# Tae Kwon Do in MMA



## Kane

Judo has been in MMA for quite some time, and it works quite well. Though not very big in the UFC, North America's biggest MMA organization, it thrives in Asia's Pride Fighter. Hidehiko Yoshida is a perfect example. Hidehiko Yoshida used to be one of the greatest in his prime, and he even has a victory over Royce Gracie as I heard. Hidehiko Yoshida is and Olympic gold medalist in judo. Judo though becoming a sport is still effective in street fights.

 However, there is another big Asian martial art that is also in the Olympics, but it doesn't seem to have made it into the MMA. I actually have never heard of a Tae Kwon Do Master or Olympian in MMA. Why is this? Is Tae Kwon Do not an effective are for street fighting.

 A lot of Tae Kwon Do is striking and may teach less practical fighting moves than let's judo or BJJ, but it is still and effective striking art in my opinion. Maybe it is not the best sole are, but I think it is great art for cross-training grapplers.

 Why do you think there are not that many TKD MMArtists in MMA? Do you think it has to do with the effectiveness or do you think it has to do that TKD masters just don't want to do MMA? Do you think TKD would be a good striking art in MMA fighter? What do you think?


----------



## SammyB57

Put the top TKD guys in the world against the top boxers in the world, and let's see what happens....


----------



## Marginal

SammyB57 said:
			
		

> Put the top TKD guys in the world against the top boxers in the world, and let's see what happens....



Hope it doesn't look like this.

http://www.tkd.risp.pl/Juras_HL_Extreme.wmv

Kane: Most MMA'ers insist that the first Gracie-Yoshida fight was a work.


----------



## Andrew Green

Most TKD'ers aren't that good at staying on their feet, side effect of throwing all those kicks 

 as for the Gracie fight - It is rather questionable.  The ref called it as him being out from a choke...  But his popping up right away and arguing that kinda casts some doubt.  There was a rematch, Gracie dominated.

 It's a simple question, do the skills that the style use apply when the restrictions of that style are stripped away?


----------



## Shawn C

IMO, top athletes in other combat sports see no reason to enter MMA. The rewards (especially financial) aren't very good, and the risk (of injury and loss of prestige) is too high.

The only ones who reach the top levels in MMA right now are people who really love the sport...they'd do it for free if they had to.


----------



## Kane

Shawn C said:
			
		

> IMO, top athletes in other combat sports see no reason to enter MMA. The rewards (especially financial) aren't very good, and the risk (of injury and loss of prestige) is too high.
> 
> The only ones who reach the top levels in MMA right now are people who really love the sport...they'd do it for free if they had to.


   That is not necessarily true. A large amount of both UFC and Pride are either wrestlers or boxers, which are the biggest combat sports in the world. Judo also makes occasional visits in the sport of MMA. In fact if you look at it, BJJ and kickboxing, though not an Olympic sport, are still combat sports. Where as kempo, karate, or kung fu which we see extremely little of are combat arts but not sports to any degree.


----------



## Shu2jack

Remember to seperate MMA from self-defense and street fighting. All three are different animals.

Like anything, it is how you train. Does TKD have "less effective" fighting techinques than other arts? I don't think so. We have punches, hooks, uppercuts, low kicks, knee strikes, elbow strikes, and the like. I read a book made in part by Renzo (I think) Gracie, which showed some of the techniques for their color belt ranks. Some of the stuff is what we use.

The problem comes in when TKD people (and people from other styles) begin to focus on jump kicks or pressure points or fancier techniques as part of their training and do not work with a lot of (resisting) partner drills. If you are training for self-defense or the cage, then you are training the wrong way. Imagine if your TKD school allows full-contact, full-contact punches to the face, a standing clinch (with points for a standing take down), and low kicks to the thighs. How much better off would TKDists be? How many would train with all those spinning and jumping kicks if they knew they would be grabbed or if their landing leg would be kicked out from underneath them?

Can TKD be used in the cage? Well, with the bad reputation TKD has, not too many people would admit to training in it. As far as the striking portion goes, kickboxing does decent and if TKDists train with more kickboxing-type rules and conditioning, then they would do fine in the striking game. The cage is not a real-life self-defense situation and you WILL probably fight at all ranges, so you need to have skill in all of them. Cross-training.

Can TKD be used in a street fight? If you are street fighting, you have not been learning TKD. We don't teach punks. (Though there are bad apples that slip through the cracks.)

Can TKD be used in self-defense? Yes, I have done so, and so has my sister and gf. Remember that self-defense is WAY more than just how well you fight.

So in summery, train like you fight so you will fight like you train. Or something close to that.


----------



## ace

There are no more singel Styel Fighters any more.
Yosdias Quote Victory over Royce was not MMA.

The did only 1 MMA Fight & it was a Draw
Ocording to Records.

The 1st 1 was a Jiu Jitsu Vs Judo Limited
Striking on the feet only match.

Verry simalr to the USJJF/JJIF Kumite Ju Jitsu.

For TKD fighter to have sucsess They Would
have to spend some time on the Ground.

Could it work of course.

But it would be the Fighter not the Art.
He/She Would Have to Feel comfertable Throwing
their Kicks knowing they May hit the Ground.

Mauris Smith has a TKD Back Round
But is Better known for His KickBoxing.

But he spent 2 Years With the Shamrocks
before He Fought.

For any Fighter To be Sucsseful They
have to Be able to Fight were ever the Fight goes.

Cross Training Is a Styel in it's self Today


----------



## WilliamJ

Sport TKD instills alot of habits that are very bad for MMA. The lack of punching to the head, getting points for questionable contact, bouncing all very bad in MMA fights.


----------



## Storm911

I study both TKD and BJJ. One of the main problems with TKD is that face and head contact with hands are not allowed in most tournaments. I have to say that I think this is stupid and dosen't represent a real fight. TKD is known for it's fast flashy kicks and if they are applied right, can be very devistating and hard. However, the sad reality is that mant TKD artists are only trained in 
" sport TKD " following WTF or ITF rules. I train in both arts in addition to western style boxing. I kind of take the TKD kicks and strikes ,the BJJ take downs and submissions, mix it together and use both. I feel that the days of studying one martial art is over. However, there will always be people that say their style is the best. I guess they will have to find out what we all already know the hard way.


----------



## Shawn C

"_That is not necessarily true. A large amount of both UFC and Pride are either wrestlers or boxers, which are the biggest combat sports in the world._"

Wrestlers can make quick money in MMA; that's why most of them started competing. They are guys that were towards the end of their wrestling careers, too. Cael Sanderson isn't going to jump in the Octagon anytime soon.

No top boxers compete in MMA (or even B or C-level boxers).


"_Judo also makes occasional visits in the sport of MMA._"

Yoshida is the only one I can think of. I believe he'd retired from Judo anyway.


"_In fact if you look at it, BJJ and kickboxing, though not an Olympic sport, are still combat sports._"

BJJ and MMA have always been intertwined. Kickboxers can make more money in K-1 events. I don't know why they would get involved in MMA.


----------



## ace

No top boxers compete in MMA (or even B or C-level boxers).


Not True at all 
Luke Spencer is a Good Pro Boxer/MMA Fighter
Jens Pulver is undefeated Pro Boxer & a Good MMA Fighter

Don Frye was a Pro Boxer,Melton Bowen Was IBF Champion 
While he Fought in the Octagon 
James Warren. I could go on all Day :whip:


----------



## Shogun

> They are guys that were towards the end of their wrestling careers, too.


Matt Lindland won silver at 2000 olympics in Sydney in Greco roman. He is still actively involved in Greco Roman

as for Judo practitioners:
Karo Parisyan is a top notch Judo guy, and a top 10 welterwight, with a 3-1 UFC record.


----------



## Shawn C

No offense to guys like Pulver (who started boxing pro only recently) and Frye, but they aren't top boxers. They haven't been in a championship fight, nor are they anywhere close to getting a championship fight. If they had a career in boxing, why would they mess with MMA? 

This goes back to my point that other combat sports are more rewarding than MMA. That's probably why Pulver crossed over to boxing anyway...the chance of making bigger money. God knows the UFC never paid him well.


"_Matt Lindland won silver at 2000 olympics in Sydney in Greco roman. He is still actively involved in Greco Roman_"

Lindland is an exception. I will be curious to see if he wrestles in the next Olympics. I don't see how he can compete in both sports in the future.

I don't know Karo's standing in Judo, but I don't believe he was an Olympian. He seems to be firmly planted in MMA, so I assume he gave up any Judo career he had for it.


----------



## phlaw

Didn't Cal Worsham do pretty well in a couple of the UFC's, and he was a TKD practioner.


----------



## Andrew Green

phlaw said:
			
		

> Didn't Cal Worsham do pretty well in a couple of the UFC's, and he was a TKD practioner.


 Different times 

 Back in those days UFC was style vs style and the level of fighters was a lot lower.  Not to many of the fighters from then can do much now.  Tank was a main attraction, now he's an easy match up and I'm pretty sure he beat up Cal pretty bad at one point.


----------



## Shogun

Karo Parisyan did attend the olympic trials. I dont think he qualified, no sure of the specifics. He is a very good judo guy, and plans on attending the 2008 olympics in Beijing.


----------



## Corporal Hicks

I have not seen much UFC. Have they got any fight video clips with TKDers on? I mean they only really seem to grapple, I guess high kicking isnt really appliable. I mean are there any pre-dominant TKDers in UFC?


Regards


----------



## Shogun

I give mention to 2 TKD blackbelts in the UFC, and one who used to be.

Bas Rutten- 3rd degree BB in TKD
Robbie Lawler- blackbelt
Yves Edwards- Blackbelt

these are some of the best fighters of past and present. mind you, they train MMA and stuff, but TKD seems to be good for MMA training.


----------



## JDenz

there will never be an olympic level TKD guy in UFC or Pride.  They will have spent to long being geared for olympic level TKD and weill never be good enough in every position.  There are alot of olympic level wrestlers in UFC and Pride anybody that won worlds (olympics in a non olympic year) or was an alternate they are the best of the best.  There are a couple olympic level Judo guys in Pride.  You will never see a top five guy in boxing in the cage because they can get 15 times the money to just box what they are good at.   A guy that could just box would get eaten up in MMA.  Botha is having a hard time just kickboxing and he was a contender once.


----------



## FearlessFreep

One thing to keep in mind about Olympic level TKDists is that they are that level in Olympic rules TKD, which has very specific rules in terms of scoring and legal shots which leads to a very specific set of tactics designed against those rules. That's not "TKD", that's "Olympic TKD", which does not really represent the highest level of TKD combat.

To turn the question around how many UFC fighters would do well in a high level olympic rules TKD sparring match?  None, I would think, because the rules are different and you learn to compete within those rules.  How many UFC fighters would do well in an environment where you cannot trap or clinch and connot punch to the head or face and cannot take down your opponent?  On the other hand, most people who train to be really good at Olympic TKD do not train in those aspects so...  It would take a very concentrated effort by a Olympic TKDist to train to be good in other techniques...but why bother.  By just a guess at observation, even in my mid-size city there are several TKD events a year, giving more opportunitues to compete.  How many UFC-style events can the average UFC fighter compete in in his own city per-year?

