# Tae kwon do vs. Kung Fu



## goof321 (May 13, 2008)

wich one do u prefer and why? i actually cant decide between either of them but id like to hear youre opinions to decide wich one to practice


----------



## terryl965 (May 13, 2008)

Well I am bias at best since I have been doing TKD for 25 years, I guess it is the Art and all the SD principle that is involved thoughout the style. Before TKD it was Okinwa Karate and they seem to mix pretty well together.


----------



## exile (May 13, 2008)

terryl965 said:


> Well I am bias at best since I have been doing TKD for 25 years, I guess it is the Art and all the SD principle that is involved thoughout the style. Before TKD it was Okinwa Karate and they seem to mix pretty well together.



I think that's pretty much what you're going to find&#8212;the TKD people will prefer TKD and the CMA people will prefer the CMA that they do. And I'm willing to bet that if you ask someone who does both of them (there must be at least a few such on the board), mostly you'll hear that they're both good.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 13, 2008)

I agree with what has been posted here so far but I need to clarify one thing

TKD is Tae Kwon Do

Kung Fu is Pick One

And that is only a partial list


----------



## exile (May 13, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> ...And that is only a partial list



I've seen that list before somewhere, XS. And it seems like you could spend a lifetime just learning the names of the various CMA styles, let alone learning one of the styles itself!

To me, that's great, one of the terrific things about the CMAs. You have to be glad there was no central CMA directorate a few hundred years back stamping out all the variants to produce a monoclonal one-size-fits-all product...


----------



## HG1 (May 13, 2008)

Check out as many schools as possible & find the best match for you. Both systems have good & bad schools so you will have to sort them out.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 13, 2008)

exile said:


> I've seen that list before somewhere, XS. And it seems like you could spend a lifetime just learning the names of the various CMA styles, let alone learning one of the styles itself!
> 
> To me, that's great, one of the terrific things about the CMAs. You have to be glad there was no central CMA directorate a few hundred years back stamping out all the variants to produce a monoclonal one-size-fits-all product...


 
Not wishing to hijack the post but yes... and no.

The variety is mighty cool and looking at things form different perspectives is good but I can do without the politics, lineage fights and true, secret, direct, fake transmissions.

But I do love the CMA styles so I guess more yes than no


----------



## Deaf Smith (May 13, 2008)

Honestly, I find the practitioner needs to see what art fits their physical and physological abilities.

Long time ago, Master Chu told us that Kung Fu masters were very very good (Chu was 7 dan Tang So Do and 8th dan Tae Kwon Do himself.) He also said it took 10 years to get a 'black belt', if that's the term, in Kung Fu. He said the motions they used were not natural and thus took alot of time to prefect.

Still, to me the style reflects the inner person. I prefer striking (heaven know what a shrink would interpet that) and lots of physical activity. Others might find more subtile methods to their liking or grappling or methods that flow and are artistic.

So I really don't care about TKD .vs. KF or SBD .vs. JuJitsu or ishen ryu .vs. Muy Thai, etc....

There are outstanding pratictioners in every art that I wouldn't want to mess with!


----------



## Steel Tiger (May 13, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Not wishing to hijack the post but yes... and no.
> 
> The variety is mighty cool and looking at things form different perspectives is good but I can do without the politics, lineage fights and true, secret, direct, fake transmissions.
> 
> But I do love the CMA styles so I guess more yes than no


 
I have to agree with XS on this.  The variety of CMA is a great attraction for me.  Even though I have only briefly dabbled in JKD and have trained extensively in bagua I still have a sense of variety.  It may be the nature of the internal arts or it may simply be the interconnectedness of the CMAs, but studying even a single style as I do you get a variety of areas into which to develop.  We have striking techniques (hands and feet), grappling techniques, movement strategies, weapons training, and qigong training.  Even staying within the one style one can specialise in one of these subsets.

One of the impressions I get of TKD is a lack of that variety.  Furthermore, I get an impression that it was probably once there, but the art has been paired down to an efficient minimum.  That's fine, but it limits the areas one can specialise in within the art.

One area in which TKD and the CMAs are very similar is politicking and lineage fighting.  But in this TKD has the advantage of actually having many living founders, the CMAs cannot really make this boast as most newly developed styles have been built on the shoulders of long dead giants.  As a result lineage disputes can be monumental, take a look at Yang taiji for an example.

But, like XS, I think that the good outweighs the bad.


----------



## snoack (May 14, 2008)

I don't know much about Kung Fu, so I really can't speak to it.  I've been into TKD for 4 years now, and I do like the simplicty with which the art is constructed (simple to me, anyway.  A series of stances and positions upon which everything is built).  Not so much a tremendous amount of movement and technique, but more of a focus on how to combine these movements and techniques into different patterns and series.  On top of that, to echo what somebody else said, the SD component is nice as well.


