowed to face/head and no guard used (very low guard what is insame for them) so TKD is no practical as a self defense tool.

Manny


----------



## Twin Fist

keep it simple:

sport: for competition
martial art: for self defense.

so the answer is either, or both, depending on how it is taught and what is emphasized.


----------



## puunui

Twin Fist said:


> keep it simple:
> 
> sport: for competition
> martial art: for self defense.



keep it even more simple: don't make distinctions between sport competition martial art or self defense, because all of it is taekwondo.


----------



## Twin Fist

not really, it isnt, no.

one is foot boxing and the training neglects the hands


----------



## puunui

Twin Fist said:


> one is foot boxing and the training neglects the hands



assuming that is true, so what? It is still taekwondo.


----------



## Twin Fist

obtuse: look it up

tae KWON do

case closed.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Twin Fist said:


> keep it simple:
> 
> sport: for competition
> martial art: for self defense.
> 
> so the answer is either, or both, depending on how it is taught and what is emphasized.


spot on.


----------



## Gorilla

ralphmcpherson said:


> spot on.



and it is all Tkd....sport, SD,  breaking, forms... And they are all great!


----------



## Gorilla

puunui said:


> assuming that is true, so what? It is still taekwondo.



Welcome back...I hope Master Cole will also start posting again!


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Gorilla said:


> Welcome back...I hope Master Cole will also start posting again!


as long as Master Cole remembers to bring his manners this time or he may disapear very quickly.


----------



## Earl Weiss

puunui said:


> keep it even more simple: don't make distinctions between sport competition martial art or self defense, because all of it is taekwondo.



While I undestand there are those who choose to believe that somehow "TKD" is an all encompassing moniker, I am still befuddled by this concept.   

Is it anyone who kicks and punches and has some link no matter how small to some korean MA doing "TKD" ? 

Is "TKD" like a sandwich? Put anything between 2 slices of bread and that's what you have? 

Would those Koreans who developed arts and chose not to use the nam "TKD" be insulted if their system were called "TKD" ? 

Is "Tae Bo" "TKD" ?

Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> as long as Master Cole remembers to bring his manners this time or he may disapear very quickly.


Not to point out the obvious, but a comment like this is hypocritical, as itself is bad manners.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Twin Fist said:


> keep it simple:
> 
> sport: for competition
> martial art: for self defense.
> 
> so the answer is either, or both, depending on how it is taught and what is emphasized.


While I like the spirit of your comment, it does raise the question: what about martial arts that are either competition focused and which involve no hand or foot striking whatsoever, such as kendo, judo or BJJ, or arts that have no direct correlation with unarmed self defense, such as pretty much all kenjutsu, iaido, haidong gumdo, or other weapon arts that involve archaic weapons that nobody carries and which involve little to no contact between participants?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> keep it even more simple: don't make distinctions between sport competition martial art or self defense, because all of it is taekwondo.


Welcome back!!  And I agree with this post.


----------



## Cyriacus

Daniel Sullivan said:


> While I like the spirit of your comment, it does raise the question: what about martial arts that are either competition focused and which involve no hand or foot striking whatsoever, such as kendo, judo or BJJ, or arts that have no direct correlation with unarmed self defense, such as pretty much all kenjutsu, iaido, haidong gumdo, or other weapon arts that involve archaic weapons that nobody carries and which involve little to no contact between participants?


Iaido wasnt meant to be used as a way of harming someone using a sword, possibly in the name of surviving an engagement in which You use a Sword?

Judo is not TKD - What is the relevance, since We arent defining what constitutes a sport?

Im not taking sides here, mind. But I do have to question that.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

puunui said:


> keep it even more simple: don't make distinctions between sport competition martial art or self defense, because all of it is taekwondo.


I think making that distinction aids potential students finding a club thats right for them. A student looking to train in and compete in tkd would find little use in a tkd club whose sole purpose is self defence training, just as someone whose sole purpose is self defence training will find little relevence in training at a club whose whole focus is training for sports competitions. While its all good and well to say all tkd is the same thing, the truth of the matter is that thats not the case. probably why many clubs (in my area at least) now use the term "sport tkd" on their signage, so as to differentiate themselves from clubs who dont teach the sport aspect.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Cyriacus said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twin Fist said:
> 
> 
> 
> keep it simple:
> 
> sport: for competition
> martial art: for self defense.
> 
> so the answer is either, or both, depending on how it is taught and what is emphasized.
> 
> 
> 
> While I like the spirit of your comment, it does raise the question:  what about martial arts that are either competition focused and which  involve no hand or foot striking whatsoever, such as kendo, judo or BJJ,  or arts that have no direct correlation with unarmed self defense, such  as pretty much all kenjutsu, iaido, haidong gumdo, or other weapon arts  that involve archaic weapons that nobody carries and which involve  little to no contact between participants?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Iaido wasnt meant  to be used as a way of harming someone using a sword, possibly in the  name of surviving an engagement in which You use a Sword?
Click to expand...

Are you asking a question or making a declarative statement?  It seems to be a statement, but you placed a question mark at the end.  My apologies; I'm not intending to give you a hard time, but the sentence as it is does not make grammatical sense. 

Iaido translates as 'way of mental presence,' and so far as I have read and seen, is not taught with the intent of teaching you to harm others or to defend yourself with a sword, but to improve yourself both physically, mentally, and spiritually, through the art and practice of iaido.  As to why I mentioned it, see below.



Cyriacus said:


> Judo is not TKD


Obviously.



Cyriacus said:


> - What is the relevance, since We arent defining what constitutes a sport?


The person to whom I responded did. 



Cyriacus said:


> Im not taking sides here, mind.


I assume not, as taking sides in the exchange would be impossible; I asked Twin Fist a question about his comment.  I have neither validated nor rejected his statement, thus I am not debating him or his statement, thus there is no side for you to choose.



Cyriacus said:


> But I do have to question that.


What are you questioning?  Twin Fist asserts that if it is for competition, it is sport and if it is for self defense, it is martial art.  

As none of the arts that I mentioned are self defense arts (though one can certainly apply principles and even some of the technical content in self defense) and in the case of judo, BJJ, and kendo, practitioners are essentially training for matches under a specific rule set (competition), I was asking Twin Fist where such arts fit in with regards to *his* definition: competition = sport/self defense = martial arts.

As I said, I'm not debating his perspective, but asking him more about it.  Whatever his answer, it is his point of view and his perspective, which is subjective.  In fact, this entire thread is about differing opinions on the matter, and the opinions expressed have been enjoyable to read.


----------



## Cyriacus

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Where did I imply that it was?
> 
> 
> Obviously.
> 
> 
> The person to whom I responded did.
> 
> 
> I assume not, as taking sides in the exchange would be impossible; I asked Twin Fist a question about his comment.  I have neither validated nor rejected his statement, thus I am not debating him or his statement, thus there is no side for you to choose.
> 
> 
> What are you questioning?  Twin Fist asserts that if it is for competition, it is sport and if it is for self defense, it is martial art.
> 
> None of the arts that I mentioned are self defense arts (though one can certainly apply principles and even some of the technical content in self defense) and in the case of judo, BJJ, and kendo, you are essentially training for matches under a specific rule set (competition), then where do those arts fit in with regards to *his* definition: competition = sport/self defense = martial arts.


Im not questioning a person - I was questioning what You said, Good Sir.

My opinion is that You can call it Muay Kwon Do-Jutsu for all I care. Ill train it if I like it. 

That being said, there could well have been a side for Me to choose if I were to support Twin Fists statement, or anyone elses here. It was meant as a way of saying that I wasnt having a go at You.

As for Iaido, I didnt see the "Unarmed" part of Your comment.

From what I could see, Twin Fist was more distinguishing between ways TKD could be partitioned, and not the definition of Sport. Forgive Me if I misunderstood, but thats the interpretation I got.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Cyriacus said:


> Im not questioning a person - I was questioning what You said, Good Sir.
> 
> My opinion is that You can call it Muay Kwon Do-Jutsu for all I care. Ill train it if I like it.
> 
> That being said, there could well have been a side for Me to choose if I were to support Twin Fists statement, or anyone elses here. It was meant as a way of saying that I wasnt having a go at You.


I didn't think that you were.  Choosing sides in a discussion or debate isn't having a go at someone in any case. 



Cyriacus said:


> As for Iaido, I didnt see the "Unarmed" part of Your comment.
> 
> From what I could see, Twin Fist was more distinguishing between ways TKD could be partitioned, and not the definition of Sport. Forgive Me if I misunderstood, but thats the interpretation I got.


You're iaido is stronger than mine: You drew your response while I was still editing.


----------



## Cyriacus

Now it all makes sense


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

On the subject of whether or not something is or is not sport, the word sport comes from 'desport' which means leisure, and in English usage, it originally was used to describe anything entertaining or amusing.  In short, any pastime can be sport.

Modern usage equates sport to physical contests in the context of athletics.

The meaning is broad enough to include self defense, which is a contest, both mental and physical, between attacker(s) and defender. 

The modern usage of the word martial art broadens the definition from war sciences to essentially any fighting system, be it competitive or no, thus my original answer to the OP was "yes."

The real issue is not whether or not taekwondo is MA or sport, but whether or not the school and student are a good fit for one another.  Ultimately, it all comes down to this:



It is incumbent upon the school owner to be forthright about the nature of the training, the atmosphere of the school, and the expense that a potential student can expect to incur.
 

It is incumbent upon the potential student to know and to be forthright about the nature of the training and atmosphere that they seek and what they are willing to spend, and to do basic research on the schools available in order to make an informed decision.
 
Failure in either area results in an unsatisfactory relationship between the instructional staff and the student.


----------



## puunui

Twin Fist said:


> obtuse: look it up



I don't need to look up the word, I know what it means.




Twin Fist said:


> tae KWON do
> 
> case closed.



Taekwondo competition and training has punching. In fact, if you count up the techniques listed in the Kukkiwon Textbook, there are more hand techniques than foot techniques listed. 

However, as you have noted, taekwondo competition does feature more kicking than punching. That is by design. For competition sparring, kicks are featured to a ratio of about 90-10% in favor of kicking; however, in poomsae, hand techniques are featured, to a ratio of about 90-10 for hands. This is in comformity with the um/yang (yin/yang) symbol which shows two spheres rotating around each other, each side containing a small tail of the other. This is expressed in taekwondo in the above. If we required everything in taekwondo to be 50/50, then the um yang symbol would be a circle cut in exactly half, each side colored differently. Kicking emphasis in competition and punching emphasis in poomsae is where we get the "tae" and "kwon" in taekwondo; it does not mean that everything has to be equal all the time throughout everything.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> While I undestand there are those who choose to believe that somehow "TKD" is an all encompassing moniker, I am still befuddled by this concept.
> 
> Is it anyone who kicks and punches and has some link no matter how small to some korean MA doing "TKD" ?
> 
> Is "TKD" like a sandwich? Put anything between 2 slices of bread and that's what you have?
> 
> Would those Koreans who developed arts and chose not to use the nam "TKD" be insulted if their system were called "TKD" ?
> 
> Is "Tae Bo" "TKD" ?
> 
> Inquiring minds want to know.



Yes, we already went over this before. Yes, all of it is taekwondo, including taebo. In fact, there is a thing called taekwon dance or something like that, which is a featured part of the Kukkiwon's hanmadang. At the recent US Open Hanmadang, there was not only some impressive competition in the musical forms divisions, but many people were remarking that the k tiger (formerly the tiger team) and muju demonstration team had much more emphasis on dance elements in their routines.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Welcome back!!



I'm not really back, just poking my head in. I notice the discussions have tailed off considerably and are much less interesting now. oh well.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> I'm not really back, just poking my head in. I notice the discussions have tailed off considerably and are much less interesting now. oh well.


Regardless, good to see you!


----------



## ralphmcpherson

puunui said:


> I'm not really back, just poking my head in. I notice the discussions have tailed off considerably and are much less interesting now. oh well.


I think you'll find there was considerably more discussion back then because we had ten threads all about the same topic all going around in circles but not actually getting anywhere. Much more pleasant here these days.


----------



## Gorilla

puunui said:


> I'm not really back, just poking my head in. I notice the discussions have tailed off considerably and are much less interesting now. oh well.



Yep


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Manny said:


> For me TKD is a martial art in the firsth place and a sport in the  second place.


I agree; the sport developed from the art.



Manny said:


> For the regular people AND other martial artists like for  example karatekas or aikidokas and lima lama and kenpo practiciones TKD  is a SPORT wiht traces of martial art.


I put little to no stock in the opinions of regular people: regular people think anything with a white uniform and/or a belt is karate.  I also hold little regard for non-TKD-ists opinion of taekwondo; a kenpoist's opinion of taekwondo is as irrelevant as my opinion of kenpo is.  

I also give little credence to the opinions of those who have dabbled a bit (I know a lot of regular people who got a yellow or green belt along the way and have no substantive knowledge of the art); I've dabbled in other arts too.  I trained in TSD for about a year and did Shotokan back in high school for over three years.  My opinion of the two is enough to know what it is but not enough to make value judgements of either art. 



Manny said:


> All the karate senseis or budo taijutsu, or aikido says TKD is only a sport where no punches allowed to face/head and no guard used (very low guard what is insame for them) so TKD is no practical as a self defense tool.


Sounds like sour grapes to me.  "_All the karate senseis or budo taijutsu, or aikido_" are wrong.  Kyokushin karate does not allow punches to the head/face and the low guard is not present in any of the pumse, nor is it a requirement in competition.  

I will tell you that "All" sensei of the arts you mention are not saying what you are attributing to them.  And those that are are apparently uninformed or have never bothered to examine the pumse.  The competition rules are not meant to mirror a 'real fight' any more than judo, BJJ, sport karate, or boxing competition rules are meant to.  In fact, if you judge every art based on its competition rules, then none of them have any practical self defense value because all of them, even MMA, exclude vital elements of a violent attack.


----------



## Gwai Lo Dan

Daniel Sullivan said:


> In short, any pastime can be sport.


I define sport to exclude activities people do while smoking and having a beer.   

Darts, snooker, and corporate softball - not sports.
Running, cycling, basketball - sports.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Gwai Lo Dan said:


> I define sport to exclude activities people do while smoking and having a beer.
> 
> Darts, snooker, and corporate softball - not sports.
> Running, cycling, basketball - sports.


Then the question then is whether or not  you consider darts, snooker, and corporate softball played in alcohol and tobacco free environment to be sports.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> On the subject of whether or not something is or is not sport, the word sport comes from 'desport' which means leisure, and in English usage, it originally was used to describe anything entertaining or amusing. In short, any pastime can be sport.
> 
> Modern usage equates sport to physical contests in the context of athletics.



Which definition are _you_ using, though? You seem a bit equivocal to me, at times. 

If you use the former definition then my children and I played the rousing sport of Candy Land recently. But if I told anybody that they'd think I was a bit odd, to say the least. It's just an unhelpful definition, especially in the context of martial arts. Sports have an athletic component to them.



> The meaning is broad enough to include self defense, which is a contest, both mental and physical, between attacker(s) and defender.



Only in the most analogous sense and, I think, this is where people are going to disagree with you. Athletic contests are decidedly different from the "contest" involved in defending yourself.



> The modern usage of the word martial art broadens the definition from war sciences to essentially any fighting system, be it competitive or no, thus my original answer to the OP was "yes."



This is debateable. While some people would include such sports as wrestling as a martial art, others would not. To say the "modern usage" of the term does this or that is being overly broad, IMNSHO. The issue simply isn't settled in any meaningful way. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## chrispillertkd

Gwai Lo Dan said:


> I define sport to exclude activities people do while smoking and having a beer.



Hey, if you use the original definition Daniel mentioned drinking beer and smoking _are_ sports! 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Which definition are _you_ using, though? You seem a bit equivocal to me, at times.


One and three: 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sport



Dictionary.com said:


> *
> sport*
> &#8194; &#8194;[spawrt, spohrt] noun
> 
> 
> *1.** an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc. *
> 
> 
> 2. a particular form of this, especially in the out of doors.
> 
> *3. diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime. *
> 
> 
> 4. jest; fun; mirth; pleasantry: What he said in sport was taken seriously.
> 
> 
> 5. mockery; ridicule; derision: They made sport of him.




For the vast majority of people, taekwondo is an athletic activity (1) practiced for recreation (3).



chrispillertkd said:


> Only in the most analogous sense and, I think, this is where people are going to disagree with you. Athletic contests are decidedly different from the "contest" involved in defending yourself.


Of course only in the most analogous sense. 



chrispillertkd said:


> This is debateable. While some people would include such sports as wrestling as a martial art, others would not. To say the "modern usage" of the term does this or that is being overly broad, INSHO. The issue simply isn't settled in any meaningful way.


Of course not.  If it were settled in any meaningful way, the topic would not come up over and over again.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Awesome! Bring on the sports of beer drinking and smoking! And Candy Land 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Hey, if you use the original definition Daniel mentioned drinking beer and smoking _are_ sports!
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


According to the dictionary, they are indeed.  See definition three http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sport (quoted from the site in my previous post). 

However, the context of this discussion revolves around taekwondo and its relationship to definition one.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> According to the dictionary, they are indeed. See definition three http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sport (quoted from the site in my previous post).



Indeed, which is why that definition isn't helpful. Because people don't really think of sports that way.



> However, the context of this discussion revolves around taekwondo and its relationship to definition one.



It's an aspect of Taekwon-Do, though Taekwon-Do is not a sport in itself. 

Can't say for Taekwondo, though.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Indeed, which is why that definition isn't helpful. Because people don't really think of sports that way.


Perhaps not, but since we're having a technical discussion about sport or martial art, it is pertinent.  



chrispillertkd said:


> It's an aspect of Taekwon-Do, though Taekwon-Do is not a sport in itself.
> 
> Can't say for Taekwondo, though.


Sport (athletic contest) is an aspect of taekwondo: WTF competition (sport) is taekwondo, but other aspects of taekwondo (pumse, philosophy, etc.) are not WTF competition (sport).


----------



## chrispillertkd

Poomse isn't a sporting event? People are talking about Poomse WC's these days. I think some people here are even on the U.S. national team. I was under the impression that was run by the WTF.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Poomse isn't a sporting event? People are talking about Poomse WC's these days. I think some people here are even on the U.S. national team. I was under the impression that was run by the WTF.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


Sure.  I was thinking of WTF competition in the athletic contest between two active fighters, but you are correct; pumse competition is sport in the same way that figure skating or gymnastics are, though with less room for creativity.


----------



## Cyriacus

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/taekwondo?s=t
[h=2]tae kwon do[/h]&#8194; &#8194;[tahy kwon doh]  Show IPA
*noun*a Korean martial art, a particularly aggressive form of karate, thatutilizes punches, jabs, chops, blocking and choking moves, andespecially powerful, leaping kicks.

​
Interesting definition You have there. It doesnt even mention Sport or Self Defense.
It does say its a form of Karate but.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Karate?s=t
[h=2]ka·ra·te[/h]&#8194; &#8194;[k_uh_-rah-tee]  Show IPA
*noun**1.*a method developed in Japan of defending oneself withoutthe use of weapons by striking sensitive areas on anattacker's body with the hands, elbows, knees, or feet.Compare judo, jujitsu.

*2.*a sport based on this method of self-defense.



So, Ive news for everyone: Theres no Chokes in Karate, but there are in Taekwondo.


​


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Of course not.  If it were settled in any meaningful way, the topic would not come up over and over again.



I would disagree with that. Many things are settled and still come up over and over again. President Obama's US citizenship for example.


----------



## puunui

chrispillertkd said:


> Indeed, which is why that definition isn't helpful. Because people don't really think of sports that way.



Then the answer is to educate people as to the definition, including the definition as contained in the Olympic Charter, and not dumb down to other people's ignorance.


----------



## Jaeimseu

Is a designated hitter a baseball player?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

> Originally Posted by *puunui*
> 
> 
> keep it even more simple: don't make distinctions between sport competition martial art or self defense, because all of it is taekwondo





ralphmcpherson said:


> I think making that distinction aids potential students finding a club thats right for them. A student looking to train in and compete in tkd would find little use in a tkd club whose sole purpose is self defence training, just as someone whose sole purpose is self defence training will find little relevence in training at a club whose whole focus is training for sports competitions. While its all good and well to say all tkd is the same thing, the truth of the matter is that thats not the case. probably why many clubs (in my area at least) now use the term "sport tkd" on their signage, so as to differentiate themselves from clubs who dont teach the sport aspect.



Touching on Glenn's portion of the above quote, he's correct in that sport competition and self-defense can both be considered 'Taekwondo'. However, touching on Ralph's portion of the above quote, he's correct in that a distinction does indeed need to be made between the two venues. They are polar opposites and the training in each differs tremendously in form and focus. It would be a grave disservice to the student to advertise one as representing the other (or both if the proper training methodology wasn't used). 