One thing my instructor has been harping on a lot recently is that what you train the most for is what you naturally react with.  He's big on TKD as self-defense and not big on sparring. When we spar we do olympic rules sparring, but we dont spar as much as many other schools.  We train a lot in all those things that are not allowed by sparring rules, hand strikes to the head/neck, traps and blocks, joint manipulations and takedowns, kicks to break knees and arm bars to break arms, etc....the full range of TKD as a fighting art.  I probably spent more time last week working on takedown techniques than I did working on sparring techniques.  We train for scenarios of an attacker punching to the head or trying to bull-rush us, etc...someone attacking in ways that are not legal sparring but are likely to be seen in..well..real life.  I spar, and I do it pretty well for a guy of my experience, but I try to focus on using sparring to teach me to keep my focus and to react quickly to an aggressive and skilled opponent doing what I don't expect.  Stay alert and aware, strike hard (really hard) and fast, don't get hit, stay balanced and in control, etc.. My instructor gets on me when I do things in sparring that are ok, but would get me hurt if I was fighting someone not following sparring rules.  I think that as I continue and put most of my focus into fighting TKD, that my sparring finess and technique will not keep up with my peers.  My hope, or my experiment, is to be good at fighting/self-defense TKD and then to apply that in sparring.  I won't be as good at some of the sparring-only tactics, but I hope to hold my own just by being faster, stronger, and more skilled in proper technique than my opponent (and I think I'm a long way from doing it).

Anyway, sorry for going astray.  The point is that olympic-style TKD has certain rules of engagement that promote certain tactics that are not the same as TKD as a fighting art.  So someone who trains a lot to be really good at olympic rules TKD is probably not going to be very good at UFC, and vice versa.  Someone who trains a more 'traditional' or 'fighting/self-defense' of TKD would probably do much better, but...I don't see how someone who trains like that would end up in a UFC-style match anyway.  UFC is itself just a sport with a different set of rules that encourages a certain style of interaction and certain tactics.  

I don't think that's specific to TKD, I think a lot of MAists train for self-defense/fighting  and would do very well in a UFC-style match but have no interest, reason, or opportunity to do it.


----------



## Shogun

I dont really like Olympic TKD. The thing is, Kano develped judo, with the idea of Olympics in his mind,even if only a small idea. not the case with taekwondo. it was more of a rejuvination of a martial art. it existed, then didnt, then did.
My old TKD instructor taught some wicked Tae Kyon self defense techniques, that were really cool. the low kicks were similar to Muay Thai, and the grappling used a lot of subtle takedowns. placing the knee behind the attackers knee and such.


----------



## FearlessFreep

_placing the knee behind the attackers knee and such._

Yeah, we do that one a lot.  Planting the toes behind the attackers foot with a bent knee and then push the heel down and straighten your leg; it will cause their knee to bend and if you couple it with some sort of upper body motion like a shoulder shove or a palm heel strike to the jaw and then drive down, they attacker goes down fairly quickly.

Sorta wish I saw those kinda fast takedowns in UFC.


----------



## Shogun

In UFC, the opponent is more prepared than in a self defense situation, and they focus on the main takedown groups of single and double legs and reaps.
On the street, your attacker doesnt have 4 months to watch videos on your fights, and prepare for how you fight.


----------



## JDenz

In self defense there not bad *** mugs that have been training non stop for  four months to knock your teeth out.


----------



## Semaj

Well, unless you are from NY...


----------



## JDenz

lol


----------



## phlaw

Olympic Tae Kwon Do'ers usually don't know how to punch.


----------



## Shogun

> In self defense there not bad *** mugs that have been training non stop for four months to knock your teeth out.


exactly. it goes down to the basics in MMA competition.



> Olympic Tae Kwon Do'ers usually don't know how to punch.


Are Olympic TKD'ers allowed to punch?


----------



## JDenz

They are allowed to punch but it is kind of a rarity for it to score.   I watched the olympics and I saw a clean punch land solidly not score.  I really am not sure of the rules if there is a TKDist that does this stlye of compition I would be very interested to read the rules.


----------



## FearlessFreep

Punching is allowed and supposed to score.  They are supposed to be starting to reinforce scoring punches more often.  My instructor teaches TKD for self-defense/fighting so we work a lot on doing good punches and when we spar he encourages us to use them.  In a match recently, I punched my opponent and it knocked him down.  Ironically, I got the extra point for the knock down from a legal technique, but not a point for the punch itself.


----------



## sgtmac_46

Lets just apply a simple formula to the equation. If it works it works. If it don't work, it probably don't work. Wanting something to work when it doesn't, or trying to figure a unique variable where it might work, is silly. If TKD works in the MMA ring, then we'll see it a lot. If it doesn't, I don't predict it to be a training trend in the MMA ring. It's that simple. In fact, it's kind of why the MMA was developed, to see what worked. I guess we could change the rules to make something work, but then we'd be doing what the MMA's were designed to reverse. If we see a trend of good TKD techniques that start working in the octagon or, where ever, then heck, i'll start stealing them. Until then, oh well. I'm really kind of tired of hearing people talk about how their style doesn't get the respect it deserves in MMA. If it earns respect, it'll deserve it. I'm not saying that some TKD practioners won't come in and earn some respect for their style, i'm just saying lets see it first.  I know Bas Rutten and several others have black belts in TKD, but i've got Rutten's books, and I don't see any TKD in it.  That kind of makes me wonder what he thinks of the style in MMA.


----------



## Han-Mi

Most people who start TKD do not wish to train toward that particular goal, I assume. I will probably do a few small time MMA fights, but I will not try to go for prid or ufc. as have a few students at the school I train at.  I have seen a few TKDers in UFC and Pride though.  nobody huge yet though.


----------



## pnoy_kickfighter

Kane said:
			
		

> Judo has been in MMA for quite some time, and it works quite well. Though not very big in the UFC, North America's biggest MMA organization, it thrives in Asia's Pride Fighter. Hidehiko Yoshida is a perfect example. Hidehiko Yoshida used to be one of the greatest in his prime, and he even has a victory over Royce Gracie as I heard. Hidehiko Yoshida is and Olympic gold medalist in judo. Judo though becoming a sport is still effective in street fights.
> 
> However, there is another big Asian martial art that is also in the Olympics, but it doesn't seem to have made it into the MMA. I actually have never heard of a Tae Kwon Do Master or Olympian in MMA. Why is this? Is Tae Kwon Do not an effective are for street fighting.
> 
> A lot of Tae Kwon Do is striking and may teach less practical fighting moves than let's judo or BJJ, but it is still and effective striking art in my opinion. Maybe it is not the best sole are, but I think it is great art for cross-training grapplers.
> 
> Why do you think there are not that many TKD MMArtists in MMA? Do you think it has to do with the effectiveness or do you think it has to do that TKD masters just don't want to do MMA? Do you think TKD would be a good striking art in MMA fighter? What do you think?


 As for your question, I think it matters in which training you do. In MMA competitions it is not advisable to fight in TKD olympic rules style but as you can see in UFC the competitors also do some roundhouse kicks and some occasional spinning kicks in K-1 where do you think they got that? You might notice that some of the MMA fighters put emphasis on grappling because that works for them. If you are a TKD practitioner you have to mix it with some ground styles or close range styles but still let people know that you are a TKD practitioner. You can do fancy kicks in real life fights or in UFC if the timing is right for example if the opponent is stagering you can give him a kick or two


----------



## SammyB57

David Loiseau... used the spinning back kick as a counter to the overhand right.


----------



## Han-Mi

ya know, there are quite a few head kick knock outs in those best knockouts clips you find all over the internet


----------



## hwarang

SammyB57 said:
			
		

> David Loiseau... used the spinning back kick as a counter to the overhand right.


 i saw that fight! it was freaking sweet


----------



## hwarang

chuck lidell does alot of striking thats kinda similar to tai kwon do


----------



## shinbushi

hwarang said:
			
		

> chuck lidell does alot of striking thats kinda similar to tai kwon do


 Ah no that is Muay Thai
 From http://www.knucklepit.com/mixed-martial-arts-chuck_liddell.htm


> However it was Chucks striking prowess that         drew him acclaim as one of the most street-effective fighters in MMA.         His Muay Thai skills earned him heavyweight titles in USMPA (an American         Thai boxing association) and WKA (World Kickboxing Association) and two         national kickboxing belts. For Chucks toe-to-toe training he has         remained with The Pits John Hackleman as his kickboxing instructor.


----------



## hardheadjarhead

Shogun said:
			
		

> I give mention to 2 TKD blackbelts in the UFC, and one who used to be.
> 
> Bas Rutten- 3rd degree BB in TKD
> Robbie Lawler- blackbelt
> Yves Edwards- Blackbelt
> 
> these are some of the best fighters of past and present. mind you, they train MMA and stuff, but TKD seems to be good for MMA training.




Interesting...but that doesn't qualify the art if they're not using the methods from it.  Erik Paulsen has a third dan in TKD, and he really never used too much of it in the ring.


Regards,


Steve


----------



## Shu2jack

> Interesting...but that doesn't qualify the art if they're not using the methods from it.


 
When you say "methods", what are you referring to exactly?


----------



## hardheadjarhead

Shu2jack said:
			
		

> When you say "methods", what are you referring to exactly?



I should have been more specific.

A particular technique alone, such as a back kick, does not qualify the art itself as having made an impact on MMA.  Paulson has a zippy roundhouse kick, but that kick is also done in some of the other arts he's dabbled in.  

If we see a person do something along the lines of a successful spin kick to the head, and that person studied TKD, we might be able to say that extensive training in TKD brought that kick out.  It validates the kick (with proper conditions) and the person's past training towards developing that kick...but the art as a whole has yet to make its measure in the game.  We aren't going to see MMA aspirants flocking to TKD schools in order to learn the art.

If you were to take a person who did nothing but TKD as their stand up game (and here I allow blending in of grappling skills), and they were to handle themselves well in the ring using TKD skills alone, then that would impress me.  


Regards,


Steve


----------



## Shu2jack

> If you were to take a person who did nothing but TKD as their stand up game (and here I allow blending in of grappling skills), and they were to handle themselves well in the ring using TKD skills alone, then that would impress me.


Well, when a TKD fighter decides to use the set curriculum and techniques (that are similar to many other striking arts) he learns and gears them for K-1, Pride, or UFC, then you will see a TKD fighter that can handle himself in the ring. Instead, most gear themselves for Olympic or point sparring and choose the techniques and methods that will work in those arenas.

I also don't think that TKD has recovered from the blow that MMA delivered to TMA and in the public's eye TKD sucks, so most of the young aspiring fighters will go to other arts that did well from the start. I think that if TKD is to get any respect in the MMA field, it needs to be within the next 5 years while many of the young TKD practioners who have focused only on TKD are still in fighting age. Otherwise those who want to go into the ring or just want to learn how to fight will go to other arts and long time TKD practioners will cross-train or move on to other arts instead of modifying how they train in TKD, destroying what effectiveness TKD can have.