This directly goes back to what I stated a few months ago; both are viable venues of training within their specifi context. One is not 'better' than the other in the same way that fruits aren't 'better' than vegtables. Both have completely different uses within the body though there is 'some' overlap. Both can be labeled as 'food'. So TKD is an umbrella term for both sport and self-defense methodology. The actual training methodologies simply differ.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chrispillertkd said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The modern  usage of the word martial art broadens the definition from  war sciences to essentially any fighting system,* be it competitive or  no, thus my original answer to the OP was "yes."
> 
> 
> 
> *This is debateable. While some people would include such sports as  wrestling as a martial art, others would not. To say the "modern usage"  of the term does this or that is being overly broad, IMNSHO. The issue  simply isn't settled in any meaningful way.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course not.  If it were settled in any meaningful way, the topic would not come up over and over again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would disagree with that. Many things are settled and still come up over and over again. President Obama's US citizenship for example.
Click to expand...

Very true.

However, one of the things that prevents this issue from being settled meaningfully is that there is disagreement within certain fighting systems as to whether or not it is a martial art.  I used to be active on F.net and most of the fencers were adamant that fencing was a sport and not an MA.  

Guys who wrestle generally consider it a sport and not an MA, but if wrestling is not MA, what makes Judo and BJJ MA, given that both are just a form of wrestling?  How is kendo a martial art and fencing isn't, given that both are fencing.

I'm not interested in parsing what fighting systems are or are not martial arts; I'm simply pointing out that within fighting systems, there is not much consistency about what defines a martial art.  

Then you have an inability on the part of many participants in the conversation (in general, not just this thread) to agree as to what constitutes a sport.

Then you have ego issues at stake, which is what drives the very strong viewpoints of some participants (in general, not just this thread).  Some people feel threatened, for example, by the idea that a ten year old can wear the same color belt that they do.  Others know, deep down, that they are unable to keep pace with athletes and are simply jealous.  So they denigrate the 'sport' and make big speeches about how what they do is martial art, self defense, and blah, blah, blah.  You also have those who despise the culture of sports and want to distance themselves from it to the greatest degree possible.

Then you have the other side of the coin; people who have trained primarily for competition but have not developed depth in the art who look down their noses at anyone who doesn't have a fight record.

Finally, within taekwondo discussions, you have the issue of people who do not train in the art throwing in their opinions about it, and who insist that their opinions hold equal weight with that of those who do train in the art.  Sometimes, those opinions are well thought out and have some merit.  Most often, however, this is not the case.

Until everyone in the conversation (again, in general, not specifically in this thread) is able to put their egos aside and can agree on what constitutes the subject, there is no way within the conversation to settle anything meaningfully.


----------



## terryl965

_*Really, seriously, unbelievable that so much time and energy is still being spent on whether or not it is a sport or Art? I can't even watch this debalcle happen again, how many threads, how many time echoing the same statement day in and day out?*_


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

terryl965 said:


> _*Really, seriously, unbelievable that so much time and energy is still being spent on whether or not it is a sport or Art? I can't even watch this debalcle happen again, how many threads, how many time echoing the same statement day in and day out?*_


Dude, time to switch to decaf!


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Maybe I'm reading you wrong Daniel, but you seem very frustrated with this topic?  It really isn't something to get upset about is it?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> However, one of the things that prevents this issue from being settled meaningfully is that there is disagreement within certain fighting systems as to whether or not it is a martial art. I used to be active on F.net and most of the fencers were adamant that fencing was a sport and not an MA.
> 
> Guys who wrestle generally consider it a sport and not an MA, but if wrestling is not MA, what makes Judo and BJJ MA, given that both are just a form of wrestling? How is kendo a martial art and fencing isn't, given that both are fencing.
> 
> Then you have an inability on the part of many participants in the conversation (in general, not just this thread) to agree as to what constitutes a sport.



There really isn't going to be a definitive answer.  It will vary as much as question like, 'how long does it take to earn a BB'?  The answer will depend upon whom your talking to and their background.  



> Then you have ego issues at stake, which is what drives the very strong viewpoints of some participants (in general, not just this thread). Some people feel threatened, for example, by the idea that a ten year old can wear the same color belt that they do.



Is it necessarily ego?  Perhaps it is a legitimate question of the actual training behind the belt for a child vs. an adult?  You could say the same thing for a 4yr old that wears a BB and one that is 15yrs old.  Was the training the same?  Can they do the same things from a skill/experience point of view?  Was it just a 'feel-good-BB club' sorta thing or solid training?  Lots of variables to be considered.  More of a case-by-case basis topic.



> Others know, deep down, that they are unable to keep pace with athletes and are simply jealous. So they denigrate the 'sport' and make big speeches about how what they do is martial art, self defense, and blah, blah, blah.



I'm not sure what you mean by this statement?  It seems to be a very broad brush stroke at best.  Someone that trains for self-defense doesn't need to be an 'athlete' although they could be.  Your applying a goal from one venue to fit another venue in which it isn't a necessary requirement.  I don't see it as 'denigrating' to establish that there is a difference between the two teaching methodologies.    



> Finally, within taekwondo discussions, you have the issue of people who do not train in the art throwing in their opinions about it, and who insist that their opinions hold equal weight with that of those who do train in the art. Sometimes, those opinions are well thought out and have some merit. Most often, however, this is not the case.



Who are these people?  Has this been an issue in this thread (or any other for that matter)?  And too be honest, one shouldn't have to have trained (or currently train) in TKD to have a valid opinion on a plethora of topics within the art/sport.  I've seen many non-TKD folks join in many of these conversations with valid points.  I'm surprised you would even go this route with a position that 'most' don't have any merit.  You may as well say, 'don't post in this section unless you're TKD'!


----------



## Earl Weiss

Next we will solve the age old problem of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. 

The question is perhaps one of perspective.  I for one do not agree with this statement from Glenn "
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Originally Posted by *puunui* 

 
keep it even more simple: don't make distinctions between sport competition martial art or self defense, because all of it is taekwondo" 

I consider sport and self defense to be elements or part of TKD as a martial art.   People who focus exclusively on one without the other, conceding that there is no bright line of demarcation. are practicing an element of TKD.  If you only go to the batting cages and practice hitting, are are practicing an element of baseball, but you are not playing baseball.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kong Soo Do said:


> Maybe I'm reading you wrong Daniel, but you seem very frustrated with this topic?  It really isn't something to get upset about is it?


Where are you getting this from?



Kong Soo Do said:


> There really isn't going to be a definitive answer.  It will vary as much as question like, 'how long does it take to earn a BB'?  The answer will depend upon whom your talking to and their background.


That, and how you use the terms, "sport" and "martial art."  The fact that they mean different things to different people and have multiple definitions presents an obstacle to consensus.



Kong Soo Do said:


> Is it necessarily ego?  Perhaps it is a legitimate question of the actual training behind the belt for a child vs. an adult?  You could say the same thing for a 4yr old that wears a BB and one that is 15yrs old.  Was the training the same?  Can they do the same things from a skill/experience point of view?  Was it just a 'feel-good-BB club' sorta thing or solid training?  Lots of variables to be considered.  More of a case-by-case basis topic.


In some cases it is ego.  In other cases, it is a legitimate question of training.  Depends on the circumstance.




Kong Soo Do said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by this statement?  It seems to be a very broad brush stroke at best.  Someone that trains for self-defense doesn't need to be an 'athlete' although they could be.  Your applying a goal from one venue to fit another venue in which it isn't a necessary requirement.  I don't see it as 'denigrating' to establish that there is a difference between the two teaching methodologies.


Establishing a difference between the two is not what I was referring to.  For example, Ralph establishes a difference between the two but does not denigrate one or the other.  Others do not follow that example.  



Kong Soo Do said:


> Who are these people?  Has this been an issue in this thread (or any other for that matter)?


It is a general observation.  This topic has been argued to death on every MA forum on the internet.  I speak of no person in particular.



Kong Soo Do said:


> And too be honest, one shouldn't have to have trained (or currently train) in TKD to have a valid opinion on a plethora of topics within the art/sport.  I've seen many non-TKD folks join in many of these conversations with valid points.


Agree to disagree. 



Kong Soo Do said:


> I'm surprised you would even go this route with a position that 'most' don't have any merit.  You may as well say, 'don't post in this section unless you're TKD'!


Not at all.  This is a public forum and there are no TOS rules to prevent people from one art from weighing in on conversations about another.  A ballerina can watch some youtube and read some wiki and jump into the conversation is she so chooses.  Perhaps she will offer insightful commentary.  However, her insight will be extremely limited by lack of first hand experience with the art.

My own opinions of kenjutsu have some merit; I practice a related art.  But on a kenjutsu thread, I will defer to actual practitioners.  There are some things that you simply have to practice an art to 'get.'  I can't think of any other way to put it.

In any case, saying that "I find some of those opinions to have merit but that most often I do not" is not tantamount to saying, "don't post in this section unless you're TKD."  It simply means that I give far more weight to opinions of those within the field than those without.  

Which is pretty much what people in most other fields do.  For example, National Geographic will give more weight to the opinion of Jack Horner on the subject of paleontology than I give to the opinion of Michael Crichton on the same subject.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

I appreciate the clarification Daniel.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> However, one of the things that prevents this issue from being settled meaningfully is that there is disagreement within certain fighting systems as to whether or not it is a martial art. I used to be active on F.net and most of the fencers were adamant that fencing was a sport and not an MA.



 Speaking as someone who used to fence, they are absolutely correct. It isn't a martial art.



> Guys who wrestle generally consider it a sport and not an MA, but if wrestling is not MA, what makes Judo and BJJ MA, given that both are just a form of wrestling? How is kendo a martial art and fencing isn't, given that both are fencing.



What is a martial art?

A sport is, apparently, drinking beer and smoking cigarettes. Is there something about an activity that must be present for it to be considered a martial art? 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Speaking as someone who used to fence,  they are absolutely correct. It isn't a martial art.


I used to fence too.  Still do on occasion.  While I'm not saying that it is a martial art, why do you say that it isn't?



chrispillertkd said:


> What is a martial art?


I gave  an answer to that in an earlier post.  You felt it was too broad.  You  must therefore have something else in mind.  So what is a martial art by  your estimation?



chrispillertkd said:


> A sport is, apparently, drinking beer and smoking cigarettes.


By  one of the five definitions they can potentially be.  For those who  missed that part of the dialogue, I furnished the dictionary definition  on page six.



chrispillertkd said:


> Is there something  about an activity that must be present for it to be considered a martial  art?


See my previous answer on page 5.  Within the context of this conversation, being a fighting system of some kind is pretty much all that is needed.  Thus fencing could be included, though I am not interested enough to discuss making a case for doing so.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kong Soo Do said:


> I appreciate the clarification Daniel.


You're welcome.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I used to fence too. Still do on occasion. While I'm not saying that it is a martial art, why do you say that it isn't?



If you've done fencing and martial arts the differences should be obvious. 



> I gave an answer to that in an earlier post. You felt it was too broad. You must therefore have something else in mind. So what is a martial art by your estimation?



I didn't see your post on this subject. Can you cut-and-paste it or just link to the post in question? I reread pages 5, 6, and 7 of this thread but didn't see what you're referring to.



> See my previous answer on page 5.



I must have missed that, too. The only thing I saw from you on page 5 that would seem to relate to the topic of "Is there something about an activity that must be present for it to be considered a martial art?" would have been something you wrote about iaido. Did you mean that to be a generalized statement about what needs to be present in the training of _any_ martial art? It seemed style specific.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> If you only go to the batting cages and practice hitting, are are practicing an element of baseball, but you are not playing baseball.



Yes you are. James' example of a designated hitter, are you saying he isn't a baseball player? In order to be a baseball player, do you have to play all of the positions as well as be a manager? Pitching is an element of baseball, but if you only do that, does that mean you are not a baseball player?


----------



## ralphmcpherson

puunui said:


> Yes you are. James' example of a designated hitter, are you saying he isn't a baseball player? In order to be a baseball player, do you have to play all of the positions as well as be a manager? Pitching is an element of baseball, but if you only do that, does that mean you are not a baseball player?[/QUOTE
> the difference there is that the baseballer has probably participted in all facets of the game during his development and had then recognised batting as his strength and has persued that aspect of the game. I doubt he started playing baseball in under 6's and never had a go at pitching, fielding etc. Peeople these days can join a "sport tkd" club like the one up the road from me and only ever try the sport side of tkd, and never at any point train tkd for self defence purposes. A young kid can not roll up to the local cricket club and say "Im a batter only, I wont bowl or field", whereas a child has plenty of access to sport-only tkd clubs.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

I thought I would just share an interesting phone call I just made which is relevent to this thread. I just phoned the "sport tkd" school up the road from me and enquired about joining (making out I have no previous tkd experience). I started by asking exactly what they meant by  "sport" tkd and he responded, "here we focus soley on the competition of sport of tkd", I asked how that would differ from a "normal" tkd club and he responded (and I quote) , "we dont focus on any applications of tkd as a martial art or tkd as a form of self defence". Now as far as Im concerned, they are only teaching a small part of the tkd curriculum, and there is a strong argument that what they teach is not a martial art based on what he told me.


----------



## Cyriacus

The biggest problem with these types of debates is trying to prove one thing to be right, which requires everyone else to be wrong. Lets look at Taekwondo, for fun. Taekwondo is a name. What you learn, could be a sport, it could be self defence, i could be Muay Thai*. The name just conveys an idea of the means to whatever end that outlet or organisation is working toward. The System is exactly that. The system. Debating how the System should, is, or could be used isnt very productive. But I have no interest in Sport, and You literally could not pay Me to go and learn from a competitively themed or focused or anything'd TKD Outlet. Some people want that, other people dont know what They want or dont care, or they have preferences, and so on. Its having the choice to get what You want. Itd be unfortunate if I couldnt learn TKD because I liked what was being taught, and the foundations it was drawing from, but lost all interest at how it was being applied, even if it was just a focus. For example, I dont like kicking very much.

*Hey - If You didnt know any better, and They taught all Thai Kicks instead of the round kicks found under the KKW, how would You know any better? And even if You found out, given the blank slate Youd have to be, would You care?


----------



## ralphmcpherson

A subject such as this has no right or wrong opinions. Its all subjective, and is basically just a matter of personal opinion.  You could debate this topic forever and people would still be in disagreement. Thats why its such a great topic.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

ralphmcpherson said:


> I thought I would just share an interesting phone call I just made which is relevent to this thread. I just phoned the "sport tkd" school up the road from me and enquired about joining (making out I have no previous tkd experience). I started by asking exactly what they meant by "sport" tkd and he responded, "here we focus soley on the competition of sport of tkd", I asked how that would differ from a "normal" tkd club and he responded (and I quote) , "we dont focus on any applications of tkd as a martial art or tkd as a form of self defence". Now as far as Im concerned, they are only teaching a small part of the tkd curriculum, and there is a strong argument that what they teach is not a martial art based on what he told me.



Good post.  I can respect and appreciate the honesty of this instructor by clearly explaining the difference between a 'sport' club vs. a Dojang that teaches SD to a prospective student.  It is the schools that teach one way, but make the claim they teach both or cover the other when in fact they don't that give the art as a whole a very bad name.  If you take TKD (or any art) as a sport, then be content that it is a sport for you.  If you take it as a hobby, then be content that it is a hobby for you.  If you take it for SD, then be content that it is SD to you.  Sport TKD is TKD and SD TKD is TKD but they differ considerably in methodology and an instructor needs to clearly explain what facet of the art they teach.


----------



## Earl Weiss

chrispillertkd said:


> Speaking as someone who used to fence, they are absolutely correct. It isn't a martial art.
> 
> 
> 
> What is a martial art?
> 
> ?
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



Seems I saw an article on this 10 years ago
https://1c47d0f0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites...mHLAg6JYflZC6KucYt1T9GlqrYzd6P&attredirects=0


----------



## Earl Weiss

puunui said:


> Yes you are. James' example of a designated hitter, are you saying he isn't a baseball player? In order to be a baseball player, do you have to play all of the positions as well as be a manager? Pitching is an element of baseball, but if you only do that, does that mean you are not a baseball player?



Last time I checked Pitchers had to catch and throw as well. At some level they also batted. So, no, there is no position that only pitches, never catches a balll, never batted, never had to do a throw other than pitch.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> If you've done fencing and martial arts the differences should be obvious.


I already know my opinion and why I hold it, and have stated that I am not interested in making a case one way or the other. I asked you to explain the reasons behind yours, as you cited it specifically as 'not.' 



chrispillertkd said:


> I didn't see your post on this subject. Can you cut-and-paste it or just link to the post in question? I reread pages 5, 6, and 7 of this thread but didn't see what you're referring to.


It is one that you responded to earlier, but I have quoted it below.



chrispillertkd said:


> I must have missed that, too. The only thing I saw from you on page 5 that would seem to relate to the topic of "Is there something about an activity that must be present for it to be considered a martial art?" would have been something you wrote about iaido. Did you mean that to be a generalized statement about what needs to be present in the training of _any_ martial art? It seemed style specific.



Same post as mentioned above. The pertinant pert of the post in question is here: 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> The modern usage of the word martial art broadens the definition from war sciences to *essentially any fighting system*, be it competitive or no, thus my original answer to the OP was "yes."


To clarify:

What makes judo a martial art and wrestling not? What makes kendo a martial art and fencing not? What makes escrima a martial art and fencing not (escrima, which is the Spanish word for fencing). What makes kyokushin a martial art and boxing not?

It certainly isn't the comprehensiveness or SD applicaiton of one art versus another; judo is no more comprehensive (lacking striking) or applicable in self defense than wrestling is and kendo is not only not comprehensive as a sword art, but has no direct unarmed self defense application at all, though some of it's principles are applicable in self defense (though again, the same could be said of three weapon fencing).

What makes haidong gumdo a martial art? It has no historical basis, uses a sword that is not Korean in origin and likely not even commonly used by those Koreans who did wield swords (mostly officers, and the preferred weapon was not a katana, but something closer to a kodachi), and many of techniques that it utilizes are inappropriate in both practical sword work and in swordwork with the weapon of choice (a katana renamed). Do belts make it an MA? Is it Asian-ness? I am perfectly accepting of it as a martial art, but it is no more "martial" than three weapon fencing (which I do not consider to be martial).

Which brings me to the question that I posed to Twin Fist: if by his definition, competition = sport and self defense = martial art, then what does one do with arts that are not specifically self defense arts such as kendo or iaido, neither of which are for self defense?

I don't really care and I'm not interested in making a case for fencing, wrestling, or boxing being a martial art, but the status as 'martial art' or 'sport' is to a great extent arbitrary; to some extent, people view an Asian form of anything as 'martial art' simply out of ignorance. Mainly, the status seems to be determined by how it was initially introduced; if it is called a sport at the time of its introduction, then it is considered a sport. If it was called a martial art at the time of its introduction, then it is a martial art.

And since there is no established international body that classifies what is and is not a martial art, much of what makes one a martial art and another sport is subjective. My opinions on the subject in general is are simply opinions. You may agree with some or all or disagree with some or all. Both of which are perfectly fine.  Aside from an enjoyable conversation, I have no dog in this race.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> I thought I would just share an interesting phone call I just made which is relevent to this thread. I just phoned the "sport tkd" school up the road from me and enquired about joining (making out I have no previous tkd experience). I started by asking exactly what they meant by "sport" tkd and he responded, "here we focus soley on the competition of sport of tkd", I asked how that would differ from a "normal" tkd club and he responded (and I quote) , "we dont focus on any applications of *tkd as a martial art or tkd as a form of self defence*". Now as far as Im concerned, they are only teaching a small part of the tkd curriculum, and there is a strong argument that what they teach is not a martial art based on what he told me.


I find the bolded part the most interesting.  I notice that he differentiates between MA and SD, while some equate MA with SD.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I find the bolded part the most interesting.  I notice that he differentiates between MA and SD, while some equate MA with SD.



I go along with the guy that Ralph talked to.  I visualize martial art, self-defense, and martial sport as a Venn diagram.  Any or all of the three can intersect each other but they can also sit alone in their own corner too.

Like kyudo (Japanese archery).  It's a martial art, perhaps a martial sport, but probably not self-defense IMO.  Judo and taekwondo = all three in my book.  Krav Maga = self-defense only.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> The modern usage of the word martial art broadens the definition from war sciences to *essentially any fighting system*, be it competitive or no, thus my original answer to the OP was "yes."



I'd be interested in what your defintion of a "fighting system is." What are the inherent components that make up such systems? At first glance I am inclined to disagree with your assertion that the "modern usage" of the term martial art is so broad. But that does depend on the definition of "fighting system" you're using. 



> Which brings me to the question that I posed to Twin Fist: if by his definition, competition = sport and self defense = martial art, then what does one do with arts that are not specifically self defense arts such as kendo or iaido, neither of which are for self defense?