----------



## Marginal

Shu2jack said:
			
		

> Well, when a TKD fighter decides to use the set curriculum and techniques (that are similar to many other striking arts) he learns and gears them for K-1, Pride, or UFC, then you will see a TKD fighter that can handle himself in the ring.


Losing proposition. When you do that, you produce a kickboxer.


----------



## Shu2jack

A kickboxer that focuses on respect, integrity, honor, self-control, humility, etc.

I didn't say that TKD had to have it's own unique style. I am just saying that a properly trainined person who has studied only TKD could hold his own. So what if it looks like kickboxing, or is. It is still TKD if they study the forms, one-steps, and other TKD material.

I guess an identity crisis is in order.    But really, if you take all striking arts and gear them for a certain event for years, they will all look pretty much the same, as we will see as MMA becomes its own style.


----------



## Marginal

Shu2jack said:
			
		

> A kickboxer that focuses on respect, integrity, honor, self-control, humility, etc.


I haven't seen much evidence that practicing a do art generates this better than a boxing gym does. Call it sportsmanship and self-discipline, or what have you. 



> I didn't say that TKD had to have it's own unique style.


Neither did I. I said, it doesn't matter what you do to prove TKD ring effectiveness. If you do train a ring effective fighter, you generate a ring fighter. At best, you'd have a ring fighter that kicks with greater frequency.  



> So what if it looks like kickboxing, or is. It is still TKD if they study the forms, one-steps, and other TKD material.


It just won't convince anyone in the MMA set that TKD's an effective art 'cause they won't let you claim they're actually doing TKD. 

They'll just say "You should've studied MT. Now you're just doing bad kickboxing."


----------



## arnisador

I have to agree. If it's successful, people'll claim it was MMA all the time. There's no winning.


----------



## Shu2jack

Maybe I will argue this at a later time, but right now I am tired and I think we are both on a totally different page. I think we are in disagreement of what TKD is and what needs to change in TKD to make it a ring effective art.

All I am saying is that if a TKD practioner;

-Conditions himself like he is going into the ring.
-Spars in TKD class with rules that allow him to punch to the head and kick below the belt and perhaps allowing grappling. Make sure it is at least "moderate" contact in the classroom.
-Makes sure to do his TKD drills with "aliveness"

then he should be able to hold his own in the striking game and in self-defense. You don't need to change TKD's focus, TKD's curriculum, or anything else.

So now if a TKD practioner does these things and can hold his own, how is it not TKD? What I am getting from you is that unless a person is dropping his hands, throwing jumpy/spinny kicks, and bouncing then it is not TKD.


----------



## Marginal

Shu2jack said:
			
		

> So now if a TKD practioner does these things and can hold his own, how is it not TKD? What I am getting from you is that unless a person is dropping his hands, throwing jumpy/spinny kicks, and bouncing then it is not TKD.


That's basically it. I've had that particular conversation a few too many times with MMA proponents already to beleive that they'd actually credit the result as TKD. 

They'd just toss out gems like, "Why aren't they thowing down blocks like in the patterns?"


----------



## Shu2jack

> That's basically it. I've had that particular conversation a few too many times with MMA proponents already to beleive that they'd actually credit the result as TKD.


I see what you are getting at now. It's closed-minded and unfortunate.




> They'd just toss out gems like, "Why aren't they thowing down blocks like in the patterns?"


"Why don't you run around aimlessly in the ring like you do when jogging?"


----------



## tradrockrat

Well, I was doing fine reading this thread until the middle of page three.

 Here's my issue.  I've seen guys from all different walks of life and martial arts backgrounds throw spinning kicks, roundhouses, two legged take downs, arm bars , etc.  That's why they call it MIXED MARTIAL ARTS in these competitions.  A spinning back kick does NOT belong to TKD, nor does a clinch belong to Muay Tai.  An arm bar is NOT the exclusive domain of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.  Many Martial arts share techniques.  MMA is about taking techniques *that work for the individual fighter *and using them together to defeat your opponent.  They don't pretend to do anything else.

 I get so frustrated when people say things like, "He's a wrestler, so he'll do real good." or, "He's a kickboxer, if he lands a punch it's all over."

*Baloney!

*They are MMA's.  They have all had to learn other techniques to augment their skill set.  There is NO REASON that someone who studied TKD couldn't augment his skill set to include grappling and go out and be successful in MMA.  After all, "It's not the art that makes the man, but the man who makes the art."

 This entire question is moot.  In the beginning it had real merit because it was style versus style (though really it was one really good Jiu-Jitsu guy against thugs with one boxing glove on...).  now it is about the better fighter.  they all kick, punch, grapple, wrestle, choke, and go for submissions.  In short , they are *all* MMA's.

 You want to win MMA?  Train to fight MMA.
 You want to win Olympic TKD?  Train to fight Olympic TKD.
 You want to win the Heavyweight Boxing championship of the world?  Get to know Don King...


----------



## NotQuiteDead

> They'd just toss out gems like, "Why aren't they thowing down blocks like in the patterns?"


 Whether or not many would use those blocks, the fact that they are in the patterns is evidence that they were intended to be used. If you were going to found a style, why would you have someone practice fighting one way while doing a form, but then expect them to suddenly fight a completely different way for real?

 If someone who trains in only TKD for striking does well in MMA using TKD techniques then I wouldn't argue that his TKD training helped, but my guess is that he wouldn't be fighting anything like Choi had in mind when he created TKD.


----------



## Shu2jack

> Whether or not many would use those blocks, the fact that they are in the patterns is evidence that they were intended to be used. If you were going to found a style, why would you have someone practice fighting one way while doing a form, but then expect them to suddenly fight a completely different way for real?


1.) As it has been said in other areas recently, some things serve a purpose other than direct fighting application.

2.) As a sport, you need to use techniques that will be more sucessful in that arena. Why would I choose techniques that don't work well in the ruleset I am going to fight in? In a fight, I will use the TKD techniques that would hopefull work best in a situation. If I was to pick to fight in a certain sporting event, I will pick the TKD techniques that will work with their rules.

3.) FORMS ARE NOT PRACTICE FIGHTING.

4.) The UFC or Pride does not give situations where some techniques would be used. For example, I have used the Knife Hand High Block to help defend myself against a drunk with a knife who was trying to grab me. I took the technique from the yellow belt form and modified it to the situation. 

I don't think too many Pride fighters are going to be in the ring squatting while unaware untill the last moments that their (drunk) opponent may be about to knife them. In these situations certain techniques become viable because shooting in for a take-down and other things that MMAists have to worry about are not really an option.


----------



## Marginal

NotQuiteDead said:
			
		

> Whether or not many would use those blocks, the fact that they are in the patterns is evidence that they were intended to be used. If you were going to found a style, why would you have someone practice fighting one way while doing a form, but then expect them to suddenly fight a completely different way for real?


The basic motions can be applied more than one way. 



> If someone who trains in only TKD for striking does well in MMA using TKD techniques then I wouldn't argue that his TKD training helped, but my guess is that he wouldn't be fighting anything like Choi had in mind when he created TKD.


Going by Choi's memoirs, he tangled with Judo players more than once. I think he took more than just striking into consideration during TKD's formative process. The TKD encyclopedia does demonstrate ground fighting applications etc. They're not super advanced, but they are there. The question largely hangs upon which techniques are practiced, and why? Sweeps, takedowns etc in sparring? Gone for insurance purposes. Low kicks? Same. Does adding them back in really create "not TKD"?


----------



## FearlessFreep

_The basic motions can be applied more than one way._

 In our class on Monday, we worked with the very first motion in Taegeuk Il-Jang, with some minor modifications, into a self defense against a mid level punch.  The "chamber" before the block became a deflection and trap, the downblock itself, with some modified hand motions became pulling the wirst down and in, and the foreward punch was re-targetted to the bicep.  Just a small example but with some thought it's not hard to find practical application in the basic movements of forms


----------



## NotQuiteDead

Shu2jack,

 1) If forms aren't for fighting they wouldn't contain punches and kicks. If you practice them for fitness etc. fine, but you'd be better off doing something that won't develop bad habits for fighting imo. But I'm sure that topic has been done to death.

 2) Under what rule set are low forearm blocks useful? If you're fighting with certain rules or without rules, it doesn't matter. Blocking like that exposes your head.

 3) See my response to number 1.

 4) I wasn't talking about blocking an arm-height attack with your arm, I was talking about blocking an attack to your legs or groin with your arm. Reaching that low leaves your face open.



			
				Marginal said:
			
		

> The basic motions can be applied more than one way.


 When Choi made TKD, do you think he came up with a pre-arranged set of movements and then thought, "Hey, each of these movements can be applied more than one way!"? I think it was more likely that forms were designed as a way to practice techniques without hurting your partner, and that the movements originally had one application. I could go take a dancing class and make up fighting applications for the movements, but that's not what they were designed for.



			
				Marginal said:
			
		

> Going by Choi's memoirs, he tangled with Judo players more than once. I think he took more than just striking into consideration during TKD's formative process. The TKD encyclopedia does demonstrate ground fighting applications etc. They're not super advanced, but they are there. The question largely hangs upon which techniques are practiced, and why? Sweeps, takedowns etc in sparring? Gone for insurance purposes. Low kicks? Same. Does adding them back in really create "not TKD"?


 When Choi created TKD, do you think he designed the stances, footwork, etc. with the threat of low kicks and takedowns in mind?

 Why can't you use takedowns and sweeps while sparring? Getting taken down is less dangerous than getting punched or kicked in the head.



			
				fearlessfreep said:
			
		

> In our class on Monday, we worked with the very first motion in Taegeuk Il-Jang, with some minor modifications, into a self defense against a mid level punch. The "chamber" before the block became a deflection and trap, the downblock itself, with some modified hand motions became pulling the wirst down and in, and the foreward punch was re-targetted to the bicep. Just a small example but with some thought it's not hard to find practical application in the basic movements of forms


 Again, when the forms were made, do you think the makers picked movements that could be applied to any situation and then put them together, or do you think they picked techniques that they practiced and put them in order?

 If I was going to develop a style and train someone in it, I would teach them techniques they could use, not a dance they have to find "hidden" techniques in.


----------



## Marginal

NotQuiteDead said:
			
		

> When Choi made TKD, do you think he came up with a pre-arranged set of movements and then thought, "Hey, each of these movements can be applied more than one way!"? I think it was more likely that forms were designed as a way to practice techniques without hurting your partner, and that the movements originally had one application.


Weird how more than one aplpication is frequently listed in that case. He envisioned one thing, then designed it on paper completely differently? 



> When Choi created TKD, do you think he designed the stances, footwork, etc. with the threat of low kicks and takedowns in mind?


As there are multiple low kick counters present as primary applications in the patterns, I have no reason to doubt that he took low line kicks into consideration. 



> Why can't you use takedowns and sweeps while sparring? Getting taken down is less dangerous than getting punched or kicked in the head.


Choi's idea of sparring was no to light contact. Can't really do a light contact sweep/takedown. 



> Again, when the forms were made, do you think the makers picked movements that could be applied to any situation and then put them together, or do you think they picked techniques that they practiced and put them in order?


No reason it has to be an either/or proposition. 



> If I was going to develop a style and train someone in it, I would teach them techniques they could use, not a dance they have to find "hidden" techniques in.


The techiques aren't exactly hidden.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

Marginal,
 Why do you think Choi invented the patterns? My guess is that he invented it so that people had a way to practice their techniques on their own, like shadowboxing but with pre-arranged techniques. *Techniques*, not generic movements. I.e. to practice your punches, kicks, blocks, some grappling, etc. I don't think he picked a movement, looked for random applications, and then threw it in 'just in case'.

 I just get sick of people saying their style can deal with any situation because "x" movement from "y" form could be used to do "z". The bottom line is if you don't practice those movements in those situations with a partner then you're probably not going to use it.

 When doing patterns, do you think about the movements as punches, kicks, blocks, etc. or do you think of them as generic movements that you simply repeat and then later when attacked you will magically apply those movements in situations you've never trained for?

 I asked about sweeps and takedowns because you said you can't do them for insurance reasons. Obviously injuries from takedowns that require treatment aren't that common. They are used without holding back all the time when training in various martial arts and sports.


----------



## FearlessFreep

_I just get sick of people saying their style can deal with any situation because "x" movement from "y" form could be used to do "z". The bottom line is if you don't practice those movements in those situations with a partner then you're probably not going to use it._

 Why do you assume people don't?

_When doing patterns, do you think about the movements as punches, kicks, blocks, etc. or do you think of them as generic movements that you simply repeat and then later when attacked you will magically apply those movements in situations you've never trained for?_

 Both.  Sometimes when doing a form I think "this is a punch", sometimes I alter my hands a bit and think "this is a trap" and practice it as such.  There are a *lot* of form movements that are basically 'block-strike', where the blocking hand comes back into you as the strike goes forward and to me, I'm contantly thinking of the block as a trap and the pull back and strike as pulling the attacker into me as I strike forward.  I mentally and physically work a lot of SJM into how I practice forms

 I don't know about other schools but we treat forms both formally as part of the art, as well as practice in motions; and we explore and practice how to use those motions practically.  My biceps are sore from the last two classes of having a partner trap my punch and counter strike me, all based on movements from simple forms

 But *shrug* this is an overdone conversation.  Those who don't like forms don't find value in them (or maybe the other way around).  Those who (can) find value in them do so, and use them.


----------



## Marginal

NotQuiteDead said:
			
		

> Marginal,
> Why do you think Choi invented the patterns?


Well, he didn't create them. He largely just approved them. Most were developed by various instructors. There was also intertia from the fact Shotokan had patterns, and so on.



> My guess is that he invented it so that people had a way to practice their techniques on their own, like shadowboxing but with pre-arranged techniques.


I can only go by what he said his intent was. Generating new patterns was one way to differientiate TKD from its Japanese roots. The fact he bothered to list alternate applications would still indicate that he wasn't thinking that a technique had only one use. 



> *Techniques*, not generic movements.


To a point, you're right. A palm pushing block is presented as a palm pushing block. However, it still doubles as a palm heel strike in a pinch for example. Same motion, different application. 



> I don't think he picked a movement, looked for random applications, and then threw it in 'just in case'.


I think you're overthinking it. Choi presented the techniques with a primary application (the one you routinely practice in the form) and then secondary applications, which are incorperated into self defense and step sparring applications. So they're all trained, just not at the same time, as some things work better in two person drilling etc.



> I just get sick of people saying their style can deal with any situation because "x" movement from "y" form could be used to do "z". The bottom line is if you don't practice those movements in those situations with a partner then you're probably not going to use it.


I've already said that if something's not trained, it's not going to be useful. But to say that they weren't intended to be there just because they've fallen into disuse... That's not accurate. 



> I asked about sweeps and takedowns because you said you can't do them for insurance reasons. Obviously injuries from takedowns that require treatment aren't that common. They are used without holding back all the time when training in various martial arts and sports.


Nonetheless, that's why they aren't routinely used in sparring. We break them out in self defense drills etc when we actually have mats down.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

I think it's backwards to learn a form and then get taught the applications. If the applications are supposed to be used, why not learn them first, practice them with a partner, on a heavy bag, on pads, etc. and then you can do them in the air all you want? You wouldn't walk into a boxing gym and expect to get taught shadowboxing, and then learn "applications" of it. You learn to box, and shadowboxing is just practicing it on your own...

 I think people would get more out of forms if they learned everything separately, and only then put them together.


----------



## FearlessFreep

Boxers do not step into the ring the first time in the gym.  They learn the techniques and train the techniques before putting the gloves on against a live opponent

_I think people would get more out of forms if they learned everything separately, and only then put them together._

 I learned how to do walking stance, forward extended stance, down block, outer block, reverse punch , and snap kick all before learning my first form, which uses those techniques.  I've never learned a form without already knowing all the basic moves of the form.  That being said, if the first day I did a down block, my instructor had said "this can also be used as a trap and then you can do this and that and the other from this basic movement", I would've been very confused.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

> Boxers do not step into the ring the first time in the gym. They learn the techniques and train the techniques before putting the gloves on against a live opponent


 Where did I say anything different?



> I learned how to do walking stance, forward extended stance, down block, outer block, reverse punch , and snap kick all before learning my first form, which uses those techniques. I've never learned a form without already knowing all the basic moves of the form. That being said, if the first day I did a down block, my instructor had said "this can also be used as a trap and then you can do this and that and the other from this basic movement", I would've been very confused.


 But in an earlier post you said this:



> In our class on Monday, we worked with the very first motion in Taegeuk Il-Jang, with some minor modifications, into a self defense against a mid level punch. The "chamber" before the block became a deflection and trap, the downblock itself, with some modified hand motions became pulling the wirst down and in, and the foreward punch was re-targetted to the bicep. *Just a small example but with some thought it's not hard to find practical application in the basic movements of forms*


 You didn't learn that and then put it into a form and practice it on your own, you practiced the form and then learned applications of it...

 I don't have a problem with people practicing forms, shadowboxing, etc. but I think it's ridiculous to base all your training off of a form, and learn "applications" of movements rather than learning the techniques themselves. If something works, use it! It just makes no sense to learn movements before techniques.


----------



## FearlessFreep

_You didn't learn that and then put it into a form and practice it on your own, you practiced the form and then learned applications of it..._

 *sigh*  I learned some moves and the applications, a bunch of those moves were then taught to me as a form, then I learned *more* applications for the same move.  I learned a snap kick (front kick) and learned to do it at various heights to various targets and with variations (toes forward for horizontal targets like groin, toes back for vertical targets like thigh, solar plexus, or face). Then I learned my first form, which happened to include a snap kick to the face.  I learned a fornal down-block which inludes a chambering motion, but also learned that in a real fight that the whole chamber is not needed, but then I used the formal downblock in a form, but then learned that the the chamber motion can be a block ot a trap in it's own right. Usually by the time I learn a new form, I've already learned several applications of the movements within the form, and as I learn the form and train in it, I learn more.

_ I think it's ridiculous to base all your training off of a form,_

 So do I, and nobody I know of does all their self-defense training based only on form movements.  I learned my first set of basic SD movements before I had learned my first form.  Heck, many of my first SD moves were as much Hapkido based as TKD based

 You seem to be assuming that day 1, class 1 is to learn a form and then learn how to do self-defense from just the motions in that form.  It's not taught and trained like that.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

> I learned a fornal down-block which inludes a chambering motion, but also learned that in a real fight that the whole chamber is not needed, but then I used the formal downblock in a form, but then learned that the the chamber motion can be a block ot a trap in it's own right. Usually by the time I learn a new form, I've already learned several applications of the movements within the form, and as I learn the form and train in it, I learn more.


 So why not learn the down block without the chambering motion as a block, and then learn the chambering motion as a grab separately? I see no reason to practice them together in the first place.

   When I trained in kung fu, we did the same thing but we _also_ practiced a drill where we would pull the opponent's hand to the chamber while punching. It made no sense to practice the chamber while punching because the drill was a better way to practice it and wouldn't develop bad habits. People have told me sometimes that instead of bringing my hand back to my face after a jab I'll drop it down by my chest, which is no doubt a bad habit from punching from the chamber and bringing it back there.



> So do I, and nobody I know of does all their self-defense training based only on form movements. I learned my first set of basic SD movements before I had learned my first form. Heck, many of my first SD moves were as much Hapkido based as TKD based
> 
> You seem to be assuming that day 1, class 1 is to learn a form and then learn how to do self-defense from just the motions in that form. It's not taught and trained like that.


 A lot of people do train like that, though. They may learn the basics separately but then they talk about takedown defenses, weapon disarms, joint locks, etc. that are "hidden" in the form that are learned afterwards. You posted an example of that, which I just quoted in my last post. Training like that is very much based on forms. If you didn't talk about the form or it's applications, would you learn much besides punches, kicks, and blocks?


----------



## Marginal

NotQuiteDead said:
			
		

> I think it's backwards to learn a form and then get taught the applications.


Good thing it's trained the other way around. 

Lots of boxers etc drop hands their too low after a punch. A lot of the initial drills and instruction in boxing centers around getting them to keep their hands up. I doubt it's a bad habit forced upon you from practicing kung fu.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

> Lots of boxers etc drop hands their too low after a punch. A lot of the initial drills and instruction in boxing centers around getting them to keep their hands up. I doubt it's a bad habit forced upon you from practicing kung fu.


 I haven't done any drills since starting mma that didn't involve keeping my guard up and bringing my hands back to my guard after a punch. The problem isn't with keeping my hands up, but sometimes I bring them back towards the "chamber" but stop lowering them at about chest level. The way my coach demonstrated what I was doing looked exactly like someone bringing their hands to the chamber, just not as far.


----------



## Marginal

NotQuiteDead said:
			
		

> I haven't done any drills since starting mma that didn't involve keeping my guard up and bringing my hands back to my guard after a punch. The problem isn't with keeping my hands up, but sometimes I bring them back towards the "chamber" but stop lowering them at about chest level. The way my coach demonstrated what I was doing looked exactly like someone bringing their hands to the chamber, just not as far.


You're describing what a lot of boxers and MMA'ers do as well. (Not just in training, in televised professional fights) They all have prior training in kung fu too?


----------



## NotQuiteDead

A lot of people drop their hands because they rely more on head movement than just covering up for defense, and a lot of times if people are tired they will keep their hands lower. I think I'm just lowering my hands after punches out of habit, because I occasionally do other stuff I haven't trained since I quit kung fu.


----------



## Marginal

I'd argue that keeping your hands up isn't a natural posture. It's effective, but it has to be trained and drilled.


----------



## FearlessFreep

I drop my hands too, when I'm not paying attention; partially fatigue and partially focus, but that's just an 'at rest' position when I'm sparring and not going for face/head punches.  In TKD sparring I punch to the body but need to remember to keep my hands up to keep from getting kicked in the head.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

I'm not talking about keeping my hands low like many people do, I'm talking about bringing my hand back at an angle towards the "chamber" after punching. I'm talking about what I do with my hand after a punch, not my guard.


----------



## FearlessFreep

That just sounds like a personal bad habit.  I'ts not something I do


----------



## tomthlee

FearlessFreep said:
			
		

> I drop my hands too, when I'm not paying attention; partially fatigue and partially focus, but that's just an 'at rest' position when I'm sparring and not going for face/head punches. In TKD sparring I punch to the body but need to remember to keep my hands up to keep from getting kicked in the head.