It depends on what you mean by "self-defense." As people have already pointed out, styles such as various Japanese koryo were never intended to be "self-defense" oriented but are certainly martial arts. If the style you study is only interested in self-defense you're not doing a martial art anymore than someone whose style is geared only towards sports competition. 



> I don't really care and I'm not interested in making a case for fencing, wrestling, or boxing being a martial art, but the status as 'martial art' or 'sport' is to a great extent arbitrary; to some extent, people view an Asian form of anything as 'martial art' simply out of ignorance. Mainly, the status seems to be determined by how it was initially introduced; if it is called a sport at the time of its introduction, then it is considered a sport. If it was called a martial art at the time of its introduction, then it is a martial art.



Can't say I agree. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> I'd be interested in what your defintion of a "fighting system is." What are the inherent components that make up such systems? At first glance I am inclined to disagree with your assertion that the "modern usage" of the term martial art is so broad. But that does depend on the definition of "fighting system" you're using.


Any 'system' wherein a fighting methodology has been systematized.  



chrispillertkd said:


> It depends on what you mean by "self-defense." As people have already pointed out, styles such as various Japanese koryo were never intended to be "self-defense" oriented but are certainly martial arts. If the style you study is only interested in self-defense you're not doing a martial art anymore than someone whose style is geared only towards sports competition.


Specifically, it depends on what Twin Fist meant by self defense, as it was his post on which I asked for clarification.



chrispillertkd said:


> Can't say I agree.


If you don't agree, then you shouldn't.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Any 'system' wherein a fighting methodology has been systematized.



If that is the case then I'd say your statement is inaccurate. Modern usage of the term "martial art" isn't used broadly enough to apply to "any fighting methodology [that] has been systematized." 

You could say that some people use the term that way (but when they do it empties the term of all meaning), but you can't say without major qualification that it is the "modern usage" of the term. 



> Specifically, it depends on what Twin Fist meant by self defense, as it was his post on which I asked for clarification.



His "sport: for competition, martial art: for self defense"? I wouldn't subscribe to that view, either. As I said, if you're doing a "martial art" that is _only_ interested in self-defense you're not doing a martial art any more than someone who is only training to compete in a sporting event. Both views are nearly equally wrong, IMO. YMMV, of course. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Kong Soo Do

chrispillertkd said:


> His "sport: for competition, martial art: for self defense"? I wouldn't subscribe to that view, either. As I said, if you're doing a "martial art" that is _only_ interested in self-defense you're not doing a martial art any more than someone who is only training to compete in a sporting event. Both views are nearly equally wrong, IMO. YMMV, of course.



I dunno Chris, I can't quite subscribe to what you're saying here.  A lot would depend upon the art in question.  Judo was designed to be a sport, but many would think of it as a martial art.  Krav Maga was designed as a SD system, but it is also thought of as a martial art.  Then you have venues such as Karate & TKD which have both but separate methodologies of training.  

Martial art serves better as an umbrella term.  Underneath one could perhaps go a step further into terms (as an example) of martial sport and martial discipline to better differentiate.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Look again at what I wrote.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> If that is the case then I'd say your statement is inaccurate. Modern usage of the term "martial art" isn't used broadly enough to apply to "any fighting methodology [that] has been systematized."
> 
> You could say that some people use the term that way (but when they do it empties the term of all meaning), but you can't say without major qualification that it is the "modern usage" of the term.


Agree to disagree.



chrispillertkd said:


> His "sport: for competition, martial art: for self defense"? I wouldn't subscribe to that view, either.


RE Twin Fist's definition, I hope he will respond to my question.  



chrispillertkd said:


> As I said, if you're doing a "martial art" that is _only_ interested in self-defense you're not doing a martial art any more than someone who is only training to compete in a sporting event. Both views are nearly equally wrong, IMO. YMMV, of course.


Agree to disagee.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

chrispillertkd said:


> Look again at what I wrote.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



Sorry Chris, I think I misunderstood your early post.


----------



## miguksaram

The more I read this thread the more I am reminded of the term "Daja-poo"  The feeling that we have stepped in this crap before.  Thus far there has been nothing new added to this age old argument, which becons the question...why was this started again?  Everyone is constantly challenging someone else's belief/definition of what a martial art is and what a martial sport is.  This is just a @$$ hair away from saying your religion is wrong.  It is apparent that you will not be able to change another's mind.  At best you may clarify why you take the position you do.  However, that only instigates people to challenges towards your view point.  

So again...why?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

miguksaram said:


> at best you may clarify why you take the position you do. However, that only instigates people to challenges towards your view point.


qft.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> Last time I checked Pitchers had to catch and throw as well. At some level they also batted. So, no, there is no position that only pitches, never catches a balll, never batted, never had to do a throw other than pitch.



Well, if that is your standard, that at "some level they also batted", then elite level competitors who are training primarily for sparring competition fit that bill as well. As a general rule color belts all learn poomsae, just like as a general rule ball players did everything when they were in little league. 

Rather than argue about who is right and who is wrong, I would instead like to focus on motivations or reasons for our positions. I chose to study and adopt the philosophies of the kukki taekwondo pioneers, who sacrificed much in order to unify. There are of the mindset that we should be inclusive in our viewpoint, that it is all taekwondo and that we can all come together as one. 

Your background is studying the philosophy of General Choi, who made it his mission in later life to separate from kukki taekwondo and pronounce that only what he did was taekwon-do. So his viewpoint, and yours by extension, is more exclusionary. This is taekwon-do but that isn't, as so forth. 

So who is right and who is wrong? If you are a kukki taekwondoin, then I would look towards the pioneers and their original intent about what is and isn't taekwondo. If you are a General Choi follower, then follow what he says. The problems arise when a kukki taekwondoin argues with a chang hon taekwon-do, each saying the other is wrong. Personally, the chang hon people are outside of my organization, so whatever you want to do or think is fine. However, if a chang hon taekwon-doin is interested in becoming part of kukki taekwondo, he will be welcomed in, because from the kukki taekwondo viewpoint, it is all taekwondo, and everyone is included, if they choose to be.


----------



## Earl Weiss

puunui said:


> I would submit that General Choi sacrificed at least as much as any KK TKD pioneer to spread TKD.
> 
> I agree that it is a question of perspective.
> 
> I disagree that General Choi chose to seperate from KK TKD at least so far as KK TKD is viewed in the modern sense.  Instead, AFAIAC KK TKD chose to seperate from Chang Hon.
> 
> (I know that from a technical historical perspective there was a KKW that may have existed before or along with the Chang Hon system and General Choi was involved with it, but I submit that the Modern 1973/74 incarnation along with the WTF is what the KKW is viewed as for the last 40 years as "The KKW" . From the "All encompassing" view I would imagine this is a distinction without difference.)
> 
> From the standpoint of one who does not spar with chest protectors and allows punches to the face, for the outside (Non TKD)  observer if I am asked, I want them to know that is not what I do.
> 
> BTW I consider the KKW inclusiveness to be one of  it's great strengths yet at the same time one of it's great weaknesses, while I consider the ITF exclusiveness to be one of it's great strengths and at the same time one of it's great weaknesses.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> I would submit that General Choi sacrificed at least as much as any KK TKD pioneer to spread TKD.



I would say General Choi sacrificed more than any taekwondo pioneer. He sacrificed his country, and some would say his honor when he went to North Korea.



Earl Weiss said:


> I disagree that General Choi chose to seperate from KK TKD at least so far as KK TKD is viewed in the modern sense.  Instead, AFAIAC KK TKD chose to seperate from Chang Hon.



General Choi separated from kukki taekwondo when he resigned as KTA President and formed his own private ITF. In contrast, the kukki taekwondo pioneers continued with their inclusive philosophy by having the Oh Do Kwan Jang, GM HYUN Jong Myung, who was teaching the chang hon forms in the ROK Army, participate as one of the members of the KTA Ad Hoc Committee which created the Palgwae, Taeguek and Yudanja poomsae. The chang hon forms have been included in kukki taekwondo through the work of GM Hyun, and the Oh Do Kwan is one of the nine kwans which signed the declaration unifying under the Kukkiwon and its certification and standards. And why wouldn't the oh do kwan join in? Afterall, its interests were capably represented through the efforts of GM HYUN Jong Myung and other oh do kwan seniors, one of whom who served as the WTF Secretary General (GM KIM Bong Sik). An ITF member, Dr. Dong Ja YANG, served as USTU President and PATU President. And the list goes on and on. 



Earl Weiss said:


> (I know that from a technical historical perspective there was a KKW that may have existed before or along with the Chang Hon system and General Choi was involved with it, but I submit that the Modern 1973/74 incarnation along with the WTF is what the KKW is viewed as for the last 40 years as "The KKW" . From the "All encompassing" view I would imagine this is a distinction without difference.)



I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Also the Kukkiwon was founded on November 30, 1972, not 1973/74. The Kukkiwon was being built when General Choi fled the country, when plans for the 1st World Taekwondo Championships and the creation of the World Taekwondo Federation were already out there. Before the creation of the Kukkiwon building, there was the KTA Central Gymnasium, but mastercole knows more about that than me. You have to ask him to explain it. 



Earl Weiss said:


> From the standpoint of one who does not spar with chest protectors and allows punches to the face, for the outside (Non TKD)  observer if I am asked, I want them to know that is not what I do.



Why is that important for them to know?



Earl Weiss said:


> BTW I consider the KKW inclusiveness to be one of  it's great strengths yet at the same time one of it's great weaknesses, while I consider the ITF exclusiveness to be one of it's great strengths and at the same time one of it's great weaknesses.



If it remained that black and white, then maybe. But it is a multi-step process, which I already explained. First step was to get everyone on board with respect to the name (taekwondo). Then it was to get everyone on board with respect to certification (kukkiwon certification). Next was to get everyone on board with respect to uniform and terminology. Next was to get everyone on board with respect to sparring competition, for inclusion in the Olympic Games. Last is to get everyone on board with respect to poomsae. All of the earlier steps have been achieved, for the most part throughout the world, and certainly in Korea. We are now on the latest stage, which is unification with respect to poomsae, through kukkiwon instructor courses, the hanmadang, and the WTF world poomsae championships. 

Competition is what creates standardization. Watch the Olympic Games, everyone pretty much looks like everyone else when they are performing. 

Is it perfect? Of course not. But I can see much more standardization at sparring competition under the WTF rules today, as compared to say, the 1988 Olympic Games. And poomsae standardization is also taking root throughout the world. The pioneers were very wise, highly intelligent people, who had a step by step plan for the development of taekwondo. And their plan is working. Taekwondo is more unified, inclusive and standardized today than at any time in our history. 

How is the ITF doing?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Originally Posted by *Earl Weiss*


From the standpoint of one who does not spar with chest protectors and allows punches to the face, for the outside (Non TKD)  observer if I am asked, I want them to know that is not what I do.
Puunui



Why is that important for them to know?

Because for the most part only those in the WTF world appreciate the nuances of that type of sparring.  (i can appreciate some of the nuances) 

For the rest of the MA world and even the non MA world the general perception is that it looks stupid and establishes bad Self Defense habits.  I share in that perception.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Originally Posted by *Earl Weiss*


BTW I consider the KKW inclusiveness to be one of  it's great strengths yet at the same time one of it's great weaknesses, while I consider the ITF exclusiveness to be one of it's great strengths and at the same time one of it's great weaknesses.




Puunui
If it remained that black and white, then maybe. But it is a multi-step process, ...... We are now on the latest stage, which is unification with respect to poomsae, through kukkiwon instructor courses, the hanmadang, and the WTF world poomsae championships. 


Yes, of course, copying exactly what General Choi was doing 40 years earlier


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Earl Weiss said:


> Because for the most part only those in the WTF world appreciate the nuances of that type of sparring. (i can appreciate some of the nuances)


I'm sure that everyone in the NFL can appreciate the value of wearing protective gear. Boxing, kick boxing, and MMA all use some kind of protective gear. Applying the padding to the hands and feet simply shifts the padding to another part of the body but the effect is the same. 

As for not punching to the face, they don't do that in kyokushin either. 



Earl Weiss said:


> For the rest of the MA world and even the non MA world the general perception is that it looks stupid


This is an ignorant comment. Aside from the fact that you could say that anything looks stupid, this is also a sweeping generalization and false. 

And since when did the non MA world's perception have any bearing on the value of an MA? 



Earl Weiss said:


> and establishes bad Self Defense habits.


Every rule set that allows for any level of protective gear, limits targets and techniques, and awards points produces sparring establishes bad self defense habits in some way or another. You could argue that judo and BJJ establish bad self defense habits because they don't address striking or that boxing produces bad self defense habits because the participants wear gloves (and headgear in amateur boxing) and do not address kicking or grappling.

Everybody who practices an MA has an opinion about how SD-worthy other MAs are. I have seen virtually every MA criticized as being unrealistic or ineffective on this site, including Chang Hon TKD. 



Earl Weiss said:


> I share in that perception.


Some others do and some others don't.


----------



## Cyriacus

To be fair, theres ALOT of people all over the Internet who resent WTF TKD for its Olympic Style Stuff.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Cyriacus said:


> To be fair, theres ALOT of people all over the Internet who resent WTF TKD for its Olympic Style Stuff.


What does that prove: There's ALOT of people all over the internet who like WTF TKD for its Olympic style stuff, so now you're back at square one. 

And why would anyone resent it? Its one thing to say that it isn't their thing, but to resent it indicate a personal problem on their part. Haidong gumdo isn't my thing, but I certainly don't resent it. MMA isn't my thing either, but I don't resent it. In fact, I hope that both arts achieve the same level of sustained success that Kukki taekwondo has.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> Because for the most part only those in the WTF world appreciate the nuances of that type of sparring.  (i can appreciate some of the nuances) For the rest of the MA world and even the non MA world the general perception is that it looks stupid and establishes bad Self Defense habits.  I share in that perception.



I disagree. If that were the case, then kukki taekwondo dojang would be empty, instead of packed to the rafters with students. We may be at a point where there are more kukki taekwondo practitioners in the world than all other martial arts practitioners combined. And if people thought that it looked "stupid", then there wouldn't be so many out there who are copying taekwondo techniques and strategies, much less actually trying to learn them.

Here's another true story for you. I have a student who used to have a commercial dojang directly across the street from a karate dojo. Both schools were on the second floor and both had all glass windows facing each other, so each side to clearly see what the other was doing. One day, two students from the karate school approached my student and asked for private lessons to learn taekwondo kicking techniques, which they watched with awe from across the street. The two karate students were both world champions, but they wanted to add the steps and kicks which were not in their arsenal. So they took private lessons for a few months and blended taekwondo's modern competition training methods into their own. A short while later, I saw some karate competition at the USOC sponsored Titan Games and was surprised to see one of the karate students winning all his matches with steps and a back leg roundhouse kick to the body. 

People may think it is stupid, but perhaps not high level practitioners, like those two karate world champions.

In your neck of the woods, what is the ratio between kukki taekwondo practitioners vs. ITF practitioners?


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Thats no different to the thousands of tkd students who go and train in muay thai to improve punching or the ones who go and do bjj to improve their ground game. Obviously tkd is the place to go to improve kicks. But for every story like yours there is another in reverse. I have a friend who recently swapped from tkd to shotokan, and another who went from tkd to wing chun.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> Yes, of course, copying exactly what General Choi was doing 40 years earlier



Actually the kukki taekwondo pioneers are nothing like General Choi. If anything, General Choi has been reacting to and trying to keep up with kukki taekwondo since he left South Korea. WTF hosts its first World Championships in 1973; ITF hosts its first World Championships in 1974. Kukkiwon is completed in 1972; the ITF's version, the Taekwon-Do Palace I think it is called, gets erected in North Korea after that. And so forth.

But the biggest difference is that the kukki taekwondo pioneers made a concerted effort to work together; General Choi never took that approach. General Choi also started with forms first. He spent a lot of time and effort spreading those chang hon tul, and spent almost no time on sparring competition, even though he wanted to make taekwon-do an Olympic sport as much as the kukki taekwondo pioneers. 

Also, the time frames are a little off as well. The unification efforts of kukki taekwondo began in the 1950's, with those early efforts to unify, first with the Daehan Kongsoodo Hyophwe in 1952 or 1953, and then the Daehan Taesoodo Hyophwe beginning in 1961. 

Finally, the biggest difference is that the kukki taekwondo pioneers were content to let go of their individual identities and kwan relationships in favor of unification. In contrast, the ITF begins and ends with General Choi's name. Even now, with the ITF shattered into so many different pieces, you still cannot help but attempt to give credit to General Choi for everything.


----------



## puunui

Cyriacus said:


> To be fair, theres ALOT of people all over the Internet who resent WTF TKD for its Olympic Style Stuff.



I don't think so. I think it is the same people voicing the same opinion over and over.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

If it is the same people voicing their opinions over and over again then they must have a lot of time on their hands.  I certainly dont agree with most of it, but the internet is absolutely littered with anti tkd sentiment, particularly from other martial artists.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> Thats no different to the thousands of tkd students who go and train in muay thai to improve punching or the ones who go and do bjj to improve their ground game. Obviously tkd is the place to go to improve kicks. But for every story like yours there is another in reverse. I have a friend who recently swapped from tkd to shotokan, and another who went from tkd to wing chun.


Sometimes, I think simply the change of environment helps.  You leave one place and start fresh at another with no baggage.  People go from one art to another for a lot of reasons as well.  

Taekwondo is a gateway art to a great degree.  It's all over the place, easy to get into, not incredibly over the top to advance in, and it isn't presented as being particularly esoteric.  People start off in taekwondo and do it for a year to several years and then want to try something new.  Not everyone wants to stay with the same art for their entire life, or only do one art.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> If it is the same people voicing their opinions over and over again then they must have a lot of time on their hands.  I certainly dont agree with most of it, but the internet is absolutely littered with anti tkd sentiment, particularly from other martial artists.


Some of it is sour grapes, some of it is ignorance, some of it is the momentum of one person starting it and others simply parroting, some of it is personal taste, and some of it is legitimately bad.

The biggest legitimate gripe that I see about taekwondo is in regards to lousy schools.  Which makes sense; they have way more schools.  20% of 5,000 nets you a lot more problem schools than 20% of 500.  The numbers are not hard data; I don't know the exact percentage of lousy vs. not lousy schools nor the number of TKD schools in the US, but you get the idea.

The biggest personal taste gripe that I see is that of kiddie black belts, which while not limited to TKD, the sheer quantity of schools makes TKD stand out in that area.  I say that it is a personal taste gripe because it really is a matter of personal taste.

Neither of those gripes has anything to do with the art itself, the skill of top level taekwondoists, or the self defense value of the art.  Regarding the last, the self defense value depends greatly on where you are training, as some KKW schools place a higher emphasis on it than others do, and on what you perceive self defense to be.


----------



## Gorilla

I live in Las Vegas the ground zero for MMA.  I Know UFC Fighters.  BJJ Champions, Judo BB, MT fighters and they all respect Taekwondo.  I have never heard one say a disparaging remark about our sport.

Both of my kids compete at a high level in WTF Tkd and WKF/NKF Karate.  They are Dan holders in KKW Tkd and Shotokan Karate.

Both Sports require tremendous athletic ability to fight at a high level.  Each sport has helped them improve in competition.  They borrow from each.

Many karate fighters train in Tkd...


----------



## ralphmcpherson

You're exactly right Gorilla, the point I was making is that its not a one way street. All arts have their strong and weak points and for each person who walks into a tkd dojang to improve their kicking, there is probably a tkdist walking into a muay thai  or boxing gym to improve their punching. It makes for better all round martial artists, but it is a two way street.


----------



## Carol

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Some of it is sour grapes, some of it is ignorance, some of it is the momentum of one person starting it and others simply parroting, some of it is personal taste, and some of it is legitimately bad.
> 
> The biggest legitimate gripe that I see about taekwondo is in regards to lousy schools.  Which makes sense; they have way more schools.  20% of 5,000 nets you a lot more problem schools than 20% of 500.  The numbers are not hard data; I don't know the exact percentage of lousy vs. not lousy schools nor the number of TKD schools in the US, but you get the idea.
> 
> The biggest personal taste gripe that I see is that of kiddie black belts, which while not limited to TKD, the sheer quantity of schools makes TKD stand out in that area.  I say that it is a personal taste gripe because it really is a matter of personal taste.
> 
> Neither of those gripes has anything to do with the art itself, the skill of top level taekwondoists, or the self defense value of the art.  Regarding the last, the self defense value depends greatly on where you are training, as some KKW schools place a higher emphasis on it than others do, and on what you perceive self defense to be.




I think this is dead on.  




			
				Gorilla said:
			
		

> I live in Las Vegas the ground zero for MMA. I Know UFC Fighters. BJJ Champions, Judo BB, MT fighters and they all respect Taekwondo. I have never heard one say a disparaging remark about our sport.





			
				Gorilla said:
			
		

> Both of my kids compete at a high level in WTF Tkd and WKF/NKF Karate. They are Dan holders in KKW Tkd and Shotokan Karate.
> 
> Both Sports require tremendous athletic ability to fight at a high level. Each sport has helped them improve in competition. They borrow from each.
> 
> Many karate fighters train in Tkd...




Tal, I don't know if I want to be around to see what happens if someone were to tell your kids they can't fight!


----------



## Earl Weiss

puunui said:


> I disagree. If that were the case, then kukki taekwondo dojang would be empty, instead of packed to the rafters with students.
> 
> , I saw some karate competition at the USOC sponsored Titan Games and was surprised to see one of the karate students winning all his matches with steps and a back leg roundhouse kick to the body.
> 
> People may think it is stupid, but perhaps not high level practitioners, like those two karate world champions.
> 
> In your neck of the woods, what is the ratio between kukki taekwondo practitioners vs. ITF practitioners?



I for one see a lot of merit in some of the WTF footwork and how some of the kicks have been refined for competiton.  I also see people jumping around with their hands down which is an invitation for disaster.   I have had WTF style r\=train with me and feel like their faces were targets. With some training they were able to overcome this deficiency. I myself have trained at a boxing gym to improve my hand skills. So I see the vlaue in exploring other arts. 

As far as numbers go I would say WTF schools outnumber Chang Hon about 100 to one. The WTF  / Kukki Black Belts age 10 and under about 10,000 to one.  Makes me want to Barf when I see 99% of the 10 and under Black Belts. Have had some of these students with their parents come to see about training with me. 99% couldn't stay on the floor with the kids in my class.  Have had plenty of kids not take things seriously, not be allowed to test, disappear and show up at the door a couple months later telling me they got their next belt or two at the WTF / KKW school down the road. 

Are there some fantastic KKW / WTF athletes? Of course. Went to a seminar with Arlene Limas once. Of course she was a great local competitor before she was WTF. 

So, does the fact that the WTF / KKW people outnumber Chang Hon by a factor of 1000 to one bother me? Only to the extent that people see all those kiddie black belts breaking BS boards and parents of same think that this is good stuff. 

Again, there is some good stuff out there. Sadly, not a lot. There are great practitioners and athletes irrespective of organizations. It's the WTF style of sparring. (and yes, sadly there is bad ITF stuff as well, especialy with some more recent trends in competition. 

And while Mr. Sullivan has every right to think my comment is ignorant, it is based on my experience at over 40 non TKD seminars in various locations over  almost 40 years.   Check out videos of real world altercations. The vast majority starty with a punch to the face. (A revent article in BB mag did a limited survey of such altercations and bears this out as does "Real Fighting" written before internet videos became popular. ) 
If you choose to train / spar without this and think it's smart, more power to you.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Master Weiss hit the nail on the head, great post. I know we have discussed this subject to death and we are all sick and tired of it, but one thing I have never understood is if 99% of altercations start with someone throwing a face punch (and most people in the know will tell you this is the case), then how can you have a ruleset with no face punches and then tell students it is preparing them for self defence?


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> I for one see a lot of merit in some of the WTF footwork and how some of the kicks have been refined for competiton.  I also see people jumping around with their hands down which is an invitation for disaster.   I have had WTF style r\=train with me and feel like their faces were targets. With some training they were able to overcome this deficiency.



Most poomsae start with hands down. Most one step sparring starts with hands down, or at least used to originally. Hapkido self defense techniques, especially advanced techniques, begin with hands down. Hands down is not limited to kyorugi under the WTF Competition Rules, and even then it is used primarily in certain situations, when for example, you are in unreachable distance. I admit that many people watch video and that is all they see, but there is a lot going on other than bouncing around with your arms down, which again happens for a specific reason. 

And a lot of it is personal preference. That 15 year old for example, liked to keep his hands up, even when in unreachable distance, something that he was taught in kajukenbo. He couldn't break the habit, it was too ingrained. But all the seniors that he sparred with had their hands up and that didn't save them from getting hit, and it didn't help them hit the 15 year old in the head because after a while they went defensive and started worrying about not getting hit, as opposed to scoring shots, to the head or otherwise. If I remember correctly, most of his matches were whatever to zero, except that golden gloves guy with the one foot height advantage. But if I could have given that student a back kick in those three months, then that guy would have been neutralized as well. But he felt uncomfortable turning his back, another stumbling block/obstacle learned from kajukenbo. He couldn't overcome his feelings of fear, engrained into him from that year of negative reinforcement. "Keep your hands up! Don't turn your back to your opponent!!" and all of that. Those became mental blocks that were hard to overcome. But the reason why he was successful against those kajukenbo people was because those kjkb seniors had even more mental blocks. For example, their kick and punch range was basically the same range, and they assumed that was the way it was for others as well, with their short kicks and long punches. 

As for the merits of "some of the WTF footwork", it isn't just the specific individual footwork itself, but rather it is a conceptual framework to  approach sparring. If you try to only take this or that, then you will be unsuccessful, just like you would be if you only learned arm bar in bjj. You cannot pick and choose but rather you have to understand the conceptual framework of bjj in order to get it to work for you. It is not something you can pick up at a seminar, for example.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> As far as numbers go I would say WTF schools outnumber Chang Hon about 100 to one. The WTF  / Kukki Black Belts age 10 and under about 10,000 to one.  Makes me want to Barf when I see 99% of the 10 and under Black Belts.



And the barfing, it is because you are looking at it from your standards, or are you looking at it from theirs, which is 1st degree is not that high and not that great, which by the way is the same standard in korea. In korea, they don't think in terms of color of your belt, they think in terms of what poom/dan you are. 

I don't know if you feel the same way, but a lot of times, my job as a teacher is helping people understand that they do not have to limit themselves with non-productive attitudes and positions. I feel like I spend all my time freeing slaves from their own ingrained thoughts. Other instructors take a different approach, instead of teaching their students about freedom, they spend their time putting even more chains on. "Sparring doesn't help you in self defense!" "Train for a long time and MAYBE you might get it." "You have to be special to reach grandmaster level." "Black belt is a really high rank." "we do martial ARTS not sport" "my certificate with my signature is worth more than some big organization's certificate", or whatever else they can cram into their student's head. 

Anything that limits you in the future is BS.


----------



## Gorilla

Carol,

Thanks for the kind words....they would probably just smile and walk away.


----------



## puunui

miguksaram said:


> The more I read this thread the more I am reminded of the term "Daja-poo"  The feeling that we have stepped in this crap before.  Thus far there has been nothing new added to this age old argument, which becons the question...why was this started again?  Everyone is constantly challenging someone else's belief/definition of what a martial art is and what a martial sport is.  This is just a @$$ hair away from saying your religion is wrong.  It is apparent that you will not be able to change another's mind.  At best you may clarify why you take the position you do.  However, that only instigates people to challenges towards your view point.  So again...why?



Have you ever heard the story about crabs in a bucket? Many are trying to crawl out, but whenever someone comes close, he gets dragged down by the other crabs. I'm the crab at the rim telling everyone there is more to life than living in a bucket, come out and see the world as you were meant to see it.


----------



## Marcy Shoberg

I think many people have different definitions of taekwondo, just as many people have different definitions of martial art, and different definitions of self-defense. 
At least when a person says "sport" we pretty well know what they are referring to. It's a game you try to win.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

It could also perhaps be the other school of thought that is the crab on the rim of the bucket.


----------



## andyjeffries

ralphmcpherson said:


> Master Weiss hit the nail on the head, great post. I know we have discussed this subject to death and we are all sick and tired of it, but one thing I have never understood is if 99% of altercations start with someone throwing a face punch (and most people in the know will tell you this is the case), then how can you have a ruleset with no face punches and then tell students it is preparing them for self defence?



I don't tell students that WTF sparring is preparing them for self-defence?!  Sure it teaches some of the things they will need - distance, timing, getting used to being hit (hard), dealing with minor injuries and carrying on, confidence, dealing with adrenaline dumps - to give just a quick list off the top of my head.  But it isn't preparing them for self-defence.

We do one steps and self-defence training for that.


----------



## Earl Weiss

puunui said:


> And the barfing, it is because you are looking at it from your standards, or are you looking at it from theirs, which is 1st degree is not that high and not that great, which by the way is the same standard in korea. In korea, they don't think in terms of color of your belt, they think in terms of what poom/dan you are.
> 
> .



Not being in Korea, I am not viewing it from the Korean perspective. No reason I should.  Further, I did not mean to imply that the perceptions I have run across at non TKD events had anything to do with perceptions in Korea.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> Master Weiss hit the nail on the head, great post. I know we have discussed this subject to death and we are all sick and tired of it, but one thing I have never understood is if 99% of altercations start with someone throwing a face punch (and most people in the know will tell you this is the case),


If this figure is hard data, name a source who is "in the know" and where they get their figures.  Is it the same source that provided the '90% of all fights go to the ground,' which is also bogus because the context represented as "all fights" was actually police officers apprehending suspects.  



ralphmcpherson said:


> then how can you have a ruleset with no face punches and then tell students it is preparing them for self defence?


No competitive rule set is preparation for self defense.  They all develop bad habbits of some kind and they all miss the mark in critical areas.  

Secondly, I have never personally heard WTF sparring represented as being analgous to a violent altercation in any school where I have trained.  Practical SD has always been a separate part of the class.

Finally, every guard has its purpose, pros and cons.  Every guard leaves something vital open (high guard leave open your entire lower body and part of your torso, wherein most of your vitals are contained, and the genitalia, which is a popular target).  Every guard does something effective, be it in or out of competition.  Your arms can only guard but so much of your body, so everyone who is involved in any kind of fight sport finds ways to compensate for the uncovered areas.  Usually through avoidance and distance management, the first of which is as important as guard and the second of which is more important than guard.


----------



## miguksaram

puunui said:


> Have you ever heard the story about crabs in a bucket? Many are trying to crawl out, but whenever someone comes close, he gets dragged down by the other crabs. I'm the crab at the rim telling everyone there is more to life than living in a bucket, come out and see the world as you were meant to see it.



Know it, I utilize it as a base standard in my of my FB daily posts.    The overall problem here is that people seem to mistake what one instructor does as a definition of the entire art.  Instructor 'A' only teaches competition aspect of TKD so ALL TKD IS NOTHING BUT SPORT.  

KKW TKD, if taught according to what the pioneers set out to do, will encompass all aspects, sport, tradtional, practical.  However, human nature kicks in and  instructors start to teach what they are best at or enjoy doing the most because that is what they feel more comfortable teaching.  Some love competition so guess what they are going to teach...competition.  Some people only like self defense, so they focus on self defense.  It is all Taekwondo, but at the same time it is only a small portion of the whole.  

These threads become more and more useless because those who do not like WTF TKD sparring will rarely see past that and will dismiss all of what KKW TKD can do.  Those who do like WTF TKD sparring are so busy trying to shoot down the opposition that they even fail to try and understand the rest of what KKW TKD has to offer.  This of course, does not only apply to KKW TKD, but ITF TKD, ATA TKD and so forth. Each of them have a sport, tradition, and practical side to them.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Earl Weiss said:


> And while Mr. Sullivan has every right to think my comment is ignorant, it is based on my experience at over 40 non TKD seminars in various locations over almost 40 years. Check out videos of real world altercations. The vast majority starty with a punch to the face. (A revent article in BB mag did a limited survey of such altercations and bears this out as does "Real Fighting" written before internet videos became popular. )
> If you choose to train / spar without this and think it's smart, more power to you.


Condescending and passive/aggressive while failing to address any of what I said to you.  Boasting about seminar attendance is not addressing points in the discussion, nor is it justification for blatant style bashing.  Besides, I don't evaluate anyone's posts based on their seminar attendance, but on the content of the post itself.  

As for whether or not training in KKW/WTF taekwondo is smart, it always comes down to what you want from the art and who your instructors are.  I've said in this thread something of what my experience with WTF sparring and SD in KKW schools has been.


----------



## chrispillertkd

ralphmcpherson said:


> It could also perhaps be the other school of thought that is the crab on the rim of the bucket.



Oh, such nonsense. Down, crab! Down!



Pax,

Chris


----------



## Earl Weiss

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Condescending and passive/aggressive while failing to address any of what I said to you.  Boasting about seminar attendance is not addressing points in the discussion, nor is it justification for blatant style bashing.  Besides, I don't evaluate anyone's posts based on their seminar attendance, but on the content of the post itself.
> 
> As for whether or not training in KKW/WTF taekwondo is smart, it always comes down to what you want from the art and who your instructors are.  I've said in this thread something of what my experience with WTF sparring and SD in KKW schools has been.



Well, if you feel honesty is passive agresive /  condescending so be it. If you feel I failed to address your points, so much the same. You view my comments about seminar attendance as boasting. I provided the info so you would have some idea as to what formed the basis of my ignorant opinion. 
I have no issue with people getting what they want from an art. I have an issue with them thinking they are getting something when they are deluding themselves. When i see people demonstrating "Power" using BS boards. they are deluding themselves. 

I may be deluding myself but I really think many of the WTF rule set sparrers think they are prepared for the most common real world attack, the Punch to the face. 

I don't think I am so much "anti Style' as I am Anti WTF sparring rule set.   It may surprise you but I am also against certain ITF rules which disallow kicking below the waist.  We drill these techniques to overcome the deficiency. 

I think the main difference is I readily acknowledge the ITF rule set deficiencies vis a vis self defense training and staunch supporters of the WTF rule set seem to pretend this elephant is not in the room.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> Not being in Korea, I am not viewing it from the Korean perspective. No reason I should.



You would or should if you wished to compare those kukki taekwondo poom and dan holders to the standards of their own organization, instead of your own. 




Earl Weiss said:


> Further, I did not mean to imply that the perceptions I have run across at non TKD events had anything to do with perceptions in Korea.



I don't understand what you are trying to say here. My only point was comparing kukki taekwondoin to their own standards, and not your own.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> I may be deluding myself but I really think many of the WTF rule set sparrers think they are prepared for the most common real world attack, the Punch to the face.




Actually I believe it starts with a push to the chest.




Earl Weiss said:


> I don't think I am so much "anti Style' as I am Anti WTF sparring rule set.   It may surprise you but I am also against certain ITF rules which disallow kicking below the waist.  We drill these techniques to overcome the deficiency. I think the main difference is I readily acknowledge the ITF rule set deficiencies vis a vis self defense training and staunch supporters of the WTF rule set seem to pretend this elephant is not in the room.



I think the main difference is that you are willing to judge kukki taekwondo without first understanding it.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Earl Weiss said:


> Well, if you feel honesty is passive agresive /  condescending so be it. If you feel I failed to address your points, so much the same. You view my comments about seminar attendance as boasting. I provided the info so you would have some idea as to what formed the basis of my ignorant opinion.



The only thing that I said was ignorant was this: 



Earl Weiss said:


> For the rest of the MA world and even the non MA world the general perception* is that it looks stupid*



I never broad brushed your opinion or you as being ignorant.  Had you said that this was your opinion, I would not have said that it was ignorant, as presumably, you are aware of your own opinions.

As for the seminar attendance, my point was that I respond to the content of your posts.  How many seminars you have been to in the past doesn't change whatever it is you typed today.  I don't question your experience; I know enough about the subject to know that you're not some troll watching youtube.  But you still made a sweeping generalization and engaged in style bashing, and some of what you say about KKW/WTF taekwondo is simply not accurate.  I don't make sweeping generalizations about ITF taekwondo because I don't practice it.



Earl Weiss said:


> I have no issue with people getting what they want from an art. I have an issue with them thinking they are getting something when they are deluding themselves. When i see people demonstrating "Power" using BS boards. they are deluding themselves.


How do you know what people think that they are getting?  And I'm pretty sure your federation uses BS boards breaking as well.  So to do karate schools, hapkido schools, and a whole slew of other schools.  This is hardly unique to the WTF.



Earl Weiss said:


> I may be deluding myself but I really think many of the WTF rule set sparrers think they are prepared for the most common real world attack, the Punch to the face.


Maybe they are prepared.  Your statement presumes that WTF sparring is the only thing that they're doing.  I can tell you with complete confidence that I am.  And not just because I extrapolate what I 'might do' against that particular circumstance, but because the WTF schools where I have trained included drills and 'sparring' other than just what you see in the Olympics.  Also because I have been on the receiving end of people attempting to punch me in the face and haven't had any trouble defending against it.



Earl Weiss said:


> I don't think I am so much "anti Style' as I am Anti WTF sparring rule set.   It may surprise you but I am also against certain ITF rules which disallow kicking below the waist.  We drill these techniques to overcome the deficiency.


Why would it surprise me?  I have no assumptions about what you think or feel.  I respond to what you type rather than try to guess about what you're thinking.  And I didn't say that you were anti style; I said that you were style bashing.  I might be anti-style of some kind, but because I refrain from bashing it, you would never know.  Anti-style is a personal position.  Style bashing is an act one engages in.



Earl Weiss said:


> I think the main difference is I readily acknowledge the ITF rule set deficiencies vis a vis self defense training and staunch supporters of the WTF rule set seem to pretend this elephant is not in the room.


Perhaps you do, but since you don't train in Kukki taekwondo, you are guessing regarding what staunch supporters think on the subject or what kind of training that they may receive at their dojang.  

Incidentally, plenty that I know readily acknowledge, rightly or wrongly, that there are areas that are not adequately addressed in Kukki taekwondo.  Rather than complain about it or treat it as some elephant in the room, they go and seek out a means to address it.  Judo doesn't address many self defense areas.  Like striking.  It isn't an elephant in the room; judoka who want to strike go and crosstrain somewhere that focuses on striking.

I have said it before and will say it again: it all comes down to the individual school and instructor.  Simply having an org membership does not preclude a school from being great or prevent it from being lousy.  Some schools are more holistic than others and others are more focused in a particular area than others.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Out of curiosity, how does this statement:



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I don't make sweeping generalizations about ITF taekwondo because I don't practice it.



get reconciled with this statement:


> And I'm pretty sure your federation uses BS boards breaking as well.



That sounds like a pretty sweeping generalization to me about a style you don't practice (or an organization you don't belong to at the very least).

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Jaeimseu

chrispillertkd said:


> Out of curiosity, how does this statement:
> 
> 
> 
> get reconciled with this statement:
> 
> 
> That sounds like a pretty sweeping generalization to me about a style you don't practice (or an organization you don't belong to at the very least).
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



I didn't read his statement as a sweeping generalization. I thought he was saying that "BS" boards (I assume that means the thin "demo" style boards) could be found in ITF schools, as well as in non-taekwondo schools. I think you may be reading too much into his statement, or you may be reaching a bit. That's just the way I read it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Originally Posted by *Earl Weiss*


Further, I did not mean to imply that the perceptions I have run across at non TKD events had anything to do with perceptions in Korea.
Puunui



I don't understand what you are trying to say here. My only point was comparing kukki taekwondoin to their own standards, and not your own.

I am saying that I am not usibng perceptions from Korea. For those who do not know where I am  I am relating perceptions I have run across in the USA.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Originally Posted by *Earl Weiss*

I may be deluding myself but I really think many of the WTF rule set sparrers think they are prepared for the most common real world attack, the Punch to the face.

Puunui

Actually I believe it starts with a push to the chest.

Must be a Hawaii thing.


----------



## Earl Weiss

puunui said:


> I think the main difference is that you are willing to judge kukki taekwondo without first understanding it.



IO hoped I made it clear i am judging WTF sparring not KK TKD. 

What is it about  not allowing punches to the head I don't understand?


----------



## Earl Weiss

"
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Originally Posted by *Earl Weiss*

I have no issue with people getting what they want from an art. I have an issue with them thinking they are getting something when they are deluding themselves. When i see people demonstrating "Power" using BS boards. they are deluding themselves.

Mr. Sullivan,
How do you know what people think that they are getting?  And I'm pretty sure your federation uses BS boards breaking as well."

Can I say absolutely positively it never happened? Of course not. I can say absolutley poistively if the powers that be found out they'd get ripped a new one.    ( Also, Side fist and palm strikes are disallowed for power breaks. )

A while back I saw a new TKD school was opening and they were going to have a demo.  I figured I'd watch and no one would know who I was . So, I came as it was in progress. (As it happened the owner had met me as had an instructor in the audience.  As they commenced their BS Board breaking the obne in the audience turned to me and said "I know, you use real boards." 

A student of mine is teaching at another school now. Interesting hybrid using KKW patterns but ITF style sparring.   He said "you know what kind of boards they are using?


----------



## chrispillertkd

Jaeimseu said:


> I didn't read his statement as a sweeping generalization. I thought he was saying that "BS" boards (I assume that means the thin "demo" style boards) could be found in ITF schools, as well as in non-taekwondo schools. I think you may be reading too much into his statement, or you may be reaching a bit. That's just the way I read it.