 There's a difference between keeping your hands up from getting kicked in the head rather than punched in the face. When someone is flurrying at you with jabs, cross punches, hookes, and uppercuts, the velocity is so extreme that you are FORCED to fight with your hands up. Since TKD fighters are relieved from this type of attack, you often find them with their hands down. They throw them up to block the occasional kick to the head, and keep in mind that the kick to the head moves significantly slower than the punch. Unless you are a skilled boxer looking to goad an attack, dropping your hands has zero functional value in NHB combat.

  And in regards to this comment earlier: "Why don't you run around aimlessly in the ring like you do when jogging?"

 That's called conditioning. If you want to fight someone with a more or less equal skill level, you have to be in shape. Jogging, squats, push-ups, sit-ups, pikes, etc. are exercises designed to put the athlete in shape so that he/she doesn't gas out after the first round. What does a TKD pattern or dead blocking drill do? 

 a) It doesn't put you in shape. Unless you're grossly obese and you sweat gallons from the slightest movement (in which case a nice walk around the park would be a better choice of exercise).
  b) It doesn't teach you how to fight.

 If I had to put my money on a street fighter who jogged 6 miles a day vs. a tkd fighter who drills patterns, my money is on the street fighter.

  Tom


----------



## FearlessFreep

_Since TKD fighters are relieved from this type of attack, you often find them with their hands down._

 Wrong on two counts.

 One:  Point-sparring does allow punches to the head and in point-sparring you see a *lot* more head punches and a lot less kicks than in olympic-style sparring.  Different scoring rules promote different strategy but they are both TKD sparring.

 Two: As I said, when I drop my hands I consdier it bad technique.  Hands held up allow defense of both the head and the body.  Hands held down are poor for body defense and real poor for head defense.  I'm not trying to defend some sort of 'value' of dropping hands


----------



## NotQuiteDead

Point sparring does, however, encourage people to fly at eachother recklessly while hoping to land the first hit.


----------



## tomthlee

Yes, it often resembles two angry girls trying to kill each other... with tons of flinching and flailing going on.

 Tom


----------



## tomthlee

FearlessFreep said:
			
		

> _Since TKD fighters are relieved from this type of attack, you often find them with their hands down._
> 
> Wrong on two counts.
> 
> One: Point-sparring does allow punches to the head and in point-sparring you see a *lot* more head punches and a lot less kicks than in olympic-style sparring. Different scoring rules promote different strategy but they are both TKD sparring.
> 
> Two: As I said, when I drop my hands I consdier it bad technique. Hands held up allow defense of both the head and the body. Hands held down are poor for body defense and real poor for head defense. I'm not trying to defend some sort of 'value' of dropping hands


 You are trying to defend your style, yet at the same time you refuse to defend a big trademark of your style (the dropping of hands) seen in olympic competition. Want some evidence? Here:

http://www.shinnstkd.com/whatsnew/Lopez01Small.jpg

http://www.abc.net.au/olympics/2004/galleries/day16_action/images/06_taekwondo.jpg

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/olympics/2000/taekwando/news/2000/09/28/korea_gold_ru/lg_sin_afp-01.jpg

 These pictures depict taekwondo in alive setting, sparring against each other using resistance. And in sparring, these players exhibit the bad habit of dropping the hands. Whether you like it or not, this represents your martial art. 

  Tom


----------



## Marginal

Ah. So then every TKD practitioner must also flop around like a fool too?


----------



## tomthlee

Marginal said:
			
		

> Ah. So then every TKD practitioner must also flop around like a fool too?


 That's what I've been seeing. This is an MMA forum. Let's be serious here. Would you really want to stick a pure TKD fighter in the octagon? It's inhumane for the poor TKD guinea pig.

  Tom


----------



## Marginal

tomthlee said:
			
		

> That's what I've been seeing.


Oh SNAP!


----------



## tradrockrat

tomthlee said:
			
		

> That's what I've been seeing. This is an MMA forum. Let's be serious here. Would you really want to stick a pure TKD fighter in the octagon? It's inhumane for the poor TKD guinea pig.
> 
> Tom


 Would want to stick a pure Greco Roman wrestler in there?  With no knowledge of chokes or kickboxing?

 How about a "pure" Judo practitioner?

 MMA isn't about purity.  Tom has nailed it on the head, but maybe he should take it further than just TKD.

 JMHO.

 PS - point sparring is (by and large) in my experience; taught wrong, practiced wrong, and developed wrong.  It is a joke more often than not.  NQD said it perfectly!

 BUT

 When done right, it is can be a beautiful thing to behold.  I prefer continuous - contact point fighting, but the old "score a point and stop" method used to mean something, and in a few places, it still does.


----------



## tomthlee

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> Would want to stick a pure Greco Roman wrestler in there?  With no knowledge of chokes or kickboxing?
> 
> How about a "pure" Judo practitioner?
> 
> MMA isn't about purity.  Tom has nailed it on the head, but maybe he should take it further than just TKD.
> 
> JMHO.
> 
> PS - point sparring is (by and large) in my experience; taught wrong, practiced wrong, and developed wrong. It is a joke more often than not. NQD said it perfectly!
> 
> BUT
> 
> When done right, it is can be a beautiful thing to behold. I prefer continuous - contact point fighting, but the old "score a point and stop" method used to mean something, and in a few places, it still does.


  Examples of pure wrestling/judo stylists holding their own:

 - If you date back to UFC 3: The American Dream, Christophe Leninger (a black belt in judo) was able to hold his own against Ken Shamrock (King of Pancrase) for a good five minutes (there were no time limits), which was one of the longest UFC matches in history at the time. Shamrock couldn't pass his guard at the start, couldn't work a choke when he had his back, and wound up winning the fight with strikes on the ground. 

 - Ultimate Fighter, Season 1: Josh Koscheck (collegiate wrestler, limited MMA training on the show) defeats Chris Leben (brawler with experience in MMA) via unanimous decision. People criticized Koscheck for relying on his pure wrestling skills and being a "blanket" on Leben, but the fact is that he made Leben his ***** with his well-trained takedowns and hold-downs.

  In contrast, pure TKD stylists have rarely, if ever, even faired well against trained MMA stylists.

 - Lodune Sincaid (claims to prefer the art of taekwondo) gets KO'd by Bobby Southworth on TUF 1. He comes back for the finale to fight Nathan Quarry, and just gets out-boxed. He eats a right cross to the tummy, followed by strikes that caused him to literally 'run away' from Quarry during the match. 

 - Ultimate Fight Night: Gideon Ray (1st dan TKD, state and national champion) takes on TUF 1's Mike Swick: Swick KO's Gideon in less than 20 seconds.

 It's a hard ball to swallow, but when it comes to NHB competition, certain styles are superior to others. Boxing, Muay Thai, and the various grappling sports tend to dominate the "bread and butter" of MMA.

  Tom


----------



## tradrockrat

tomthlee said:
			
		

> Examples of pure wrestling/judo stylists holding their own:
> 
> - If you date back to UFC 3: The American Dream, Christophe Leninger (a black belt in judo) was able to hold his own against Ken Shamrock (King of Pancrase) for a good five minutes (there were no time limits), which was one of the longest UFC matches in history at the time. Shamrock couldn't pass his guard at the start, couldn't work a choke when he had his back, and wound up winning the fight with strikes on the ground.


 He still lost and that's what counts in competition.  It's not enough to hold your own.



> - Ultimate Fighter, Season 1: Josh Koscheck (collegiate wrestler, limited MMA training on the show) defeats Chris Leben (brawler with experience in MMA) via unanimous decision. People criticized Koscheck for relying on his pure wrestling skills and being a "blanket" on Leben, but the fact is that he made Leben his ***** with his well-trained takedowns and hold-downs.


 He had MMA training even if it WAS limited, but relied on what he knew best.  It came down to a decision because he couldn't finish it - he didn't know how.  Why did they criticize him?  Cause they knew that relying exclusively on his wrestling would ultimately get him beaten more often than not.  It's not enough in MMA.



> In contrast, pure TKD stylists have rarely, if ever, even faired well against trained MMA stylists.
> 
> - Lodune Sincaid (claims to prefer the art of taekwondo) gets KO'd by Bobby Southworth on TUF 1. He comes back for the finale to fight Nathan Quarry, and just gets out-boxed. He eats a right cross to the tummy, followed by strikes that caused him to literally 'run away' from Quarry during the match.
> 
> - Ultimate Fight Night: Gideon Ray (1st dan TKD, state and national champion) takes on TUF 1's Mike Swick: Swick KO's Gideon in less than 20 seconds.
> 
> It's a hard ball to swallow, but when it comes to NHB competition, certain styles are superior to others. Boxing, Muay Thai, and the various grappling sports tend to dominate the "bread and butter" of MMA.
> 
> Tom


 Not going to argue your last point cause I agree with you.  My point is only this - MMA is about learning multiple styles, and techniques.  That's the whole point of it.  If somebody chooses to use TKD as their basis for their striking game they may very well make it work, but they better know how to rumble on the ground, just as that wrestler better be able to punch and kick if he wants to be a champion.


----------



## tomthlee

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> He still lost and that's what counts in competition.  It's not enough to hold your own.
> 
> 
> He had MMA training even if it WAS limited, but relied on what he knew best. It came down to a decision because he couldn't finish it - he didn't know how. Why did they criticize him? Cause they knew that relying exclusively on his wrestling would ultimately get him beaten more often than not. It's not enough in MMA.
> 
> 
> Not going to argue your last point cause I agree with you. My point is only this - MMA is about learning multiple styles, and techniques. That's the whole point of it. If somebody chooses to use TKD as their basis for their striking game they may very well make it work, but they better know how to rumble on the ground, just as that wrestler better be able to punch and kick if he wants to be a champion.


 So you dismiss Leninger's efforts as "he lost and that's all that counts," yet at the same time you dismiss Koscheck's ring ability even when he decisively won his match? What happened to your consistent theory that should state "Leben lost and that's all that counts"? 

I agree, MMA does involve completing whatever your base style is. But in the case of TKD, it's not just a matter of adding some grappling training in to complement TKD, but it's a matter of completely overhauling your system of fighting. You're speaking as if a TKD player and an amateur wrestler are on an even playing field in a full contact fight. That's just not true. I know it's politically correct to say that "it's the figher and not the style," but CERTAIN STYLES ADAPT BETTER TO AN MMA ENVIRONMENT. TKD simply isn't designed to handle the heat of a full contact fight. 

  Tom


----------



## tradrockrat

tomthlee said:
			
		

> So you dismiss Leninger's efforts as "he lost and that's all that counts," yet at the same time you dismiss Koscheck's ring ability even when he decisively won his match? What happened to your consistent theory that should state "Leben lost and that's all that counts"?
> 
> I agree, MMA does involve completing whatever your base style is. But in the case of TKD, it's not just a matter of adding some grappling training in to complement TKD, but it's a matter of completely overhauling your system of fighting. You're speaking as if a TKD player and an amateur wrestler are on an even playing field in a full contact fight. That's just not true. I know it's politically correct to say that "it's the figher and not the style," but CERTAIN STYLES ADAPT BETTER TO AN MMA ENVIRONMENT. TKD simply isn't designed to handle the heat of a full contact fight.
> 
> Tom


 I'm not dismissing anything.  There's a miscommunication here.  The fact that a great Judo fighter lost proves MY point, not yours.  One system isn't enough for MMA.  As for Lebbin, he did lose.  Koscheck WAS criticized.  He DIDN'T finish off his opponent, he won a judges decision.  It seemed pretty clear that if he had been a better rounded fighter (ie finishing moves and chokes) he would have won quickly.  He was the better fighter - that time.

 All the rest comes down to perceptions of what a martial Art is - in this specific case, your idea of TKD versus mine.  There will be no meeting of the minds here because we seem to be traveling along two different preconceptions of what TKD is and can do.  I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 BTW - I once saw a TKD student with 8 months of experience drop a college wrestler with 20 pounds on him in the street. It was over in about 20 seconds start to finish.  It isn't political correctness, its a fact.


----------



## tomthlee

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> I'm not dismissing anything. There's a miscommunication here. The fact that a great Judo fighter lost proves MY point, not yours. One system isn't enough for MMA. As for Lebbin, he did lose. Koscheck WAS criticized. He DIDN'T finish off his opponent, he won a judges decision. It seemed pretty clear that if he had been a better rounded fighter (ie finishing moves and chokes) he would have won quickly. He was the better fighter - that time.
> 
> All the rest comes down to perceptions of what a martial Art is - in this specific case, your idea of TKD versus mine. There will be no meeting of the minds here because we seem to be traveling along two different preconceptions of what TKD is and can do. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
> 
> BTW - I once saw a TKD student with 8 months of experience drop a college wrestler with 20 pounds on him in the street. It was over in about 20 seconds start to finish. It isn't political correctness, its a fact.


 Koscheck won a judge's decision because he dominated the fight. That's all there is to it. Amateur wrestling works in MMA. If it didn't, you wouldn't see Matt Hughes slamming opponents around or Randy Couture using textbook Greco Roman takedowns. Judo techniques also work in MMA (a large portion of BJJ has been derived from Judo).

 The "I once saw this guy kick that guy's ***" argument isn't a fact. Got a video of it? Pictures? Even a story in the newspaper? Contact information of both parties involved in the altercation? If so, send me a PM and I'll give you my email address. Otherwise, it's not a fact, rather just some anecdote you happened to drop in order to support your point. And no one really cares about a little story if there's no way to verify it.

 This conversation is about mixed martial arts competition. Let's be empirical about this. I am very tired of reading philosophy after philosophy that "it just depends on how you use TKD" and "TKD can work in MMA if we just worked grappling into the system." Philosophies are great to write books about. But if you want to talk about facts and results, then give me facts and results. 

 In my opinion, it's obvious and has been proven that taekwondo doesn't belong in mixed martial arts competition. When the held they K-1 fights in Korea, there was an opening act of little kiddie black belts doing forms and high kicks, but that's where the TKD ended. 

 Tom


----------



## tomthlee

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> Not going to argue your last point cause I agree with you. My point is only this - MMA is about learning multiple styles, and techniques. That's the whole point of it. If somebody chooses to use TKD as their basis for their striking game they may very well make it work, but they better know how to rumble on the ground, just as that wrestler better be able to punch and kick if he wants to be a champion.


 As a side note, you don't agree with my last point. Your argument is that a skilled TKD player can do well in MMA if they learn the needed elements required to be a "complete" fighter. My point is that TKD fighters with MMA experience still don't fare too well. Gideon Ray and Lodune Sincaid BOTH have quite a bit of MMA training (more experience than Koscheck) in addition to their TKD credentials. Yet, they both consistently lose to MMA players while Koscheck (a wrestler) continues to excel in MMA.

 Tom


----------



## tradrockrat

tomthlee said:
			
		

> The "I once saw this guy kick that guy's ***" argument isn't a fact. Got a video of it? Pictures? Even a story in the newspaper? Contact information of both parties involved in the altercation? If so, send me a PM and I'll give you my email address. Otherwise, it's not a fact, rather just some anecdote you happened to drop in order to support your point. And no one really cares about a little story if there's no way to verify it.
> 
> This conversation is about mixed martial arts competition. Let's be empirical about this. I am very tired of reading philosophy after philosophy that "it just depends on how you use TKD" and "TKD can work in MMA if we just worked grappling into the system." Philosophies are great to write books about. But if you want to talk about facts and results, then give me facts and results.
> 
> In my opinion, it's obvious and has been proven that taekwondo doesn't belong in mixed martial arts competition. When the held they K-1 fights in Korea, there was an opening act of little kiddie black belts doing forms and high kicks, but that's where the TKD ended.
> 
> 
> Tom


 So even though I saw something with my own eyes it's not a fact...whatever man.  

 You go ahead and continue to summarily dismiss anything that doesn't fit your world view, but were really not even on the same page here as I have tried to point out.  I'm actually trying to talk about mixed martial arts and the need for multiple systems and techniques, while you are focusing on what you believe to be my position about TKD.  What I'm *TRYING* to get across is that even if TKD *ISN'T* *AND CAN'T BE *as good a base martial art for the octagon (your position, not mine - but lets go ahead and pretend that there isn't a human being on earth that could pull it off...) as other styles, as a MMA fighter you need to train other styles *ANYWAY!  

  NOBODY fights a pure style in MMA!  *So why couldn't a TKD guy train BJJ and Muay Thai and whatever else he felt he needed to get competent?  And why couldn't he use a front kick in the octagon that he learned as a white belt in TKD?  Or would you insist that the kick was actually Muay Thai because that fits your world view better?

 So lets rewind here and stick to my opinions as I posted them - because it IS a fact that this is what I said - you're reading between the lines and finding positions I never put forth.

 1. I DO believe that a fighter of ANY SYSTEM could invest time in learning other techniques that his system lacked to make themselves well rounded and effective in the octagon.  The End.  Notice I mention no specific style, but I do acknowledge that this thread is about TKD, so that is the default art for this discussion, though I could have easily said Escrima, Capoera, etc.  In this respect, it comes down to training, effort, determination, natural ability, etc., etc., etc. - sounds like the man and not the system to me...

 2. NO ONE SYSTEM IS ENOUGH - even Greco Roman wrestling or Judo or Muay Thai - even if they do seem to be more readily adaptable to the rules of MMA.  This is the point I WASN'T arguing with you.  I feel some systems *are* more readily adaptable, but that doesn't mean that other styles *won't* work.  For the record, I've got 25 years experience in Martial Arts, started at age 8 - Bando.  I began kickboxing (Lethway / Thiang) at age 17.  I began studying a traditional Japanese Jiu Jitsu style at age 21 as well as the Python (ground fighting) system in Bando.  I've got a grand total of *18 MONTHS* in TKD, and I started training in it for exercise.  I think it's safe to say that I'm not an expert in it... but I have learned a few new techniques that I didn't know before.  How could that be anything but good?

 3. As I said earlier - If you want to fight Olympic style TKD - train for it!  If you want to fight MMA - Train for THAT!  Maybe I should have mentioned that Olympic TKD isn't the only thing a good, comprehensive TKD school teaches because that's not all TKD contains... I figured we all knew that - my bad.

 4. FACTS AS TOLD BY YOU:  
 A pure Judo fighter lost.  

 BJJ uses Judo techniques very effectively.  So that would make it a MMA, right?  The MMA wins while the single art loses.]

 A wrestler with limited MMA experience is winning fights.  OK, so he's a MMA fighter who is* primarily but not exclusively a wrestler.  *In other words, he is a MMA.  

 So far, most MMA guys who rely on TKD as their primary art lose.  As I said before - no argument on that point, I concede that point, point taken, etc. - got it?  I still don't think that means no one ever will or can.

 Lastly, and I may be wrong on this one, but it also seems that you are putting forth the proposition that TKD is actually detrimental to the chances of a person ever being successful in MMA.  After all, if Gideon and Sincaid are both losing because of TKD and not because they lack the skills and talent of others in the octagon, what other conclusion can I draw?  Clearly those two would wipe the floor with the Chuck Liddel if only they had never learned TKD... That's utter baloney.  The Iceman is a champion in every sense of the word.  I've seen him outboxed - he still won.  I've seen him outmaneuvered on the ground several times - he still won.  Why?  Because he's got always something the others don't, wether it be better conditioning, that bomb of a right hand, or his singleminded determination.  That's why he wins.


 Look, I used to be that young kid that thought my system rocked, some others were good, and a few sucked..  TKD was on the end of that list.  I used to train for tournies by sparring at other schools, and we used to laugh at the TKD guys, but I SAW and EXPERIENCED things that changed my mind.  You may not care what those things are and dismiss them because you weren't there, but that doesn't change the facts.

 You post back and get the last word if you want, but we're not communicating here (which is the whole point of this forum) so I'm done posting on this subject.


----------



## Marginal

tradrockrat said:
			
		

> You go ahead and continue to summarily dismiss anything that doesn't fit your world view, but were really not even on the same page here as I have tried to point out.


I think you missed his point. Even if he was there, it doesn't count because it wasn't videotaped as well. One video clip of one encounter = fact which proves the answers to all questions regarding a style's absolute horribleness. One person commenting on a fight they witnessed = not fact, just an anecdote. 



> 2. NO ONE SYSTEM IS ENOUGH - even Greco Roman wrestling or Judo or Muay Thai - even if they do seem to be more readily adaptable to the rules of MMA.  This is the point I WASN'T arguing with you.



Use "fact". Koschek was demolished by Sanchez. One dimension met knees to the forehead, and went nowhere. Since it was taped, it proves beyond all doubt that a pure wrestler has no chance.



> 3. As I said earlier - If you want to fight Olympic style TKD - train for it!  If you want to fight MMA - Train for THAT!  Maybe I should have mentioned that Olympic TKD isn't the only thing a good, comprehensive TKD school teaches because that's not all TKD contains... I figured we all knew that - my bad.


Doesn't matter unless it's video taped.



> Lastly, and I may be wrong on this one, but it also seems that you are putting forth the proposition that TKD is actually detrimental to the chances of a person ever being successful in MMA.


Joe Rogan said it on TV, which is video taped, so it must be an immutable fact.



> After all, if Gideon and Sincaid are both losing because of TKD and not because they lack the skills and talent of others in the octagon, what other conclusion can I draw?


Do they actually claim TKD? The commentators seem to toss TKD nugget in there any time someone throws at least one "wheel kick" in a fight. 

I'm sure Nathan Jones for example, is considerd a TKD BB.


----------



## tomthlee

tradrockrat,

 This wasn't a personal discussion about being a "young kid that thought my system rocked" or about my "world views." it was a discussion about TKD's applicability in MMA competition. You need to learn how to support your arguments with fact. Otherwise, they're not arguments. They are ideas floating in the air with no evidence to back them. 