I'd agree with you _if_ Daniel had said "BS boards are used by some ITF school, as well as non-Taekwon-Do schools." But he didn't, did he? He referred to Master Weiss' "organization." You don't say an "organization" _does_ something if you mean a few schools within an oranization does something. If he'd like to go back and change his statement he can, but as it stands he made a _very_ sweeping generalization directly after saying Master Weiss did so.

What's sauce for the goose and all that 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Earl Weiss said:


> I have no issue with people getting what they want from an art. I have an issue with them thinking they are getting something when they are deluding themselves.



Very good statement!  This is an appropriate observation on many levels as well.


----------



## jks9199

Folks, let's keep it friendly.  Leave the shots and snipes out, OK?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

jks9199 said:


> Folks, let's keep it friendly. Leave the shots and snipes out, OK?



I must have missed something?


----------



## Gorilla

This is the best thread we have had for months....the BBS had become very boring...I am very glad that Puunnui and Kong Soo do are posting again and everyone else who adds to the discussion....I hope people aren't whining  again...


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> I'd agree with you _if_ Daniel had said "BS boards are used by some ITF school, as well as non-Taekwon-Do schools." But he didn't, did he? He referred to Master Weiss' "organization." You don't say an "organization" _does_ something if you mean a few schools within an oranization does something. If he'd like to go back and change his statement he can,


Jaeimseu got it easily enough.  But for your benefit, and that of anyone else who isn't sure, I'm happy to rephrase it.  

I'm pretty sure schools using BS boards happens in your federation. Happens with schools in karate, hapkido, and a whole slew of schools in other striking arts as well.  This is hardly unique to the WTF.



Jaeimseu said:


> Chris 			 		 	  I didn't read his statement as a sweeping generalization. I thought he  was saying that "BS" boards (I assume that means the thin "demo" style  boards) could be found in ITF schools, as well as in non-taekwondo  schools. I think you may be reading too much into his statement, or you  may be reaching a bit. That's just the way I read it.


Of course you read it that way; you read it in the spirit in which it was intended.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Earl Weiss said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Earl Weiss said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no issue with people getting what they want from an art. I have  an issue with them thinking they are getting something when they are  deluding themselves. When i see people demonstrating "Power" using BS  boards. they are deluding themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know what people think that they are getting?  And I'm pretty sure your federation uses BS boards breaking as well."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can I say absolutely positively it never happened? Of course not. I can say absolutley poistively if the powers that be found out they'd get ripped a new one.    ( Also, Side fist and palm strikes are disallowed for power breaks.)
Click to expand...

Which powers that be?  I am not clear as to which federation you are a part of due to posts you made previously about one organization not allowing you membership simultaneously in another.  I had thought that you were no longer ITF, but still practicing the same curriculum.  



Earl Weiss said:


> A while back I saw a new TKD school was opening and they were going to have a demo.  I figured I'd watch and no one would know who I was . So, I came as it was in progress. (As it happened the owner had met me as had an instructor in the audience.  As they commenced their BS Board breaking the obne in the audience turned to me and said "I know, you use real boards."
> 
> A student of mine is teaching at another school now. Interesting hybrid using KKW patterns but ITF style sparring.   He said "you know what kind of boards they are using?


Were the boards in question at the demo thin, precut, or otherwise rigged to break?  And was the "obne" (not sure what you mean by that) in the audience your student mentioned in the next paragraph?  The way your narrative reads, it is unclear as to whether or not they are separate conversations.

The hybrid curriculum (taekguk pumse and ITF sparring) probably works quite well.  It isn't my federation, but I do like ITF sparring.  Lots of good stuff there.

How is his school doing?


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Of course you read it that way; you read it in the spirit in which it was intended.



Then I'm sure you'll remember this when people make sweeping generalizations about the WTF or KKW, right? Because obviously the spirit of their posts will mean they refer to individual schools, not those organizations as a whole. Regardless of what they actually write 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Then I'm sure you'll remember this when people make sweeping generalizations about the WTF or KKW, right?  Because obviously the spirit of their posts will mean they refer to individual schools, not those organizations as a whole. Regardless of what they actually write
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



Depends on the context, Chris.  What they actually type is rather important.

Master Weiss used definitive language: 'all MA-ists and non MA-ists'.  He made it pretty clear in his response that he stood by his comments and made no attempt to rephrase, so it _seems_ that I did take in the spirit in which it was intended.  

Had he chosen to make some clarification, or should he choose to, I will happily say, 'my bad' and thank him for clarifying.  I do it with others here and they with me and feathers aren't ruffled.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Depends on the context, Chris. What they actually type is rather important.



Which is exactly my point. Which is also why I posted your two obviously conflicting statements (about how one shouldn't make sweeping generalizations and then how you made a sweeping generalization).



> Master Weiss used definitive language: 'all MA-ists and non MA-ists'. He made it pretty clear in his response that he stood by his comments and made no attempt to rephrase, so it _seems_ that I did take in the spirit in which it was intended.



You also used pretty definitive language in your post. I'm just glad that you've walked back your comment since if you didn't your post would've been self-contradictory.



> Had he chosen to make some clarification, or should he choose to, I will happily say, 'my bad' and thank him for clarifying. I do it with others here and they with me and feathers aren't ruffled.



I don't think there are any feathers ruffled now. At least not on my part  I actually thought your contradicting yourself was rather amusing!

Pax,

Chris


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Gorilla said:


> This is the best thread we have had for months....the BBS had become very boring...I am very glad that Puunnui and Kong Soo do are posting again and everyone else who adds to the discussion....I hope people aren't whining  again...


I agree, Gorilla, this has been a great thread. Im sure there will be some though saying "here we go again, havent we done this subject to death?". The fact this thread has gone for 12 pages proves its a subject people are quite passionate about.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Which powers that be?  I am not clear as to which federation you are a part of due to posts you made previously about one organization not allowing you membership simultaneously in another.  I had thought that you were no longer ITF, but still practicing the same curriculum.
> 
> No longer with the ITF . Although I do not know of any of the powers in the ITF V that would sanction the use of the BS boards for power breaks. This is part of competition and anf the standard is maintained.  I am with the USTF . Senior GM Sereff and the 3 GM Board would be "Displeased" to say the least.
> 
> 
> Were the boards in question at the demo thin, precut, or otherwise rigged to break?  And was the "obne" (not sure what you mean by that) in the audience your student mentioned in the next paragraph?  The way your narrative reads, it is unclear as to whether or not they are separate conversations.
> 
> The school owner was acquainted with me because his former instructor had me come in to do a Chang Hon pattern seminar and he was there.  The other instructor in the audience had invited me to his school to observe a  test. He was the one who said "I know you use real boards."
> 
> 
> How is his school doing?



His school folded after a year. I am still friendly with his now former instructor whom he went into competition with .


----------



## Earl Weiss

Daniel Sullivan said:


> If this figure is hard data, name a source who is "in the know" and where they get their figures.  Is it the same source that provided the '90% of all fights go to the ground,' which is also bogus because the context represented as "all fights" was actually police officers apprehending suspects.
> 
> 
> .



New thread started.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Master Weiss used definitive language: 'all MA-ists and non MA-ists'.  He made it pretty clear in his response that he stood by his comments and made no attempt to rephrase, so it _seems_ that I did take in the spirit in which it was intended.
> 
> Had he chosen to make some clarification, or should he choose to, I will happily say, 'my bad' and thank him for clarifying.  I do it with others here and they with me and feathers aren't ruffled.



What I said was (post #126

"
Because for the most part only those in the WTF world appreciate the nuances of that type of sparring.  (i can appreciate some of the nuances) 

For the rest of the MA world and even the non MA world the general perception is that it looks stupid and establishes bad Self Defense habits.  I share in that perception."

Note the "For the most part" and "General Perception"  It is definitevely qualified

I stand by that characterization.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Never are these "nuances" more evident than during the olympics. If I had a dollar for every one of my mates who will say to me during the olympics "why do they just stand there bouncing" or "why dont they punch" or "why are their hands by their sides" etc, I'd be a millionaire. Im not knocking it, but its a ruleset only really appreciated by those that understand the finer points of the ruleset.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> Never are these "nuances" more evident than during the olympics. If I had a dollar for every one of my mates who will say to me during the olympics "why do they just stand there bouncing" or "why dont they punch" or "why are their hands by their sides" etc, I'd be a millionaire. Im not knocking it, but its a ruleset only really appreciated by those that understand the finer points of the ruleset.


Do your mates ask similar questions of judo or wrestling (real wrestling, not WWE)?  Or do they ask why in boxing why they don't do any grappling?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Earl Weiss said:


> What I said was (post #126
> 
> "
> Because for the most part only those in the WTF world appreciate the nuances of that type of sparring.  (i can appreciate some of the nuances)


This I would agree with you on, though I also will say that this is true of most fight sports.  



Earl Weiss said:


> For the rest of the MA world and even the non MA world the general perception is *that it looks stupid* and establishes bad Self Defense habits.  I share in that perception."
> 
> Note the "For the most part" and "General Perception"  It is definitevely qualified
> 
> I stand by that characterization.


I will give you that and retract the sweeping generalization statement.  Though I still stand by my comment that that is not the general perception amongst either group, though that perception does exist, and that the bolded part is style bashing.  If you or others do not feel that it is, then fine; I'm not interested in pressing the issue further.

So far as I have seen (and I have seen this opinion expressed by far to many others both on and off the web for to be just me), the non MA world's perception is that white pajamas = karate/judo/taekwondo and that the guy with the black belt knows what he's doing.  The non MA world doesn't scrutinize taekwondo on enough of a technical level to either differentiate it from karate or to have an opinion of how SD worthy or aesthetically pleasing it may or may not be.

Most in the non MA world view MA as an activity for kids, teens, and young adults and do not have enough interest in it to care how SD worthy it is or what it looks like.

As for the opinion of how SD worthy it is within the MA world, I think that it is more balanced than you are characterizing it.  Most in the MA world know that each art has its nuances and peculiarities that make more sense to people who practice that particular art.  I also think that most of those who post negatively about KKW taekwondo specifically or taekwondo in general represent a very vocal minority.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Earl Weiss said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which powers that be?  I am not clear as to which federation you are a  part of due to posts you made previously about one organization not  allowing you membership simultaneously in another.  I had thought that  you were no longer ITF, but still practicing the same curriculum.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No longer with the ITF . Although I do not know of any of the powers in  the ITF V that would sanction the use of the BS boards for power breaks.  This is part of competition and anf the standard is maintained.  I am  with the USTF . Senior GM Sereff and the 3 GM Board would be  "Displeased" to say the least.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification. Now, do you view the breaking of boards, precut/demo or no, to be of any value in SD training?  No right or wrong answer, but if the answer is 'no' then as far as SD goes, it really doesn't matter if the boards are BS or not.

Personally, I do not believe that board breaking has any SD value at all, though I do believe that it has value as a training tool and as an attention getter at demos.  And excepting children under ten and speed breaking, I feel that the use of overly thin boards negates that value on both counts.



Earl Weiss said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Were the boards in question at the demo thin, precut, or otherwise  rigged to break?  And was the "obne" (not sure what you mean by that) in  the audience your student mentioned in the next paragraph?  The way  your narrative reads, it is unclear as to whether or not they are  separate conversations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The school owner was acquainted with me because his former instructor  had me come in to do a Chang Hon pattern seminar and he was there.  The  other instructor in the audience had invited me to his school to observe  a  test. He was the one who said "I know you use real boards."
Click to expand...

What about the boards in the demo?




Earl Weiss said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is his school doing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> His school folded after a year. I am still friendly with his now former instructor whom he went into competition with.
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear that.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Thanks for the clarification. Now, do you view the breaking of boards, precut/demo or no, to be of any value in SD training?
> 
> Personally, I do not believe that board breaking has any SD value at all, though I do believe that it has value as a training tool and as an attention getter at demos.  And excepting children under ten and speed breaking, I feel that the use of overly thin boards negates that value on both counts.
> 
> 
> What about the boards in the demo?
> 
> 
> Sorry to hear that.



I believe it has a Self Defense Value. GM Sereff has a saying. I forget how it goes butm it is something like "The value of board breaking is in the courage to attempt".   
If you are breaking a sufficient numer of real board there is a known danger of injury. This known danger is apparent in Self defense situations.  Irrespective of this danger yuour mind must be ready to do what needs to be done and do it irrespective of the potentila for injury. 

The boards in that schools grand opening were BS boards. That is why the instructor in the audience turned to me and said "I know you break real boards."


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> I believe it has a Self Defense Value. GM Sereff has a saying. I forget how it goes butm it is something like "The value of board breaking is in the courage to attempt".
> If you are breaking a sufficient numer of real board there is a known danger of injury. This known danger is apparent in Self defense situations.  Irrespective of this danger yuour mind must be ready to do what needs to be done and do it irrespective of the potentila for injury.




that is a different mindset and reaction from "traditional" reasons for board, tile and/or brick breaking, which was a test to see the quality of one's makiwara and other training. In the past, no one would think about doing any kind of breaking without first conditioning their striking weapons in some fashion. Doing breaking without any of that type of training is akin to entering a sparring competition by training in poomsae.


----------



## puunui

chrispillertkd said:


> I don't think there are any feathers ruffled now. At least not on my part  I actually thought your contradicting yourself was rather amusing!



He didn't contradict himself.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> I am saying that I am not usibng perceptions from Korea. For those who do not know where I am  I am relating perceptions I have run across in the USA.



I'm not talking about perceptions, I am talking about evaluating kukki taekwondo according to kukki taekwondo standards, not looking at kukki taekwondo using some other organization's or your own personal standards.


----------



## puunui

Earl Weiss said:


> Must be a Hawaii thing.



Not according to peyton quinn in his book Real Fighting.


----------



## puunui

chrispillertkd said:


> I'd agree with you _if_ Daniel had said "BS boards are used by some ITF school, as well as non-Taekwon-Do schools." But he didn't, did he? He referred to Master Weiss' "organization."



Master Weiss is not a member of any ITF.


----------



## chrispillertkd

:lol:


----------



## puunui

All this sport vs. martial arts stuff came around during the 1970's, when taekwondo instructors were flooding into the US by the hundreds every year, forever changing the landscape of the martial arts in America. These instructors had that asian face and name, pretty certificates from korea with large numbers on them, in addition to citations, plaques, international master instructor titles, and it was very difficult to compete with that. One of the ways was to focus on the sport vs. martial art thing, because many korean born instructors were fully supportive of the directive and push to get taekwondo into the Olympics. I think these anti sport campaigns back then were at least a little successful, because there was that large group of teenaged or early 20's males that was focused on self defense. 

Today, the market for taekwondo is focused mainly on children and/or families who can train together. So while some people still try to focus on the anti sport angle as a means of market differentiation, for the most part it does not affect taekwondo schools, especially those located in neighborhoods with middle class or higher demographics. The parents who live in these neighborhoods are not interested so much in self defense, at least not at the level of intensity that the teenagers and young 20s types were in the 70s. Self defense training? They say "yeah sure", why not, but that isn't the primary or even the secondary reason why they signed up their kids or themselves. 

And the instructors from korea keep coming, by the hundreds, every year. In the past, there may have been some validity in the qualifications of some who came over. But not for the instructors who are coming today. The ones who are coming from korea today usually are first recruited by another older more established instructor, to help teach their students. And after a few years, these established instructor help the new instructor open their own dojang in a location that will not affect business. These new instructors coming today get a first class education on how to run a very very successful dojang operation and already made the decision as to whether the commercial dojang lifestyle is right for them. It is hard to say no when you get paid a lot of money to teach what you have grown up with your whole life. These new instructors, more often than not, are highly skilled former world and olympic champions, who received college scholarships because of taekwondo. They are smart, hard working, and motivated, and the things that made them champions serve them well in running their own businesses. 

Add to that are the sons and daughters of those instructors who came in the 70's and 80's. Their children grew up in the dojang, went to some of the best colleges in the nation, and now are taking their father's dojang to warp speed levels of achievement. One famous senior told me recently, my first son went to harvard law school and makes $250k/year, my second son got a Ph.D from Stanford and makes $150k per year. My third son went to a college on the east coast and makes $1 million per year teaching taekwondo. The third son is not even 30 yet. 

All these instructors network and have meetings with other highly successful dojang operators throughout the country, and they get together specifically to get new ideas and to rejuvenate their spirits, because like every one else, they get down in the dumps sometimes. 

Those who teach other martial arts in a commercial setting have no doubt felt the impact of the continuing flood of korean born instructors who saturate and dominate the market with their impeccable credentials, large brand new beautiful schools and a work ethic that is difficult to overcome. I would be seriously afraid if I were not a part of this network, especially in these lean economic times. 

Soon the only place where you will hear anything about "sport vs. self defense" will be in internet message boards such as these. Learning kukki taekwondo from one of these types of instructors is like going to walmart or target, with all of the mom and pop stores closing left and right. You get the same high quality goods, with a better selection, and they atmosphere is nicer and cleaner and, well, just better. 

So sport not so good for self defense? Maybe. But most students and their parents in a taekwondo dojang today will tell you "so what".


----------



## Kong Soo Do

puunui said:


> All this sport vs. martial arts stuff came around during the 1970's, when taekwondo instructors were flooding into the US by the hundreds every year, forever changing the landscape of the martial arts in America. These instructors had that asian face and name, pretty certificates from korea with large numbers on them, in addition to citations, plaques, international master instructor titles, and it was very difficult to compete with that. One of the ways was to focus on the sport vs. martial art thing, because many korean born instructors were fully supportive of the directive and push to get taekwondo into the Olympics. I think these anti sport campaigns back then were at least a little successful, because there was that large group of teenaged or early 20's males that was focused on self defense.



This is your opinion and you of course are entitled to have it.  I think people in general were enamored with the, as you put it 'Asian faces'.  As time continued however, this was seen to be more of a stereotype than anything else.  Not all Asian looking people are kung fu/karate masters as was once the stereotype.  Yes, many did have wonderful certificates as well.  And many were legitimate.  



> In the past, there may have been some validity in the qualifications of some who came over.



Agreed, it would be fair to say that not all were legitimate.  Some were 'airport' promotions.  As the internet became available it became easier to differentiate between qualified instructors and ones that weren't.  That is a good thing.

With respect, you focus so much of your time hating on SD for a TKD school.  Like it is the enemy of KKW TKD.  It isn't at all.  SD has a place in TKD just as does sport and this allows a person to take TKD regardless of their interest and allows them to focus on whatever their personal goal(s) are.  The only problem that will surface is when a school for one teaching methodology claims to cover the other.  Then there is an issue that needs to be addressed for the safety of the student(s).



> Today, the market for taekwondo is focused mainly on children and/or  families who can train together. So while some people still try to focus  on the anti sport angle as a means of market differentiation, for the  most part it does not affect taekwondo schools, especially those located  in neighborhoods with middle class or higher demographics. The parents  who live in these neighborhoods are not interested so much in self  defense, at least not at the level of intensity that the teenagers and  young 20s types were in the 70s. Self defense training? They say "yeah  sure", why not, but that isn't the primary or even the secondary reason  why they signed up their kids or themselves.



I think it is fantastic for a family to turn off the T.V. and take up any activity that brings them together.  But again, the anti-SD sentiment is there on your part.  Maybe they want sport, that's great.  Maybe they want SD, that's great.  Maybe they don't care either way and just want to get off the couch, that's also great.  But you seem to want to speak for everyone.  You can't.  

Perhaps another way to look at it, apart from your perspective is that sport schools are more abundant and therefore may be the only option available in a particular area.  So it is either a sport school or Dancing with the Stars as a choice.  That is a viable consideration.



> One famous senior told me recently, my first son went to harvard law  school and makes $250k/year, my second son got a Ph.D from Stanford and  makes $150k per year. My third son went to a college on the east coast  and makes $1 million per year teaching taekwondo. The third son is not  even 30 yet.



I (and I think others as well based on their comments) see a trend where you keep equating $ with quality instruction.  Although it _can_ be an indicator, it isn't the best one.  Indeed, one can operate a pure '_McDojang/belt mill_' with no regard for the student and make a lot of money.  That doesn't mean they offer a quality product or have quality instruction.  It could merely pander to the lower base by tickling their ego-fancy i.e. here's another belt for you and this one has stripes.

The measure of an instructor is the quality of his/her students.  Can they successfully compete if it is a sport school?  Can they successfully defend themselves if it is a SD school?  This is by far more important that the type of car the instructor drives in my opinion.  

Quality is not dependent on quantity or $.



> Those who teach other martial arts in a commercial setting have no doubt  felt the impact of the continuing flood of korean born instructors who  saturate and dominate the market with their impeccable credentials,  large brand new beautiful schools and a work ethic that is difficult to  overcome. I would be seriously afraid if I were not a part of this  network, especially in these lean economic times.



I cannot expound on other areas, but within my own area I've seen a half dozen TKD schools close in the last few years.  The ones here that have been around for decades, other than my own are an Aikido school, three Ueichi Ryu schools, one Bushido school and several BJJ and/or MMA schools.  There are some TKD schools with staying power in the area to be sure, some large and well known.  But I just haven't seen them adversely affect the other schools or my own.  And I wish all of them the very best success.



> Soon the only place where you will hear anything about "sport vs. self  defense" will be in internet message boards such as these. Learning  kukki taekwondo from one of these types of instructors is like going to  walmart or target, with all of the mom and pop stores closing left and  right. You get the same high quality goods, with a better selection, and  they atmosphere is nicer and cleaner and, well, just better.



Actually it remains beyond just the internet.  Which is why I have a waiting list.  I would not consider the schools I mentioned above as mom & pop stores, and they've been around for decades here.  

I understand you're KKW TKD and want to put it in the best light possible.  But perhaps putting it on a pedestal while simultaneously trying to bad mouth or put down other arts isn't the best approach.  Is there not room for everyone?  Can we not offer the student choices in their martial education.  Not everyone wants, needs or desires sport methodology.  It is there if they want it, and other options are available if they desire it.

Celebrate TKD for ALL it can offer.  Don't elevate one aspect by putting the rest down.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

puunui said:


> Learning kukki taekwondo from one of these types of instructors is like going to walmart or target, with all of the mom and pop stores closing left and right. You get the same high quality goods, with a better selection, and they atmosphere is nicer and cleaner and, well, just better.


I'm with you right up to this point.  I find such stores to be fairly bereft of high quality goods outside of maybe consumer electronics, which are pretty much the same level of quality regardless of the retailer.  I have never found either walmart or target to be overly friendly or inviting, walmart in particular.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Kong Soo Do said:


> I understand you're KKW TKD and want to put it in the best light possible.  But perhaps putting it on a pedestal while simultaneously trying to bad mouth or put down other arts isn't the best approach.  Is there not room for everyone?  Can we not offer the student choices in their martial education.  Not everyone wants, needs or desires sport methodology.  It is there if they want it, and other options are available if they desire it.
> 
> Celebrate TKD for ALL it can offer.  Don't elevate one aspect by putting the rest down.


Where did he put the other arts down?  He's talking about trends with customer demand.  Customers don't go hunting for kendo schools.  Wish they did, but they don't.  Likewise, SD focused clubs in middle class and affluent areas are simply not popular.  That doesn't diminish what they do; it simply means middle class and affluent areas are hard demographics for that type of school.  Partly because middle class and affluent neighborhoods tend to be environments where practical SD is not an obvious need, while after school programs, fitness, and self improvement are, and most KKW and ATA schools meet those particular needs very well.

When my area was more rural and the surrounding areas less affluent, motorcycle shops were fairly common.  Now that the area has become much more affluent, most of them are gone excepting the Harley/Yamaha dealer, Battley Cycles, who mainly sells Harleys.  Why?  Mainly because Harley Davidson has meticulously cultivated the affluent middle aged market.  The lack of other brand presence is not a reflection of their quality but rather a reflection of a shift in demographics.  

If I go up to Frederick, I have my pick of brands; Kawasaki, Triumph, Yamaha, Suzuki, Harley Davidson, and even Kymco.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I'm with you right up to this point.  I find such stores to be fairly bereft of high quality goods outside of maybe consumer electronics, which are pretty much the same level of quality regardless of the retailer.  I have never found either walmart or target to be overly friendly or inviting, walmart in particular.



The "high quality goods" that I am talking about (which may or may not be high quality) are the kind that would be found in a mom and pop store. Fresh milk for example.


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Where did he put the other arts down?  He's talking about trends with customer demand.



Exactly.


----------



## puunui

Kong Soo Do said:


> With respect, you focus so much of your time hating on SD for a TKD school.



I don't focus any time on hating self defense for a taekwondo school. What I don't appreciate is having opinions pass as fact and misinformation shoved into the face of taekwondoin by the opinionated who seem to shrink away and hide when facts are presented. 




Kong Soo Do said:


> Like it is the enemy of KKW TKD.  It isn't at all.



Self defense isn't the enemy of kukki taekwondo; ignorance and those who spread it are. 




Kong Soo Do said:


> But you seem to want to speak for everyone.  You can't.



I don't speak for everyone nor do I pretend to. Instead, what I do is publicly defend and support those who are constantly falsely accused and maligned on internet forums such as this, especially from those who do not practice taekwondo, and never did. 



Kong Soo Do said:


> Perhaps another way to look at it, apart from your perspective is that sport schools are more abundant and therefore may be the only option available in a particular area.  So it is either a sport school or Dancing with the Stars as a choice.  That is a viable consideration.



I never said sport schools are more abundant. 



Kong Soo Do said:


> I (and I think others as well based on their comments) see a trend where you keep equating $ with quality instruction.



Wrong again. I equate financially successful dojang with understanding and catering to what people want. And what they don't want is some sort of hard core self defense program which focuses on paranoid thinking and ugly situations. Instead they want to feel good about themselves and their children and learn things that will make them and their children better, more positive people. 




Kong Soo Do said:


> Indeed, one can operate a pure '_McDojang/belt mill_' with no regard for the student and make a lot of money.  That doesn't mean they offer a quality product or have quality instruction.  It could merely pander to the lower base by tickling their ego-fancy i.e. here's another belt for you and this one has stripes.



I disagree with the idea that making a lot of money equates with having no regard for the student. What martial arts instructors teach are life skills that students carry with them long after they stopped physically training. Let's face it, 95% or more of students eventually quit, and their physical skills decline, almost to the point of zero. But what they do carry with them long afterwards are the positive attitudes and good habits (not to mention good memories) that stay with them for the rest of their lives.

 I had lunch with one of my long time students on Sunday. He was one of the people that helped me translate the Modern History book. He is a major in the US Army now and was in town with his family for the week. He told me that the training we did made army training feel like nothing, that the discipline and respectful attitudes developed during his time in the martial arts serve him well in his personal life and his army life. My first taekwondo teacher was also eating at the restaurant and came by the table to say hello. I introduced him to my student, telling him that this was his taekwondo grandson. My teacher smiled and it was a moment neither will forget. It is moments like these that we carry with us that make us better people. Maybe his side kick or flexibility isn't what it used to be, and perhaps there are those out there who would take his dan rank away. But who really cares about that stuff? The point is, he is a better person because of taekwondo. We all are, my teacher, my student as well as myself. That is what is important. 



Kong Soo Do said:


> The measure of an instructor is the quality of his/her students.



But how is that quality measured? The longer and farther down the road I travel, the broader and wider my measure of quality.




Kong Soo Do said:


> Quality is not dependent on quantity or $.



Again, what quantity and money do measure is what people want from their martial arts training. Obviously, these large martial arts schools are doing something right, if they can attract and keep hundreds and thousands of students under their roof.  




Kong Soo Do said:


> But perhaps putting it on a pedestal while simultaneously trying to bad mouth or put down other arts isn't the best approach.  Is there not room for everyone?  Can we not offer the student choices in their martial education.  Not everyone wants, needs or desires sport methodology.  It is there if they want it, and other options are available if they desire it.



Like I said, if you wish to carve out a tiny niche for yourself, go for it. No one will say anything about it.




Kong Soo Do said:


> Celebrate TKD for ALL it can offer.  Don't elevate one aspect by putting the rest down.



I do celebrate taekwondo for all it can offer, and the fact that you can't see that, is your problem, not mine.


----------



## Tez3

Perhaps you should add a third option, a game of cards. Just watching the Olympic matches, the action keeps getting stopped because coaches are holding up cards,one coach shows one then the other, the contestants are standing around with the referee while videos are looked at and various coaches are showing cards. The commentator has just suggested this is perhaps more like a game of poker. Little action lots of standing around. This isn't a good look guys.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Tez3 said:


> Perhaps you should add a third option, a game of cards. Just watching the Olympic matches, the action keeps getting stopped because coaches are holding up cards,one coach shows one then the other, the contestants are standing around with the referee while videos are looked at and various coaches are showing cards. The commentator has just suggested this is perhaps more like a game of poker. Little action lots of standing around. This isn't a good look guys.


Thats not good to hear tez. Ive just put the olympics on tv and Im hoping to see some tkd. I was really hoping it would be entertaining,


----------



## Tez3

ralphmcpherson said:


> Thats not good to hear tez. Ive just put the olympics on tv and Im hoping to see some tkd. I was really hoping it would be entertaining,



To be honest it's on live now but I've switched it to the athletics, the decathon is starting. It may be just the ones I saw and the rest are fine but it was disappointing. I'm not a fan of Olympic TKD admittedly but wanted to watch some as I do appreciate good kicking. One a side note though I've discovered handball which is like martial arts netball!


----------



## Gnarlie

Tez3 said:


> Perhaps you should add a third option, a game of cards. Just watching the Olympic matches, the action keeps getting stopped because coaches are holding up cards,one coach shows one then the other, the contestants are standing around with the referee while videos are looked at and various coaches are showing cards. The commentator has just suggested this is perhaps more like a game of poker. Little action lots of standing around. This isn't a good look guys.



True.  You give competitors the option of a video replay to ensure fairer scoring, and then what?   Everybody uses it, every single time, rather than waste the opportunity.  Bring on the electronic head gear.  And proper contact to the head.  Too much surfing around with one leg in the air looking for the light head contact. 

I can always judge by the comments of my family how much the spectator entertainment value of TKD has changed since the last Olympic outing.   For as long as they are asking questions like "why did that just happen?", and "why didn't that score?",  and "why aren't they doing anything?", we're not looking as good as we need to be.  I'm not sure it can ever be as entertaining for the crowd as it is for the players, but we continue to evolve and develop the scoring technology and rules to maximise entertainment value.   Although I wonder if we can evolve quickly enough to deal with the ever-decreasing public attention span. 

Oh well, it's a good thing I love Taekwondo unconditionally, with all its flaws.  I'll still be there for you when all's said and done TKD.   You can come crying to me, and we'll eat ice cream straight from the tub together on the couch watching 'Best of the Best'. 

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## chrispillertkd

Tez3 said:


> Perhaps you should add a third option, a game of cards. Just watching the Olympic matches, the action keeps getting stopped because coaches are holding up cards,one coach shows one then the other, the contestants are standing around with the referee while videos are looked at and various coaches are showing cards. The commentator has just suggested this is perhaps more like a game of poker. Little action lots of standing around. This isn't a good look guys.



Let's not go crazy. Texas Hold 'Em is much more exciting to watch.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## miguksaram

chrispillertkd said:


> Let's not go crazy. Texas Hold 'Em is much more exciting to watch.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


I disagree...Strip poker is far more superior.


----------



## seasoned

Markku P said:


> This is one of the common arguments among Taekwondo practitioners. The simple answer is that Taekwondo is a sport and it is a martial art. What is really funny to see is how fanatical we are. Sometimes just for the sake of fun I mention that the sport aspect of Taekwondo is the only unique thing in Taekwondo, which is when I start to receive hate mail, (I actually believe this). I think that we should see the big picture. The audience doesnt care if we are a sport or a martial art; people just care what is to them and how our training can help them or if they have a child who would like to start training in Taekwondo.
> 
> When I was younger, I too was really fanatical about the difference between traditional and sport. I did look down at those schools that were focusing only on sparring. I felt that every school should teach the same as we did. We had sparring, self-defence, poomsae, 1 and 3 step sparring and well, pretty much everything.
> 
> Today I am older, more experienced and I have learnt that it doesnt matter what I or anyone else is thinking. The teachers of individual schools decide what the style of the school is and if students are happy and satisfied, I think thats enough.
> 
> For me, Taekwondo is a martial art and a sport and I dont separate those things. One of the prominent Taekwondo writers asks if we should consider Taekwondo as a martial art because in sparring we dont use many hand techniques only mainly kicking techniques. My question is what is the definition of a martial art? For me, one of the definitions is of course the ability to defend yourself.
> 
> Well, boxers dont use kicks and Judo doesnt use strikes but many of them are really good with self-defence and I wouldnt like to fight against them in a real fight (I would prefer run anyway- I am too old for fighting).
> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> /Markku


This was the OP first and last post in this thread. He never came back, but he must have had fun looking. 
After over 200 posts, I went back and reread the original OP and found it interesting. He commented, gave his insight, and asked for thoughts.

To sum it up, the paying public will determine what they want and what gives them the best bang for their buck. 
In the mid 60s people came to the dojo for SD. But, SD became boring because of the directness of the techniques, "low kicks, no protective gear", and in practice if you took a bare knuckle shot you were going down, and it never turned out good. 
Once people learned how to sue, for things we took for granted, (stitches, broken bones) things got very different. Prices for Ins, if you even had any went way up. The price of training with all the amenities, (nice bleachers, air conditioning, nice lockers, a ton of training equipment) and the economy, drove that 15.00 per month I payed years ago, to around 175.00/200.00 per month and more.
It was said that people wanted more, yes, they could not afford to go to work with things not working well psychically. And this is very understandably so.

It is very difficult to address and cover all that has been said, but there is a common thread running through it all. 

SD vs Sport.

Big dojo vs store front, (garage).

Kids over adults. 

Lots of money, little money.

Modern ways vs traditional teaching

In the ends my friends it is what works best for YOU, and what kind of a mark you want to leave on life and your students. Nobody is right, and nobody is wrong, just different.

MT is meant to give insight and build up the martial arts community, not make us look like a bunch of white belts. Aside from some personal attacks, much good information has been shared, and of this I hope we can have a consensus.

I'm not sure this thread is over yet, I have enjoyed the read, and I do hope we all come out of it intact.

My 2 cents, enjoy the rest of your day. Wes (seasoned)


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Daniel Sullivan said:


> ralphmcpherson said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never are these "nuances" more evident than during the olympics. If I  had a dollar for every one of my mates who will say to me during the  olympics "why do they just stand there bouncing" or "why dont they  punch" or "why are their hands by their sides" etc, I'd be a  millionaire. Im not knocking it, but its a ruleset only really  appreciated by those that understand the finer points of the ruleset.
> 
> 
> 
> Do your mates ask similar questions of judo or wrestling (real wrestling, not WWE)?  Or do they ask why in boxing why they don't do any grappling?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you missed this, but I am curious as to your answer.  

Do your mates or yourself ask, "why don't they kick?" when they or you watch boxing?  Or "why don't they do any striking at all?" when they or you watch judo?  Or why players in those sports crouch in a particular way?  

Every rule set has just as many oddities and peculiarities that make little sense outside of the context of competition as WTF taekwondo does.  Do you and those who make similar criticisms of WTF competition ask these same questions of such sports?  Or of martial arts that do not train in striking at all, such as various jujutsu ryu, BJJ, or aikido, which has very minimal focus on striking?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Daniel Sullivan said:


> ralphmcpherson said:
> 
> 
> 
> Master Weiss hit the nail on the head,  great post. I know we have discussed this subject to death and we are  all sick and tired of it, but one thing I have never understood is if  99% of altercations start with someone throwing a face punch (and most  people in the know will tell you this is the case),
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this figure is hard data, name a source who is "in the know" and where they get their figures.  Is it the same source that provided the '90% of all fights go to the ground,' which is also bogus because the context represented as "all fights" was actually police officers apprehending suspects.
> 
> 
> 
> ralphmcpherson said:
> 
> 
> 
> then how can you  have a ruleset with no face punches and then tell students it is  preparing them for self defence?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No competitive rule set is preparation for self defense.  They all develop bad habbits of some kind and they all miss the mark in critical areas.
> 
> Secondly, I have never personally heard WTF sparring represented as being analgous to a violent altercation in any school where I have trained.  Practical SD has always been a separate part of the class.
> 
> Finally, every guard has its purpose, pros and cons.  Every guard leaves something vital open (high guard leave open your entire lower body and part of your torso, wherein most of your vitals are contained, and the genitalia, which is a popular target).  Every guard does something effective, be it in or out of competition.  Your arms can only guard but so much of your body, so everyone who is involved in any kind of fight sport finds ways to compensate for the uncovered areas.  Usually through avoidance and distance management, the first of which is as important as guard and the second of which is more important than guard.
Click to expand...

And you still haven't responded to any of this.  

The first part regarding accuracy of the 99% statistic has been picked up in Earl's thread about real world attacks, but I am curious what you have to say about the rest.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I'm not sure if you missed this, but I am curious as to your answer.
> 
> Do your mates or yourself ask, "why don't they kick?" when they or you watch boxing?  Or "why don't they do any striking at all?" when they or you watch judo?  Or why players in those sports crouch in a particular way?
> 
> Every rule set has just as many oddities and peculiarities that make little sense outside of the context of competition as WTF taekwondo does.  Do you and those who make similar criticisms of WTF competition ask these same questions of such sports?  Or of martial arts that do not train in striking at all, such as various jujutsu ryu, BJJ, or aikido, which has very minimal focus on striking?



I think it has to do with vying over what the word TKD must mean or being 'embarrassed' over what happens elsewhere.  I used to dislike Olympic rules TKD because it didn't match what I trained in, yet at the same time I felt ownership due to holding a BB in 'TKD'.  It's largely the same reason why I also disliked the sine wave method in ITF TKD, or why I thought some of the ATA leadership stuff is cheesy.  

At this point none of them concern me overly much.  I accept that there are several expressions of TKD and I think there's room for them all.  If others enjoy it and find value in their training methods and interests, I think that's great.  It may not be my cup of tea personally, but  I'll worry about what happens in my dojang since I control that.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> I think it has to do with vying over what the word TKD must mean or being 'embarrassed' over what happens elsewhere.  I used to dislike Olympic rules TKD because it didn't match what I trained in, yet at the same time I felt ownership due to holding a BB in 'TKD'.  It's largely the same reason why I also disliked the sine wave method in ITF TKD, or why I thought some of the ATA leadership stuff is cheesy.
> 
> At this point none of them concern me overly much.  I accept that there are several expressions of TKD and I think there's room for them all.  If others enjoy it and find value in their training methods and interests, I think that's great.  It may not be my cup of tea personally, but  I'll worry about what happens in my dojang since I control that.


Did you have the same questions and critiques of other arts, such as the ones that I listed?

If yes, did you repeatedly raise them in those arts' forum sections and dismiss everything that practitioners of those arts said to you, and repeatedly try to force a delineation in those arts/styles between sport and art?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

To those who are following this thread who are only familiar with WTF sparring via youtube or having seen a match or two, but have never actually trained in KKW/WTF taekwondo, I posted a thread that answers the questions that are repeatedly posed here.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...t-is-the-way-that-it-is?p=1510386#post1510386

It is pinned as a resource in the sticky section.  If you really are interested in knowing why the WTF rule set is the way that it is and why participants adopt the various strategies seen in WTF matches, it is all there.

One comment that I will make is that WTF sparring is not, in my experience, utilized as SD training in KKW schools; that is usually a separate part of the curriculum, and WTF sparring is not presented as SD to students of those schools.


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Did you have the same questions and critiques of other arts, such as the ones that I listed?
> 
> If yes, did you repeatedly raise them in those arts' forum sections and dismiss everything that practitioners of those arts said to you, and repeatedly try to force a delineation in those arts/styles between sport and art?



No, and I can't fully explain what the difference is.  I still participate in the biggest judo forum on the web from time to time, and I think there are less flame wars there for whatever reason.  Maybe it is because the sport side of judo is strongly integrated into the art, even with participation being a requirement for rank advancement in many cases.

TKD is still fractured comparatively IMO.  Yeah, there are millions and millions of KKW taekwondoin worldwide.  However, I still get the sense that that are huge amounts of people outside of the umbrella in the US, and certainly in my area.  And if these people are 'true believers' in their methods, it's all too easy to see where the disagreement and conflict can come from.  Finally, it should be pointed out that it works the other way too - intolerance is a two way street.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> No, and I can't fully explain what the difference is.  I still participate in the biggest judo forum on the web from time to time, and I think there are less flame wars there for whatever reason.  Maybe it is because the sport side of judo is strongly integrated into the art, even with participation being a requirement for rank advancement in many cases.


Perhaps.  It could be that judo is more unified, likely due in part to judo having a half century head start and likely having worked out many of the issues seen in TKD.



dancingalone said:


> TKD is still fractured comparatively IMO.  Yeah, there are millions and millions of KKW taekwondoin worldwide.  However, I still get the sense that that are huge amounts of people outside of the umbrella in the US, and certainly in my area.  And if these people are 'true believers' in their methods, it's all too easy to see where the disagreement and conflict can come from.  Finally, it should be pointed out that it works the other way too - intolerance is a two way street.


No idea as to how huge or not huge the numbers may be; I know that WTF and ITF figures for dan promotions have been posted in past threads, but that does not account for independent schools or ATA/ITA (or whatever the ITA calls itself now) schools.  At least in Maryland, the presence of the other taekwondo federations is virtually nil.  Jhoon Rhee has maybe six schools scattered throughout Maryland, DC, and Virginia, but I can drive to ten KKW schools on the way to any one of them.  So to a great extent, the perception of huge amounts may vary by location.