 Your concession doesn't surprise me; you simply couldn't handle the requirements to effectively argue a point. That's okay because we all have to learn sometime. I think you also need to realize that not everyone will agree with you or take what you say seriously, especially when you can only provide anecdotal evidence to prove your point. This may be damaging to your ego, but *that's life*.

 I wasn't expecting you to tell me your credentails in martial arts, but I appreciate that you did. You say you have 18 months of taekwondo experience. That makes you a red belt ready to get his black belt in some McDojos. But let's be serious. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you attend a reputable TKD school that doesn't have kiddy black belts running around. You probably have an intermediate level of experience, which is respectable. 

 My experience with taekwondo is TWELVE YEARS. I've worked with instructors with experience from 3rd dan to 8th dan in both ITF and WTF systems. I've attended seminars and I've even worked with the Korean Tigers. When I left taekwondo I started judo and then moved into Muay Thai, BJJ, and vale tudo (full contact) fighting. To tell me that my world view is so closed-minded and biased is pure ignorance on your part. I've engaged in every aspect of taekwondo - ITF and WTF competition sparring, self defense training, one step sparring, poomsae, weapons and everything else. It was fun while I was a kid, but as I grew up, I realized that TKD simply isn't an ideal martial art to learn self defense or full contact competition fighting.

 Don't think that students of MMA aren't well versed in traditional martial arts. Most of us studied them while we were young or in our teens, realized it wasn't for us, and moved on. In my case, I've practiced TKD for a while and I've read books by both Korean and Western authors about the art. I know what I'm talking about when I say that TKD isn't cut out for MMA.

 From your experience, you did not list any type of MMA or NHB experience. If anybody is closed-minded or ignorant, it would be *you*. Unless you train in MMA or fight in full contact, no holds barred competitions, you can't stand on your mountain of ignorance and expect us to believe your claims of what does work, what doesn't work, and what could work. Watching TUF isn't enough to know what goes into MMA training. Come to an MMA gym, check your ego and any black belts you have at the door, and take a boxing or Muay Thai class. Put on a white belt and roll with the BJJ guys. Jump in on the conditioning training that the vale tudo guys do. Your belief that MMA guys are young, ignorant guys with closed world views will soon be changed.

 If you would like to come back and post that's fine. But you have essentially conceded your arguments and agreed with mine, so I don't know what else you have to say. Better luck next time.

   Tom


----------



## Marginal

tomthlee said:
			
		

> tradrockrat,
> My experience with taekwondo is TWELVE YEARS. I've worked with instructors with experience from 3rd dan to 8th dan in both ITF and WTF systems. I've attended seminars and I've even worked with the Korean Tigers. When I left taekwondo I started judo and then moved into Muay Thai, BJJ, and vale tudo (full contact) fighting. To tell me that my world view is so closed-minded and biased is pure ignorance on your part. I've engaged in every aspect of taekwondo - ITF and WTF competition sparring, self defense training, one step sparring, poomsae, weapons and everything else. It was fun while I was a kid, but as I grew up, I realized that TKD simply isn't an ideal martial art to learn self defense or full contact competition fighting.


Strange that during all that time, you never once saw any ITF sparring involving people keeping their hands up.


----------



## tomthlee

Marginal said:
			
		

> Strange that during all that time, you never once saw any ITF sparring involving people keeping their hands up.


  They keep their hands up at the start, and then begin a sad display of flailing and wild swinging. 

http://www.itf-information.com/gallery/camp-36.jpg

http://www.atkd.no/bildegalleri/pub/Folder.2004-09-07.5338311916/TKD-Elite2004%20Thomas%20Sparring.jpg

  Hmmm. Why couldn't they just take up ballet?

  Tom


----------



## Marginal

Are they sparring in the first picture?

Second one, why are they wearing hogus if they're supposed to be ITF?

Lucky neither are video so you haven't provided "fact" yet. Just anecdotal junk.


----------



## Shu2jack

NotQuiteDead, I was on vacation and couldn't reply right away. Sorry about that and here is my response to your questions.





> 1) If forms aren't for fighting they wouldn't contain punches and kicks. If you practice them for fitness etc. fine, but you'd be better off doing something that won't develop bad habits for fighting imo. But I'm sure that topic has been done to death.


I didn't say forms are not for fighting. I said they didn't have direct fighting application. Jogging has no direct fighting application, but it helps a fighter gain stamina/endurance. Likewise, forms help give a student a technical foundation for their techniques. 



> 2) Under what rule set are low forearm blocks useful? If you're fighting with certain rules or without rules, it doesn't matter. Blocking like that exposes your head.


I have seen the block useful in response to having one's arms grabbed and the situation didn't call for breaking the other guy's nose. If your that opposed to the block, the next time you are in a standing clinch do a low block to your opponents head/neck/shoulder if he is lower than you. Instead of snapping out the lowerforarm, just ram your elbow into his head/neck. Technically that is a elbow strike, but techniques tend to blend together if you study them enough. 



> 3) See my response to number 1.


See my response to number 1



> 4) I wasn't talking about blocking an arm-height attack with your arm, I was talking about blocking an attack to your legs or groin with your arm. Reaching that low leaves your face open


So don't block kicks with a low block. I wouldn't. I would still use the "block" in other circumstances. I say "block", but it is taught that blocks can be strikes. You can use the fist to strike the head, or not full execute it and use it like an elbow strike like I mentioned. 

Also, a fight is not UFC or Pride. There will be some situations where you don't have to worry so much about certain things.


----------



## Shu2jack

> And in regards to this comment earlier: "Why don't you run around aimlessly in the ring like you do when jogging?"
> 
> That's called conditioning. If you want to fight someone with a more or less equal skill level, you have to be in shape. Jogging, squats, push-ups, sit-ups, pikes, etc. are exercises designed to put the athlete in shape so that he/she doesn't gas out after the first round. What does a TKD pattern or dead blocking drill do?


That was my point. Jogging does not have a direct fighting application, but it still helps the fighter fight. Forms help those who study it gain a greater technical understanding of techniques and to help with technical proficency. 



> a) It doesn't put you in shape. Unless you're grossly obese and you sweat gallons from the slightest movement (in which case a nice walk around the park would be a better choice of exercise).
> b) It doesn't teach you how to fight.


a) Define "shape". After spending 30 minutes over my patterns I am dripping sweat and I'm 6' and 180lbs. I am not "grossly obese" and I would bet a large sum of money that the patterns are better execerise than a walk in the park. Plus I get a chance to work on my pivoting for techniques, hip rotation, using the entire body in coordnation with strikes, etc. Instead of working on power with a heavy bag, speed with targets/speed bag, and working "alive" with a partner, I have a chance to focus just on the foundations of technique without worrying about anything else. For a warm up or light work out, patterns are a worthwhile endevor in my opinion.

b) No kidding?



> If I had to put my money on a street fighter who jogged 6 miles a day vs. a tkd fighter who drills patterns, my money is on the street fighter.


Same here.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

Shu2Jack said:
			
		

> I didn't say forms are not for fighting. I said they didn't have direct fighting application. Jogging has no direct fighting application, but it helps a fighter gain stamina/endurance. Likewise, forms help give a student a technical foundation for their techniques.


 If it's giving them a 'technical foundation' then they are practicing fighting techniques. Those techniques can be used to fight with so they have fighting applications.



			
				Shu2Jack said:
			
		

> I have seen the block useful in response to having one's arms grabbed and the situation didn't call for breaking the other guy's nose. If your that opposed to the block, the next time you are in a standing clinch do a low block to your opponents head/neck/shoulder if he is lower than you. Instead of snapping out the lowerforarm, just ram your elbow into his head/neck. Technically that is a elbow strike, but techniques tend to blend together if you study them enough.


 If I wanted to practice elbows I would practice elbows, not low blocks down by my thigh or groin.



			
				Shu2Jack said:
			
		

> So don't block kicks with a low block. I wouldn't. I would still use the "block" in other circumstances. I say "block", but it is taught that blocks can be strikes. You can use the fist to strike the head, or not full execute it and use it like an elbow strike like I mentioned.


 So why not just practice what you would use, rather than practice something you wouldn't and justify it by saying if you change it and use it for something else then it is useful?



			
				Shu2Jack said:
			
		

> Also, a fight is not UFC or Pride. There will be some situations where you don't have to worry so much about certain things.


 This thread is about tkd in mma, though. And dropping your hand down by your waist to block something still leaves your face wide open no matter what situation you are in.


----------



## Shu2jack

You are right, this thread is about TKD in MMA.

[Warning: Sarcasim]

Obviously, the fact that I practice forms will render me incapable of performing well in any fighting arena. No amount of extra conditioning, alive drills, bag work, hard work, and "hard" partner sparring (with less limiting rules) will over come the fact that forms will be my sole source of how I perform techniques. And we all know that techniques are meant to be used how they were done in the forms. Why else would they be done like that? A low block HAS to block something low! If it is not, you are changing things! 


I have read your other posts in the TKD forum NotYetDead and I will end our argument here.


----------



## tomthlee

Marginal said:
			
		

> Are they sparring in the first picture?
> 
> Second one, why are they wearing hogus if they're supposed to be ITF?
> 
> Lucky neither are video so you haven't provided "fact" yet. Just anecdotal junk.


 1. The two fighters are wearing punch guards, kick guards, and both seem to be in the middle of a technique at the same time (creating a jam). It looks to me like they're sparring.

 2. It's unfortunate that a 1st dan in TKD recognizes a thin sheet of fabric (used to differentiate the opponents) as a hogu. Those are ITF fighters.

 3. Okay, you want video of ITF guys flailing around and swinging their arms around. Unlike some TKD supporters I've encountered on this forum, I don't run away when people ask me for evidence. By the way, photos are legitimate evidence. But, since you asked me for video (which is pointless because you can find this by going to your dojang), I've done the research and here it is:

http://www.northants-taekwondo.com/video/taekwondo-intro-dl.avi

 You can bypass all the demo stuff and check out the sparring clips. There's plenty of happy-go-lucky arm flailing and multiple Chun-Li "hiyayayayaya!" lightning kicks. You're right about these displays of TKD being junk. But it's not anecdotal; it's fact. 

   Tom


----------



## Marginal

The problem here stems from your horrible definition of an anecdotal argument. 

If that was going on in my instructor's Dojang, I'd be more inclined to accept it as fact. But it must because you've seen it a few times, and that means it applies to all TKD practitioners. 

That's an anectodal argument you're presenting. Not a factual one. 

2. Weak insults aside, I've never seen markers differentiating opponents beyond a strip of cloth intersted into the back of the belt.

Finally, bear in mind that I'm questioning the claim that the whole of TKD looks like olympic rules sparring. This is not about TKD's performance in MMA. I already stated that TKD's in a no-win situation in that respect. You will not shame me into allowing you lazy generializations however.


----------



## Digger70chall

I honestly can't believe this has gotten to 100 posts.  If you want to practice MMA practice MMA...if you want to practice olympic TKD practice that, if you want "traditional" TKD then find that.

 this question could've just as easily been about MMA in TKD,  or I've played basketball for 20+ years, do you think i can make the transition to figure skating?  

 If you want to become a UFC champ then sure you probably won't be competing in the olympics TKD the same year...they are different sports and have to be treated as such, not to say it's not impossible for somebody to train in TKD and then dominate the UFC it's not as likely as a wrestler though.