That aside, I do not see equity on the two way street that you speak of.  Pretty much all of the bashing is aimed at the KKW/WTF on this forum.  The most negativity that is ITF specific that I see is usually a response rather than preemptive, and is usually, if not always, in regards to General Choi.  

I honestly cannot think of a single instance where the actual _Chang Hon style or ITF sparring style_ has been disrespected or knocked by KKW/WTF folks. Not saying that it hasn't happened, but I cannot think of any off hand.  Most often, I see people saying things about KKW/WTF that are either inaccurate or untrue and who have no interest in hearing anything to the contrary.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Do your mates or yourself ask, "why don't they kick?" when they or you watch boxing? Or "why don't they do any striking at all?" when they or you watch judo? Or why players in those sports crouch in a particular way?



You know, most people realize that boxing doesn't include rules and that judo competition omits the very limited strikes found in that art in the first place so your question really is moot. Taekwon-Do includes both hand and foot techniques in its sparring competitions so Ralph's friends are right to ask where the punching is. 

People say punching is more pronounced today than it was in the 80s and 90s in KKW competitions. I suppose. My KKW instructor in college was an international referee and said that in 10 years or so of experience he'd seen six punches scored at WTF events. Six. In that sense there was no where to go but up  I've read your sticky. The WTF can make whatever rules they want. But that doesn't mean people aren't going to ask about them. I've had people ask why the ITF doesn't do this or that in its competitions. The only thing to do is try to educate them, not get defensive.



> Every rule set has just as many oddities and peculiarities that make little sense outside of the context of competition as WTF taekwondo does. Do you and those who make similar criticisms of WTF competition ask these same questions of such sports? Or of martial arts that do not train in striking at all, such as various jujutsu ryu, BJJ, or aikido, which has very minimal focus on striking?



I don't know about Ralph, but I have heard many, many people ask questions about MMA and BJJ rules. Not as much today as 10 years ago but the questions still linger. It's no big deal.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## dancingalone

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Perhaps.  It could be that judo is more unified, likely due in part to judo having a half century head start and likely having worked out many of the issues seen in TKD.



Maybe.  To be upfront, judo has its own organizational squabbles.  There are several certifiying bodies alone in the US, and depending on your interests (Olympics for example) one can be more advantageous than the others.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> No idea as to how huge or not huge the numbers may be; I know that WTF and ITF figures for dan promotions have been posted in past threads, but that does not account for independent schools or ATA/ITA (or whatever the ITA calls itself now) schools.  At least in Maryland, the presence of the other taekwondo federations is virtually nil.  Jhoon Rhee has maybe six schools scattered throughout Maryland, DC, and Virginia, but I can drive to ten KKW schools on the way to any one of them.  So to a great extent, the perception of huge amounts may vary by location.



I think the deep south and flyover country have more equitable representation in the types of TKD available in their area.  Equitable in this case 
should be taken as 'spreading the wealth' more evenly rather than any indication on my part of 'fairness'.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> That aside, I do not see equity on the two way street that you speak of.  Pretty much all of the bashing is aimed at the KKW/WTF on this forum.  The most negativity that is ITF specific that I see is usually a response rather than preemptive, and is usually, if not always, in regards to General Choi.



There are examples I can remember, though not necessarily aimed at ITF TKD,  but I don't wish to rehash them here.  We can go to PM or not.  Preferably not since they are really unimportant in the big scheme of things other than to note that extremely fervent advocacy of your own style or system can by extension serve to detract from others.  It's like this... if we're friendly neighbors yet you tell me how great your yard is every single day, soon enough I begin to see that your point is perhaps that my yard is a dump.  It's human nature and I don't necessarily think the affront is all in the mind of the receiver.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I honestly cannot think of a single instance where the actual _Chang Hon style or ITF sparring style_ has been disrespected or knocked by KKW/WTF folks. Not saying that it hasn't happened, but I cannot think of any off hand.  Most often, I see people saying things about KKW/WTF that are either inaccurate or untrue and who have no interest in hearing anything to the contrary.



Most digs against the ITF that I have seen here revolve around their sine wave motion or about General Choi and whatever personal or leadership failings he might have had.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> You know, most people realize that boxing doesn't include rules and that judo competition omits the very limited strikes found in that art in the first place so your question really is moot. Taekwon-Do includes both hand and foot techniques in its sparring competitions so Ralph's friends are right to ask where the punching is.


Sure.  Once or twice.  But if he'd be a billionaire if he had a dollar for each time one of his mates asked, then either he's not answering the question or they're ignoring the answer.



chrispillertkd said:


> People say punching is more pronounced today than it was in the 80s and 90s in KKW competitions. I suppose. My KKW instructor in college was an international referee and said that in 10 years or so of experience he'd seen six punches scored at WTF events. Six. In that sense there was no where to go but up  I've read your sticky. The WTF can make whatever rules they want. But that doesn't mean people aren't going to ask about them. I've had people ask why the ITF doesn't do this or that in its competitions. The only thing to do is try to educate them, not get defensive.


Asking questions is fine; but when it is the same people asking the same questions and getting the same answers over an over again, the issue is no longer a lack of education.




chrispillertkd said:


> I don't know about Ralph, but I have heard many, many people ask questions about MMA and BJJ rules. Not as much today as 10 years ago but the questions still linger. It's no big deal.


Again, if the people asking the questions were not asking them over and over over a period of months or in some cases, years, and getting the same answers over and over again, then it wouldn't be an issue at all.  People who legitimately don't know ask, get an answer, and are done.  There is a small but persistently vocal group of people, some of whom don't even practice the art, who raise the same criticisms and questions in the TKD section over and over and no answer given is ever good enough for them.


----------



## miguksaram

chrispillertkd said:


> You know, most people realize that boxing doesn't include rules and that judo competition omits the very limited strikes found in that art in the first place so your question really is moot. Taekwon-Do includes both hand and foot techniques in its sparring competitions so Ralph's friends are right to ask where the punching is.


TKD punching is right next to the Kyokushin punching.   I don't see why this is such a hang up for people.  The rules say that you can punch to the body.  So what is the problem.  Just because the sport rules dictate no punching to the head does not mean TKD schools do not practice it.  The point is not moot about judo because it does have those techniques so why are they not questioned as to why they are not allowed in competition.  



> People say punching is more pronounced today than it was in the 80s and 90s in KKW competitions. I suppose. My KKW instructor in college was an international referee and said that in 10 years or so of experience he'd seen six punches scored at WTF events. Six. In that sense there was no where to go but up  I've read your sticky. The WTF can make whatever rules they want. But that doesn't mean people aren't going to ask about them. I've had people ask why the ITF doesn't do this or that in its competitions. The only thing to do is try to educate them, not get defensive.



I don't believe it is being defensive so much as frustrated.  People don't seem to ask because they don't understand the rules so much as they seem to ask so the can have  reason to tear down WTF sparring.   



> I don't know about Ralph, but I have heard many, many people ask questions about MMA and BJJ rules. Not as much today as 10 years ago but the questions still linger. It's no big deal.



How many of them turn around and say that MMA or BJJ is worthless because they don't allow this technique or that technique?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

dancingalone said:


> Most digs against the ITF that I have seen here revolve around their sine wave motion or about General Choi and whatever personal or leadership failings he might have had.


I'd agree to that.  One thing that I have noticed about sine wave is that not all Chang Hon people subscribe to it or seem to agree on how to explain it.  

The General Choi stuff is unfortunate; it has no bearing on the quality of the system or its practitioners and in any case, the man is dead now.


----------



## puunui

dancingalone said:


> Preferably not since they are really unimportant in the big scheme of things other than to note that extremely fervent advocacy of your own style or system can by extension serve to detract from others.  It's like this... if we're friendly neighbors yet you tell me how great your yard is every single day, soon enough I begin to see that your point is perhaps that my yard is a dump.  It's human nature and I don't necessarily think the affront is all in the mind of the receiver.



There you go. Kukki taekwondoin generally don't really bother or care about taekwondo different than their own. They just concentrate on what they are doing. On the other hand, it seems that those that are different from kukki taekwondo come out and constantly and consistently criticize kukki taekwondo. Even you have expressed your complaints. So the question is, who is really calling who's yard a dump. 




dancingalone said:


> Most digs against the ITF that I have seen here revolve around their sine wave motion or about General Choi and whatever personal or leadership failings he might have had.



And this happens only within the context of General Choi fans stating General Choi gets the credit for this or that. In that case, it is important not to allow misinformation to continue to flow. That doesn't do anyone any good, not even the General Choi fans.


----------



## puunui

miguksaram said:


> People don't seem to ask because they don't understand the rules so much as they seem to ask so the can have  reason to tear down WTF sparring.



exactly. these other non-kukki taekwondoin have the resentment and chip on their shoulder with regard to kukki taekwondo, not the other way around. But I suppose that comes with being the big kid on the block, some people want to tear you down.


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Sure. Once or twice. But if he'd be a billionaire if he had a dollar for each time one of his mates asked, then either he's not answering the question or they're ignoring the answer.



Or he's talking about different people. Or they simply can't believe a striking martial art would de-emphasize hand strikes. Or any number of other reasons. 



> Asking questions is fine; but when it is the same people asking the same questions and getting the same answers over an over again, the issue is no longer a lack of education.



Maybe, maybe not. If you have that big of a problem with it though, you should maybe ignore the person in question when they bring up the topic. Obviously it's something that really annoys you.



> Again, if the people asking the questions were not asking them over and over over a period of months or in some cases, years, and getting the same answers over and over again, then it wouldn't be an issue at all. People who legitimately don't know ask, get an answer, and are done. There is a small but persistently vocal group of people, some of whom don't even practice the art, who raise the same criticisms and questions in the TKD section over and over and no answer given is ever good enough for them.



You might want to consider going back and looking to see how many threads there are on sine wave here  Really, you should either ignore whoever you have a problem with when they ask a question or simply accept the fact that some people thinks WTF rules are stupid (for any number of reasons). But if you really expect things to change then you will have to learn to live with disappointment because that is rarely the case. Trust me, I know  Can't tell you the number of times I've discussed sine wave with non-ITF'ers who after getting an explanation just begin right back at the original objection they have. _C'est la vie_.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Or he's talking about different people. Or they simply can't believe a striking martial art would de-emphasize hand strikes. Or any number of other reasons.


I'm sure that if Ralph decides to respond, he can clarify that.



chrispillertkd said:


> Maybe, maybe not. If you have that big of a problem with it though, you should maybe ignore the person in question when they bring up the topic. Obviously it's something that really annoys you.


It isn't a question of personal exchanges.  It is an endemic pattern on this board (maybe others, but I don't post on those).



chrispillertkd said:


> You might want to consider going back and looking to see how many threads there are on sine wave here
> Really, you should either ignore whoever you have a problem with when they ask a question or simply accept the fact that some people thinks WTF rules are stupid (for any number of reasons). But if you really expect things to change then you will have to learn to live with disappointment because that is rarely the case. Trust me, I know  Can't tell you the number of times I've discussed sine wave with non-ITF'ers who after getting an explanation just begin right back at the original objection they have. _C'est la vie_.


No expectations that it will change, and again, it isn't a question of personal exchanges but an endemic pattern on this board.

As for the sine wave discussions, the same would apply; if they don't understand it, then get an answer, either be happy with the answer or if they don't understand the answer, say so.  But to continue leveling the same criticism over and over again is just silly as it is with regards to sine wave as it is with shihap kyorugi.

As for a sine wave explanation, if you would be willing to describe it in another thread, I would be happy to learn more about it.  I think I know how it works and why it is done; I have no criticism of it; it is a linear method of power generation from what I can see, and should work just fine.  Regarding how it looks, I've seen videos of Chang Hon tul performed with sine wave, and while it looks different from what I do, the aesthetics of it shouldn't drive the discussion.


----------



## chrispillertkd

miguksaram said:


> TKD punching is right next to the Kyokushin punching. I don't see why this is such a hang up for people. The rules say that you can punch to the body. So what is the problem. Just because the sport rules dictate no punching to the head does not mean TKD schools do not practice it.



 Well, in Kyokushin you can't punch to the head but you can use a variety of punches, unlike in WTF competition. Or has the WTF changed that, too? Last I knew it was straight punches to the hogu only. In Kyokushin you can throw jabs, upper cuts, hooks, etc. As for people getting hung up on it or not, who cares? 

Regarding _Kukkiwon_ TKD school practicing a variety of punching methods, I'm sure it depends on the school. The school I trained at for a couple years in college focused primarily on kicking  Hand techniques were, while not an after thought, not emphasized nearly as much. In ITF schools there's a necessity of practicing many different types of hand techniques. This would be true even if it was a school dedicated almost exclusively to sport competition because the rule set allows for a variety of hand techniques to a variety of target areas. 



> The point is not moot about judo because it does have those techniques so why are they not questioned as to why they are not allowed in competition.



Well, no. The conversation revolves around techniques allowed in sparring, or sparring-like for judo, competition. People don't ask why judoka don't just punch the other guy in the face because they _can't_ (now if you were talking about judo kata and people were ommitting punches that were called for then that really would be a legitimate question to ask!). In WTF events you explicitly can punch the other guy. And if you tell me it happens all the time I'll believe you  But the fact is people wouldn't be asking about it if 1) it did happen a lot, or 2) the rules didn't allow it. 



> I don't believe it is being defensive so much as frustrated. People don't seem to ask because they don't understand the rules so much as they seem to ask so the can have reason to tear down WTF sparring.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like it appears to me that WTF'ers get defensive, as opposed to just frustrated, it may appear to you that people asking aren't really asking because they don't understand. But even if people asked about WTF rules, got an explanation, and understood it they would be totally free to then "tear down" (as you put it) WTF rules. Why? Because it's a _game_ and people can disagree about what's good or bad about them. It's also quite possible to have someone explain WTF rules and simply be incredulous. As in, "Why would they ever want to do that?" But, again, who cares? If you're happy doing what you're doing more power to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many of them turn around and say that MMA or BJJ is worthless because they don't allow this technique or that technique?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know, nor do I care. I'm sure MMA and BJJ players are confident enough in their rule set not to let it bother them when people who don't compete like they do question what or how they do things. People are making the argument, it seems, that WTF rules aren't for self-defense but are a game. If that's the case who cares what people say about them? You might as well get mad if someone complained that you got two cards face down instead of three in Hold 'Em. It's irrelevant because that's not how the game is played. If you want to punch to the face, or do a variety of other hand techniques in sparring, don't go to a WTF competition. If people ask why the WTF doesn't allow those techniques tell them it's because that's the kind of game the WTF wants.
> 
> It's simple, really.
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## chrispillertkd

Daniel Sullivan said:


> It isn't a question of personal exchanges. It is an endemic pattern on this board (maybe others, but I don't post on those).



I must've missed the majority of them then. I'm not particularly interested in WTF competition threads so sometimes I don't even skim them. I played that game a couple of years in college and it wasn't really my thing. 



> No expectations that it will change, and again, it isn't a question of personal exchanges but an endemic pattern on this board.



Again, I really think you're being overly sensitive. But even if it is endemic sometimes it's better to not get involved in the discussion if you don't think people would listen. There are a couple of posters on MT that I simply don't bother with because it would be like casting pearls before swine. I have better things to do with my time, and I'm sure they're happier not listening to me. This way everybody wins 



> As for the sine wave discussions, the same would apply; if they don't understand it, then get an answer, either be happy with the answer or if they don't understand the answer, say so. But to continue leveling the same criticism over and over again is just silly as it is with regards to sine wave as it is with shihap kyorugi.



Eh, it's the nature of the intrawebs. People come, people go. Topics come up, topics go away. It's cyclical. I used to get annoyed when some people would critisize sine wave, not because they critisized it so much as because they critisized what they didn't understand. But what can you do? After a while I realized that offering a few comments to people is really the most I could do in most situations. If people really want to get a andle on sine wave there are several excellent instructors I could recommend that they go train with for an extended period of time. But most people on an internet BBS aren't _that_ interested in the topic  Heck, it took me more than a few years to get a handle on sine wave. But now I'm more powerful and faster than I used to be.



> As for a sine wave explanation, if you would be willing to describe it in another thread, I would be happy to learn more about it. I think I know how it works and why it is done; I have no criticism of it; it is a linear method of power generation from what I can see, and should work just fine. Regarding how it looks, I've seen videos of Chang Hon tul performed with sine wave, and while it looks different from what I do, the aesthetics of it shouldn't drive the discussion.



The only thing I'll say on this is that sine wave really should be much more subtle than what you generally see on the internet (on youtube, for instance). Also, concentrating more on keeping the foot that is in motion flat (though not touching the floor) really helps make the knee spring used in sine wave quite natural. See? Easy!

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> Miguksaram said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point is not moot about judo because it does have those techniques  so why are they not questioned as to why they are not allowed in  competition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, no. The conversation revolves around techniques allowed in sparring, or sparring-like for judo, competition. People don't ask why judoka don't just punch the other guy in the face because they _can't_ (now if you were talking about judo kata and people were ommitting punches that were called for then that really would be a legitimate question to ask!). In WTF events you explicitly can punch the other guy. And if you tell me it happens all the time I'll believe you  But the fact is people wouldn't be asking about it if 1) it did happen a lot, or 2) the rules didn't allow it.
Click to expand...

Just a point of clarification: one of the reasons that I asked the question about judo/bjj/jujutsu is because the argument was specifically that because the WTF rule set lacks specifically face/head punches (rather than lacks a variety of hand techniques), it promotes bad self defense.  Earl, Ralph, KSD, and others have, over several threads, made this criticism, Ralph most recently.  I understand their logic (I don't agree with it, but I understand it), but if one makes the SD criticism of WTF sparring, then it stands to reason that one would be patrolling the judo, bjj, and jujutsu sections making similar criticisms.  

The other half of this is that it is implied or stated outright that KKW/WTF students are taught WTF sparring *as* self defense, which is the justification that they have for making the above argument.  This has been countered many times by many posters.  Though none of them actually train KKW/WTF, they seem unwilling to accept what they are told, regardless of how it is explained, who explains it, or how many times it is explained.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

chrispillertkd said:


> The only thing I'll say on this is that sine wave really should be much more subtle than what you generally see on the internet (on youtube, for instance). Also, concentrating more on keeping the foot that is in motion flat (though not touching the floor) really helps make the knee spring used in sine wave quite natural. See? Easy!


Makes sense.  It looks to me that it is the downward/forward motion that is taking advantage of gravity and body weight to generate power.  Not sure if that is accurate, but that is how it looks.  In any case, as I said before, I have no criticism of sine wave; it is simply another method of power generation.


----------



## puunui

chrispillertkd said:


> You know, most people realize that boxing doesn't include rules



Boxing doesn't include rules? 



chrispillertkd said:


> and that judo competition omits the very limited strikes found in that art in the first place so your question really is moot.



Not only does judo limit strikes, it also limits many different kinds of locks as well. No standing arm bar for example. Judo's allowed techniques is a fraction of the available hand techniques available to a judo player. 



chrispillertkd said:


> Taekwon-Do includes both hand and foot techniques in its sparring competitions so Ralph's friends are right to ask where the punching is.



How about eye pokes? Kicks to the leg and or groin? Are those allowed in ITF competition?


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Just a point of clarification: one of the reasons that I asked the question about judo/bjj/jujutsu is because the argument was specifically that because the WTF rule set lacks specifically face/head punches (rather than lacks a variety of hand techniques), it promotes bad self defense.



Every competitive format limits the available weapons and available targets. But what that does is make what is allowed that much stronger, especially in competition formats that allow full contact action. This point cannot be overstressed.


----------



## puunui

Tez3 said:


> Perhaps you should add a third option, a game of cards. Just watching the Olympic matches, the action keeps getting stopped because coaches are holding up cards,one coach shows one then the other, the contestants are standing around with the referee while videos are looked at and various coaches are showing cards. The commentator has just suggested this is perhaps more like a game of poker. Little action lots of standing around. This isn't a good look guys.



That is a little exaggerated because each competitor/coach get only one protest, unless you win that protest. Then you get another. But if you protest and lose, you have no more for the entire match. Because of that, coaches tend to use those protests sparingly, only if they are confident the protest will be upheld.

There has been a switch in policy towards referees. The policy used to be that we assume our officials have integrity; the rules revolved around that. However, under WTF President Choue, the policy changed to referees are suspect and do not have integrity, the result being that we take away as much power from the officials as possible to make decisions on calls, and we allow coaches to challenge officials in the middle of the match. To that end we have electronic scoring (which takes away scoring body shots from corners), instant replay, etc.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Daniel Sullivan said:


> And you still haven't responded to any of this.
> 
> The first part regarding accuracy of the 99% statistic has been picked up in Earl's thread about real world attacks, but I am curious what you have to say about the rest.