----------



## Marginal

That's what's so annoying about this discussion. Nobody disagrees with that. It's just people talking past each other, crossed wires etc.

For example, the ITF rule set enables a specific approach to sparring. It has its limitations. 

1)No full contact.
2)Back's an illegal target.
3)Hitting below the belt's illegal.
4)No grabbing.

All of those rules contribute to the sparring featured in the video provided. Not having to worry about being grabbed etc, will greatly alter what can be gotten away with etc.

However, change some of those sparring rules, and a different beast will emerge.

1)Full contact, but you can't punch to the head
2)Punches don't really count.
3)No striking below the belt
4)No grappling

Changing the rules still produces a result that anyone'd recognize as TKD, but it does bear a different flavor. You can make the case that both rule sets produce an inefficient striker with a collection of bad habits that aren't condusive to success in a ring. But the differing rule sets don't produce the same collection to bad habits, so "factually" lumping them together fails unless you're overgenerializing.

The basic point a lot of the pro-TKD people are making in here is, if you change the rule set around yet again to something like:

1)Reduce the invalid target areas to the groin, knees, and throat
2)Allow full contact
3)Allow clinching and takedowns

That'd still produce someone who practices TKD. You're just changing the sparring rules, not reinventing the system. (Notice I didn't toss groundfighting in there as well since TKD has limited applications once there, and I'm not pretending that TKD's complete.)

That's why I have a problem with the suggestion that all TKD -regardless of rule set- creates the exact same fighter. That's also why I find the arguments about the patterns being the true intention of TKD's appearance and how a TKD practitioner will fight to be totally baseless.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3

Marginal said:
			
		

> That's what's so annoying about this discussion. Nobody disagrees with that. It's just people talking past each other, crossed wires etc.
> 
> For example, the ITF rule set enables a specific approach to sparring. It has its limitations.
> 
> 1)No full contact.
> 2)Back's an illegal target.
> 3)Hitting below the belt's illegal.
> 4)No grabbing.
> 
> All of those rules contribute to the sparring featured in the video provided. Not having to worry about being grabbed etc, will greatly alter what can be gotten away with etc.
> 
> However, change some of those sparring rules, and a different beast will emerge.
> 
> 1)Full contact, but you can't punch to the head
> 2)Punches don't really count.
> 3)No striking below the belt
> 4)No grappling
> 
> Changing the rules still produces a result that anyone'd recognize as TKD, but it does bear a different flavor. You can make the case that both rule sets produce an inefficient striker with a collection of bad habits that aren't condusive to success in a ring. But the differing rule sets don't produce the same collection to bad habits, so "factually" lumping them together fails unless you're overgenerializing.
> 
> The basic point a lot of the pro-TKD people are making in here is, if you change the rule set around yet again to something like:
> 
> 1)Reduce the invalid target areas to the groin, knees, and throat
> 2)Allow full contact
> 3)Allow clinching and takedowns
> 
> That'd still produce someone who practices TKD. You're just changing the sparring rules, not reinventing the system. (Notice I didn't toss groundfighting in there as well since TKD has limited applications once there, and I'm not pretending that TKD's complete.)
> 
> That's why I have a problem with the suggestion that all TKD -regardless of rule set- creates the exact same fighter. That's also why I find the arguments about the patterns being the true intention of TKD's appearance and how a TKD practitioner will fight to be totally baseless.


Well said. Good, open-minded, independent thinking. Salute


----------



## tomthlee

Marginal said:
			
		

> The problem here stems from your horrible definition of an anecdotal argument.
> 
> If that was going on in my instructor's Dojang, I'd be more inclined to accept it as fact. But it must because you've seen it a few times, and that means it applies to all TKD practitioners.
> 
> That's an anectodal argument you're presenting. Not a factual one.
> 
> 2. Weak insults aside, I've never seen markers differentiating opponents beyond a strip of cloth intersted into the back of the belt.
> 
> Finally, bear in mind that I'm questioning the claim that the whole of TKD looks like olympic rules sparring. This is not about TKD's performance in MMA. I already stated that TKD's in a no-win situation in that respect. You will not shame me into allowing you lazy generializations however.


 Addressing your lack of knowledge of your own martial art isn't a weak insult. It's a valid argument against your credibility.

 Is a piece of cloth around the body really considered a hogu? A piece of cloth that, when striked, will make the popping sound that occurs in WTF matches? Just because it doesn't fit in with your "world view" of what a marker is, doesn't mean that it's not a marker. It serves no other purpose than to differentiate the fighters. 

 So you admit that practitioners in your dojang fight properly, using a reasonable punch-kick ratio and covering as a stand-up MMA fighter does. All the flailing, Chun Li kicks, and happy go lucky sparring doesn't go on in your gym. Please post some pictures of live sparring action at your gym. Or even better, video.

 Crap, I forgot... the TKD practitioners I've met on this forum only like to tell stories.

 Tom


----------



## tomthlee

Marginal said:
			
		

> That's what's so annoying about this discussion. Nobody disagrees with that. It's just people talking past each other, crossed wires etc.
> 
> For example, the ITF rule set enables a specific approach to sparring. It has its limitations.
> 
> 1)No full contact.
> 2)Back's an illegal target.
> 3)Hitting below the belt's illegal.
> 4)No grabbing.
> 
> All of those rules contribute to the sparring featured in the video provided. Not having to worry about being grabbed etc, will greatly alter what can be gotten away with etc.
> 
> However, change some of those sparring rules, and a different beast will emerge.
> 
> 1)Full contact, but you can't punch to the head
> 2)Punches don't really count.
> 3)No striking below the belt
> 4)No grappling
> 
> Changing the rules still produces a result that anyone'd recognize as TKD, but it does bear a different flavor. You can make the case that both rule sets produce an inefficient striker with a collection of bad habits that aren't condusive to success in a ring. But the differing rule sets don't produce the same collection to bad habits, so "factually" lumping them together fails unless you're overgenerializing.
> 
> The basic point a lot of the pro-TKD people are making in here is, if you change the rule set around yet again to something like:
> 
> 1)Reduce the invalid target areas to the groin, knees, and throat
> 2)Allow full contact
> 3)Allow clinching and takedowns
> 
> That'd still produce someone who practices TKD. You're just changing the sparring rules, not reinventing the system. (Notice I didn't toss groundfighting in there as well since TKD has limited applications once there, and I'm not pretending that TKD's complete.)
> 
> That's why I have a problem with the suggestion that all TKD -regardless of rule set- creates the exact same fighter. That's also why I find the arguments about the patterns being the true intention of TKD's appearance and how a TKD practitioner will fight to be totally baseless.


 Those arguments aren't baseless. They have been proven by fact. What's baseless is your vision of what TKD could be if it were a full contact event. I'm not saying it's a bad vision, but it's baseless on many counts.

 1. It hasn't happened yet. An official TKD match has never been fought with those rules.
 2. It's unlikely that the head honchos (whoever the leaders are of ITF and WTF or even... ATA) would sanction it or even approve of it as a legitimate taekwondo event.

 Once again, it's a great vision for TKD because San Shou kung-fu did the same thing and had success with it. They adopted the boxing ring, created a stand up fighting event that's more or less full contact, and even permitted the use of throws and suplexes. This gives San Shou practitioners a strong argument to support their art having success in MMA when mixed with grappling training. There are plenty of photos and videos showing San Shou practitioners using legitimate striking and defending/covering tactics.

 However, the idea of a full contact TKD event is still just a vision. It hasn't been done yet. Personally, I'd love to see it happen, but I doubt that it will anytime soon.


----------



## Marginal

tomthlee said:
			
		

> I'm not saying it's a bad vision, but it's baseless on many counts.
> 
> 1. It hasn't happened yet. An official TKD match has never been fought with those rules.
> 2. It's unlikely that the head honchos (whoever the leaders are of ITF and WTF or even... ATA) would sanction it or even approve of it as a legitimate taekwondo event.
> 
> Once again, it's a great vision for TKD because San Shou kung-fu did the same thing and had success with it.


Not to mention the full contact varieties of karate... I'm not claiming it's being done now. I'm claiming that amending the rules would discourage the development of certain bad habits. (Chun Li kicking etc.) The only way it'd be baseless is if the techniques are totally unsuitable for such a sparring environment. 



> However, the idea of a full contact TKD event is still just a vision. It hasn't been done yet. Personally, I'd love to see it happen, but I doubt that it will anytime soon.


Probably won't be adopted by any major org. Nobody says they have to always train under offical rules though. Not to mention splinter groups and/or schools.


----------



## NotQuiteDead

I'm sure there have been full contact tkd competitions before...



> That's why I have a problem with the suggestion that all TKD -regardless of rule set- creates the exact same fighter. That's also why I find the arguments about the patterns being the true intention of TKD's appearance and how a TKD practitioner will fight to be totally baseless.


 Of course the rule set changes how someone will fight. I am, however, confused about your comment on the patterns.

 When a technique found in a pattern is criticized, that criticism is often written off because many people think that patterns are not supposed to be related to fighting in any way. They do, however, contain many of the techniques those same people _do_ fight with, in addition to the ones they wouldn't. Why would someone invent a pattern that they believed contained both useful and useless techniques?

 A lot of people think that Iain Abernethy is doing a great job explaining the applications of karate kata. I think that is how karate was intended to be used... and seeing how the idea for the original tkd patterns came from shotokan I don't see why they wouldn't represent the way TKDists were meant to fight.

 Going back to the low block briefly (and by low block I do mean low- the waist-height block found in many patterns), what practical purpose does it serve as a block? There are better ways to deal with attacks to your lower abdomen, groin, and thighs that don't expose your face. For example, there are movements in Yu-Sin that resemble the way you would check a low kick in muay thai.


----------



## Marginal

Uh, yeah.. But you've already stated that there are no alternate applications. Why keep trying to have a conversation you don't want to actually have?


----------



## NotQuiteDead

I said I don't think the forms were meant to have infinite applications, but rather just a few that would actually be practiced. If something is specifically called a "low block", I doubt it was intended to be an elbow strike, joint lock, grip break, takedown, etc. as well... Unfortuneately some people I've talked to, when asked how their training would help them deal with a given situation, claim that a random movement could be adapted in a such a way that you could deal with said situation, even though they don't practice that "application".


----------



## Shu2jack

I will give you three direct applications of the low block, two from personal use.

1.) A weapon be thrusted at your abdomen by a person committed to the attack. Move you body out of the center line as you knock the attack in the other direction.

2.) When sparring, a front kick is a typical move seen. Using the previous method I mentioned, the low block can be used to knock your opponent's foot off target and leave him off balance if timed correctly. I use this sucessfully in sparring.

3.) If you want to use the block exactly as seen in the form, have somone grab your right hand. From there execute a left low block. The grabbed hand will pull back as you hit your attacker's hand that grabbed you. This is better used in situations where a more damaging technique is not called for. I have used this on people who have grabbed my wrist.

I won't get into another argument on form application and such. You seem to have your own views of what forms are, are not, and what they should be with no intention of changing your mind. You asked for application though and here you are.


----------