I will respond properly later daniel as this is a subject i have a lot of time for but i am currently at work. In a nutshell i believe tkd is an incredibly brilliant sport/art, it contains lightening quick strikes, balance, footwork, punches, kicks, grabs etc etc, but i dont feel the wtf ruleset does the art any justice at all. It gives people a false impression of tkd, for example i regularly hear people say "i wanted to start tkd, but wanted to learn how to punch". You cant compare it to boxing, boxing includes way more of their techniques on display than tkd and gives the viewer a more accurate view of the art. The same can be said for bjj, for instance, what you see is pretty much what you get. I am copping an absolute ribbing from work colleagues today who watched the tkd last night and i am constantly having to explain to them that what they are seeing in the olympics is only avery small part of what we do.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> I will respond properly later daniel as this is a subject i have a lot of time for but i am currently at work. In a nutshell i believe tkd is an incredibly brilliant sport/art, it contains lightening quick strikes, balance, footwork, punches, kicks, grabs etc etc, but i dont feel the wtf ruleset does the art any justice at all. It gives people a false impression of tkd, for example i regularly hear people say "i wanted to start tkd, but wanted to learn how to punch". You cant compare it to boxing, boxing includes way more of their techniques on display than tkd and gives the viewer a more accurate view of the art. The same can be said for bjj, for instance, what you see is pretty much what you get. I am copping an absolute ribbing from work colleagues today who watched the tkd last night and i am constantly having to explain to them that what they are seeing in the olympics is only avery small part of what we do.


I certainly respect your opinion and appreciate the response!

However, that was not the underlying reason for your criticism.  You had tied the lack of punching emphasis to a self defense deficiency and asked why WTF students are told that WTF competition is sparring.  It was mainly that which prompted the question.  

Regarding your post above: 


It doesn't give a false impression; simply an incomplete one. 
I would like to see pumse in the Olympics as well, as this, along with shihap kyorugi, would provide a very complete picture. 
Finally, if your coworkers cannot appreciate the incredibly high level of training and dedication that it takes to get to that level and are ribbing you for it, I submit that their opinion is unimportant and they are ignorant.  Especially if this is the same group that you would have a billion dollars for every time you've had to explain it to them previously. 

Again, I appreciate you taking the time to respond.  I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy conversing with you.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Sorry daniel, Im flat out with work today so Im just dealing with one point at a time. In regards to the many people who question me about tkd ruleset, I would say almost all people who find out I do tkd come out with the "oh, is that the one they do in the olympics?, why dont they punch?, why are their hands by their sides?" questions. Only yesterday I dropped my son to football training and apologised for dropping him their late and explained his tkd class had gone over time that afternoon and his immediate response was "oh thats the one with all the kicking in the olympics, why dont they punch?". Its not the same people over and over, except for a few of my mates who do karate or muay thai, who mention it regularly because they know it pisses me off


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Just quickly daniel (and I will go into more detail when I get a chance), the self defence/wtf sparring I think is more the fault of individual schools than the kkw. All tkd clubs in my area say "SELF DEFENCE" in bold lettering at the top of all their school's signage, in smaller print they mention things like "how to protect yourself" etc. These schools only teach wtf sparring, they dont teach other forms of sparring and this is their students only "live" full contact, un rehearsed form of practice against resisting opponents. So, reading between the lines, students at these schools are told they are learning self defence, and have what they call 'simulated fights' using a ruleset with no face punching, which as discussed in the other thread is an attack you are highly likely to encounter in the real world. I have friends at these schools and this is what they think. If that form of sparring is taught in conjunction with other forms then I have no problem with it, but when students sign up to learn how to defend themself and spend a great majority of class time sparring under this ruleset, I have a problem with it. The problem is there is the "real world" and the "perfect world", in the latter all kkw clubs teach many forms of sparring, teach heaps of punching and produce well rounded fighters. These schools do exist, as Ive said many times I would gladly train at puuini's club, andy jeffries club, ethan's club etc and I would be heaps better for the experience. The sad reality, in my area at least, is that most kkw clubs are full of students who just kick for an hour and dont get the well rounded instruction.


----------



## andyjeffries

Gnarlie said:


> I can always judge by the comments of my family how much the spectator entertainment value of TKD has changed since the last Olympic outing.   For as long as they are asking questions like "why did that just happen?", and "why didn't that score?",  and "why aren't they doing anything?", we're not looking as good as we need to be.



If you're at the Olympic venue (as I was yesterday) this actually gets a lot better.  The announcer says why people are requesting a video reply (if they're standing there doing nothing but waiting) and whether the protest was upheld or not (and generally why).  With regards to "why didn't that score" most of the time this is about body shots (as head shots are now simpler to score) and again, if you're at the venue the Dadeo PSS system shows the power required to score and (briefly) the power of the last shot.

It's getting better as a spectator sport (the crowd certainly loved it and I was mostly surrounded by non-Taekwondoin, just people who wanted tickets for any Olympic event to be a part of it), but we need to improve the information shown in TV broadcasts.


----------



## andyjeffries

puunui said:


> There has been a switch in policy towards referees. The policy used to be that we assume our officials have integrity; the rules revolved around that. However, under WTF President Choue, the policy changed to referees are suspect and do not have integrity, the result being that we take away as much power from the officials as possible



I would phrase it differently - in the past we assumed that referees were perfectly flawless individuals, now we assume they are human like the rest of us and in a fast moving sport like Taekwondo it's easy to make a judgement mistake.  On the highest stage, the Olympic Games, those mistakes get highlighted in a huge way and risk us losing Olympic status so the WTF has changed the rules to reduce the mistakes made (PSS) and to provide an easy way to rectify those made (Video Replay).

I think the changes are all very positive.


----------



## Markku P

andyjeffries said:


> I
> 
> I think the changes are all very positive.



This I agree and I was watching yesterdays fights via internet ( whole day ) and there was many good fights to see


----------



## Markku P

seasoned said:


> This was the OP first and last post in this thread. He never came back, but he must have had fun looking.
> After over 200 posts, I went back and reread the original OP and found it interesting. He commented, gave his insight, and asked for thoughts.
> 
> (seasoned)



I have been here and reading of course, I had my summer vacation so I have been busy  Now I have to read everything and come up with something 

//Markku


----------



## Gorilla

My Son scored 6 points in three matches at the JR World team trials.  The referees were IR's...my son is also a 
Shotokan BB and a very good puncher.


QUOTE=chrispillertkd;1510409]You know, most people realize that boxing doesn't include rules and that judo competition omits the very limited strikes found in that art in the first place so your question really is moot. Taekwon-Do includes both hand and foot techniques in its sparring competitions so Ralph's friends are right to ask where the punching is. 

People say punching is more pronounced today than it was in the 80s and 90s in KKW competitions. I suppose. My KKW instructor in college was an international referee and said that in 10 years or so of experience he'd seen six punches scored at WTF events. Six. In that sense there was no where to go but up  I've read your sticky. The WTF can make whatever rules they want. But that doesn't mean people aren't going to ask about them. I've had people ask why the ITF doesn't do this or that in its competitions. The only thing to do is try to educate them, not get defensive.



I don't know about Ralph, but I have heard many, many people ask questions about MMA and BJJ rules. Not as much today as 10 years ago but the questions still linger. It's no big deal.

Pax,

Chris[/QUOTE]


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

Based on this...


ralphmcpherson said:


> Sorry daniel, Im flat out with work today so Im just dealing with one point at a time. In regards to the many people who question me about tkd ruleset, I would say almost all people who find out I do tkd come out with the "oh, is that the one they do in the olympics?, why dont they punch?, why are their hands by their sides?" questions. Only yesterday I dropped my son to football training and apologised for dropping him their late and explained his tkd class had gone over time that afternoon and his immediate response was "oh thats the one with all the kicking in the olympics, why dont they punch?". Its not the same people over and over, except for a few of my mates who do karate or muay thai, who mention it regularly because they know it pisses me off



and this...



ralphmcpherson said:


> Just quickly daniel (and I will go into more detail when I get a chance), the self defence/wtf sparring I think is more the fault of individual schools than the kkw. All tkd clubs in my area say "SELF DEFENCE" in bold lettering at the top of all their school's signage, in smaller print they mention things like "how to protect yourself" etc. These schools only teach wtf sparring, they dont teach other forms of sparring and this is their students only "live" full contact, un rehearsed form of practice against resisting opponents. So, reading between the lines, students at these schools are told they are learning self defence, and have what they call 'simulated fights' using a ruleset with no face punching, which as discussed in the other thread is an attack you are highly likely to encounter in the real world. I have friends at these schools and this is what they think. If that form of sparring is taught in conjunction with other forms then I have no problem with it, but when students sign up to learn how to defend themself and spend a great majority of class time sparring under this ruleset, I have a problem with it. The problem is there is the "real world" and the "perfect world", in the latter all kkw clubs teach many forms of sparring, teach heaps of punching and produce well rounded fighters. These schools do exist, as Ive said many times I would gladly train at puuini's club, andy jeffries club, ethan's club etc and I would be heaps better for the experience. The sad reality, in my area at least, is that most kkw clubs are full of students who just kick for an hour and dont get the well rounded instruction.


I would say that your experience might be more of a local thing. 

Regarding the predominance of kicking training, it is much harder to develop okay kicking than it is develop great punching. I'm not going to evaluate the clubs or what they actually teach; you are providing me with second hand knowledge of clubs on another continent that neither of us have ever trained at. I can only tell you that what you describe is not what I have experienced. Apparently it isn't what Puunui, Andy, Master Cole, or ArchTKD have experienced either. 

Keep in mind that regardless of art or organization, most schools are no more than adequate, regardless of what is on their door. Puunui made the statement, which I think is accurate, that most people are looking for neither SD nor sport, but for general fitness, confidence, and a nice after school program for their kids. All the stuff that the ATA does very well, by the way.

In my travels, most of which have been eastern US, but also Ireland and some western and west coast US states, and Hawaii, most schools signs say the name of the art, and barring that, just say 'martial arts,' regardless of which art it is, along with a website, phone number, and a schedule. The ones that do promote selling features on their doors usually promote their programs: CAGE Fitness, Tiny Tigers, Little Ninjas, and 'Great for Teens and Adults!' without much more detail than that.

I cannot speak for other areas, but putting up a sign that says, "Self Defense" in this area will not increas one's customer count. It isn't that there's anything wrong with it, but it definitely isn't what the majority of people in the region (Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia) are looking for. 

Kicks Karate is probably the largest MA chain in the region; he's got nine schools in Montgomery county, four of which are within easy to tolerable driving distance from my home. Here's his website: http://www.kickskarate.com/ 

Pretty typical of what is in my area, both in presentation and in content. I don't think that the term, "self defense," is mentioned anywhere on the website.

Regarding your mates (the ones from whom you said you'd be a billionaire if you had a dollar for each time they questioned): 





ralphmcpherson said:


> except for a few of my mates who do karate or muay thai, who mention it regularly because they know it pisses me off


Don't you think that using your friends who you admit are doing it specifically to piss you off as an example is a bit disingenuous?


----------



## puunui

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I cannot speak for other areas, but putting up a sign that says, "Self Defense" in this area will not increas one's customer count. It isn't that there's anything wrong with it, but it definitely isn't what the majority of people in the region (Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia) are looking for.



Here too, you hardly see that anymore. It might come up on those laundry lists of benefits from training, but that is about it. No more big signs saying "Self Defense" in the window, hardly any school names incorporating the phrase "Self Defense".


----------



## puunui

andyjeffries said:


> I would phrase it differently - in the past we assumed that referees were perfectly flawless individuals, now we assume they are human like the rest of us and in a fast moving sport like Taekwondo it's easy to make a judgement mistake.  On the highest stage, the Olympic Games, those mistakes get highlighted in a huge way and risk us losing Olympic status so the WTF has changed the rules to reduce the mistakes made (PSS) and to provide an easy way to rectify those made (Video Replay).



I don't think he have ever considered referees to be perfectly flawless; if we did then we wouldn't have had protest procedures in place since the beginning. Your way sounds nicer, but the reality is that the changes were made as a reaction to the very vocal complaints from a vocal minority. Here is one such very public complaint made by Herb Perez to the press at the 2008 Beijing Olympics:

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijing/taekwondo/news?slug=cr-lopez082208

&#8220;When (poor judging) happens to you, you&#8217;re told to shut up and not say  anything because of what will happen to you, or what will happen to the  sport,&#8221; Perez said. &#8220;If this is truly what taekwondo is about, maybe  taekwondo shouldn&#8217;t be in the Olympics. Maybe they should fix it.&#8221;


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Based on this...
> 
> 
> and this...
> 
> 
> I would say that your experience might be more of a local thing.
> 
> Regarding the predominance of kicking training, it is much harder to develop okay kicking than it is develop great punching. I'm not going to evaluate the clubs or what they actually teach; you are providing me with second hand knowledge of clubs on another continent that neither of us have ever trained at. I can only tell you that what you describe is not what I have experienced. Apparently it isn't what Puunui, Andy, Master Cole, or ArchTKD have experienced either.
> 
> Keep in mind that regardless of art or organization, most schools are no more than adequate, regardless of what is on their door. Puunui made the statement, which I think is accurate, that most people are looking for neither SD nor sport, but for general fitness, confidence, and a nice after school program for their kids. All the stuff that the ATA does very well, by the way.
> 
> In my travels, most of which have been eastern US, but also Ireland and some western and west coast US states, and Hawaii, most schools signs say the name of the art, and barring that, just say 'martial arts,' regardless of which art it is, along with a website, phone number, and a schedule. The ones that do promote selling features on their doors usually promote their programs: CAGE Fitness, Tiny Tigers, Little Ninjas, and 'Great for Teens and Adults!' without much more detail than that.
> 
> I cannot speak for other areas, but putting up a sign that says, "Self Defense" in this area will not increas one's customer count. It isn't that there's anything wrong with it, but it definitely isn't what the majority of people in the region (Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia) are looking for.
> 
> Kicks Karate is probably the largest MA chain in the region; he's got nine schools in Montgomery county, four of which are within easy to tolerable driving distance from my home. Here's his website: http://www.kickskarate.com/
> 
> Pretty typical of what is in my area, both in presentation and in content. I don't think that the term, "self defense," is mentioned anywhere on the website.
> 
> Regarding your mates (the ones from whom you said you'd be a billionaire if you had a dollar for each time they questioned):
> Don't you think that using your friends who you admit are doing it specifically to piss you off as an example is a bit disingenuous?



It must be a regional thing then daniel, because most, if not all tkd clubs in my area push the self defence angle in their advertising, and i dont live in an area where knowing how to defend yourself is really necessary. In fact, after i posted that yesterday i went on my afternoon run and paid particular attention to any signage i saw (i run past 3 schools that run tkd clubs in the hall and have signage on the front gates) , and every sign i saw actually said "self defence" in larger lettering than the actual name of the club.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> It must be a regional thing then daniel, because most, if not all tkd clubs in my area push the self defence angle in their advertising, and i dont live in an area where knowing how to defend yourself is really necessary. In fact, after i posted that yesterday i went on my afternoon run and paid particular attention to any signage i saw (i run past 3 schools that run tkd clubs in the hall and have signage on the front gates) , and every sign i saw actually said "self defence" in larger lettering than the actual name of the club.


Are these older clubs?  I wonder if they have "Self Defense" up in big bold letters as a hold over from when nobody knew what taekwondo was.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Are these older clubs?  I wonder if they have "Self Defense" up in big bold letters as a hold over from when nobody knew what taekwondo was.



No, these are well established clubs, but are reasonably new to the area, and one of the schools was only built three years ago and has two tkd clubs and one karate club using their hall. I am taking my kids to tkd tonight but cant train myself (flu) so i will be up the back with the other parents watching their kids train. I will ask them why they put their kids in tkd in the first place, im sure 'self defence' will be their primary reason, but i will check and see what responses i get.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan

ralphmcpherson said:


> No, these are well established clubs, but are reasonably new to the area, and one of the schools was only built three years ago and has two tkd clubs and one karate club using their hall.


Perhaps asking the owner why his sign says 'self defense' and what he does in that area might yield a fruitful (or at least interesting) answer.



ralphmcpherson said:


> I am taking my kids to tkd tonight but cant train myself (flu) so i will be up the back with the other parents watching their kids train. I will ask them why they put their kids in tkd in the first place, im sure 'self defence' will be their primary reason, but i will check and see what responses i get.


How do your kids like the class and what is your primary reason for having them in it?  Your kids are obviously in the class and you are paying to have them their in spite of what you are saying.  

Or is the club you train at SD focused?  If it is an SD Focused club (that actually does SD in the way that you view it), then their answers will be of no support to the point you are making.  If that is the case, you'd really have to ask parents at the other schools why they put their kids in, or the students why they train.  And I will restate that finding out how the owner defines self defense in the context of his class would be of value.  Even if you don't agree with it, think it's nuts, or think he's full of it, it will be straight from the horse's mouth.


----------



## Kinghercules

Markku P said:


> This is one of the common arguments among Taekwondo practitioners. The simple answer is that Taekwondo is a sport and it is a martial art. What is really funny to see is how fanatical we are. Sometimes just for the sake of fun I mention that the sport aspect of Taekwondo is the only unique thing in Taekwondo, which is when I start to receive hate mail, (I actually believe this). I think that we should see the big picture. The audience doesnt care if we are a sport or a martial art; people just care what is to them and how our training can help them or if they have a child who would like to start training in Taekwondo.
> 
> When I was younger, I too was really fanatical about the difference between traditional and sport. I did look down at those schools that were focusing only on sparring. I felt that every school should teach the same as we did. We had sparring, self-defence, poomsae, 1 and 3 step sparring and well, pretty much everything.
> 
> Today I am older, more experienced and I have learnt that it doesnt matter what I or anyone else is thinking. The teachers of individual schools decide what the style of the school is and if students are happy and satisfied, I think thats enough.
> 
> For me, Taekwondo is a martial art and a sport and I dont separate those things. One of the prominent Taekwondo writers asks if we should consider Taekwondo as a martial art because in sparring we dont use many hand techniques only mainly kicking techniques. My question is what is the definition of a martial art? For me, one of the definitions is of course the ability to defend yourself.
> 
> Well, boxers dont use kicks and Judo doesnt use strikes but many of them are really good with self-defence and I wouldnt like to fight against them in a real fight (I would prefer run anyway- I am too old for fighting).
> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> /Markku



Why cant it just be both?




Markku P said:


> Well, boxers dont use kicks and Judo doesnt use strikes but many of them are really good with self-defence and I wouldnt like to fight against them in a real fight (I would prefer run anyway- I am too old for fighting).Markku




It just all depends who trained you.  Ive beaten both in street fights before and all I knew was my TKD.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

ralphmcpherson said:


> It must be a regional thing then daniel, because most, if not all tkd clubs in my area push the self defence angle in their advertising, and i dont live in an area where knowing how to defend yourself is really necessary. In fact, after i posted that yesterday i went on my afternoon run and paid particular attention to any signage i saw (i run past 3 schools that run tkd clubs in the hall and have signage on the front gates) , and every sign i saw actually said "self defence" in larger lettering than the actual name of the club.



I've know a couple of instructors in Australia and SD does seem to be a predominate theme from conversations we've had over the years.  The same can be said for my area, including TSD and TKD schools nearby.  One of the schools nearest me that advertises SD also has has a huge trophy case so they seem to be heavily into competition.  I stopped in years ago but don't remember what or if they have a specific affiliation(s).  Very nice school and one of the few TKD schools in the area that hasn't shut the doors in recent years.  

Is TKD a sport or SD or a traditional art?  As others have stated, the answer is, yes.  Perhaps the biggest plus of TKD is that it can hold something for just about anyone.


----------



## ralphmcpherson

You're right kong soo do, almost all clubs over here use the term "self defence" in describing/advertising their club. Many do not practice what they preach, but will still use self defence as a selling point. Im out with injury at the moment and Im getting some time up the back of class mingling with the other parents and all that Ive spoken to have listed self defence as a reason for enrolling their kids in martial arts. As one parent said to me "if all I wanted for my kids was health, fitness, discipline, socialising etc, I would have just signed him up at the local AFL club. Martial arts is self defence". I think a lot of aussies feel this way.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

ralphmcpherson said:


> You're right kong soo do, almost all clubs over here use the term "self defence" in describing/advertising their club. Many do not practice what they preach, but will still use self defence as a selling point.



That is always my pet-peeve.  It is a disservice to the student.


----------



## leadleg

When a student who has no knowledge of even making a fist or chamber a kick, teaching them how to kick, punch, or block, would be teaching the basics of self defense.


----------



## Gorilla

This debate is more about ego than sport or self defense...they are both viable and worthy pursuits!


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Gorilla said:


> This debate is more about ego than sport or self defense...they are both viable and worthy pursuits!



How?  Has anyone in the thread suggested otherwise?


----------



## Andrew

Its a Martial arts with some sports aspect mixed into it.


----------