----------



## Marginal (May 14, 2008)

Steel Tiger said:


> One of the impressions I get of TKD is a lack of that variety.  Furthermore, I get an impression that it was probably once there, but the art has been paired down to an efficient minimum.  That's fine, but it limits the areas one can specialise in within the art.


That's until you get into the politics etc. Then you get people practicing the exact same style right down the pre class warmup sessions telling you you're not doing "true TKD" etc, not to mention the various spins the numerous Kwans have put on TKD from one to the next. At that point it seems just as pissy as the next art. :high5:


----------



## arnisador (May 15, 2008)

It depends on so many things--your body type and movement style, what you want out of the martial arts, etc. Both can work! Try some schools.

As mentioned, while TKD orgs. vary, kung fu _really_ covers a lot of territory. Northern and Southern styles can feel quite different, for example.


----------



## zDom (May 15, 2008)

I would prefer to train TKD and watch Kung Fu movies


----------



## Tames D (May 15, 2008)

zDom said:


> I would prefer to train TKD and watch Kung Fu movies


I would prefer to train Kung Fu and watch TKD in the Olympics 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





.


----------



## IcemanSK (May 15, 2008)

QUI-GON said:


> *I would prefer to* *watch TKD in the Olympics
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Really? Huh? I guess there's something for everyone:lol:


----------



## still learning (May 16, 2008)

Hello,  If comparing art to art....both are excellant for what they do!

When two arts complete against each other?  ...than it is the person who makes the art win.   NOT the style of the art.

Most times the better skill person, one with more cardio, will have the advantage....Aloha

PS:  A street fighter with more cardio...in a real fight will have the advantage..


----------



## SageGhost83 (May 18, 2008)

still learning said:


> Hello, If comparing art to art....both are excellant for what they do!
> 
> When two arts complete against each other? ...than it is the person who makes the art win. NOT the style of the art.
> 
> ...


 
Amen, still learning!


----------



## 14 Kempo (May 18, 2008)

Which is better? It's all a matter of skill and movement. Distance comes into play as well. Just about every art has its most desirable distance, find it and you have the advantage. Both arts mentioned here will give you an intense workout, and self defense skills. 
Most important in a decision such as this is the school and the instructor. Both arts have their good and bad, the instructor is going to be the most important aspect. There are great martial artists that can't teach and great teachers that aren't so good at martial arts. Check out the classes, have a list of questions for the instructor. Talk to other students.

Good luck!


----------



## Hawke (May 18, 2008)

Between TKD and CMA which has the better instructor?

Which will you go train more often?

Go visit the local training halls.

If possible go visit as many training halls in other styles as well.

You may be surprised with the quality of the instructor and the art itself.


----------



## chinto (May 18, 2008)

If I had to choose which to train in, I would choose Kung fu in say choy li fat or crane or one other of the many good combat effective systems.  I would not choose Tae Kwan do because so many of the schools for that styel are not teaching it as a combat efficient and effective  system aimed at self defense and survival. Most seem to be teaching it for Olimpic competition. and in my opinion good judo schools teach better for the street then most of the sport tkd types seem to. ( at dan level the good judo schools teach basically all the stuff that was taken out so you learn the old school Japanese jujitsu techniques and strikes and things that were removed for safety.)


----------



## exile (May 18, 2008)

chinto said:


> If I had to choose which to train in, I would choose Kung fu in say choy li fat or crane or one other of the many good combat effective systems.  I would not choose Tae Kwan do because so many of the schools for that styel are not teaching it as a combat efficient and effective  system aimed at self defense and survival. Most seem to be teaching it for Olimpic competition. and in my opinion good judo schools teach better for the street then most of the sport tkd types seem to. ( at dan level the good judo schools teach basically all the stuff that was taken out so you learn the old school Japanese jujitsu techniques and strikes and things that were removed for safety.)



This is unfortunately true so far as many (or even maybe most) TKD dojangs go, but I think it's going to be changing. TKD has been, I think, under increasing pressure to show its bona fides as an effective defensive combat system (something _no_ one would have questioned about 'old-school' TKD). And there are a lot of people doing TKD who don't _want_ to be competitive athletes in that particular sport (even if it were realistic on their part to pursue that path, which for many is not the case); what they want are practical SD skills, and the training to make those skills operational under street conditions (which is a very specific and 'hard' kind of training that is still pretty scarce, I'd bet, not just in dojangs but in MA schools across the whole range of different styles). 

Wait a few years and I'm guessing you're going to see a lot more SD in the curricula of most TKD dojangs. The question is, how well do TKD instructors actually _control_ the necessary combat skills themselves? Before the dojangs start teaching revitalized SD-oriented TKD, instructors themselves are going to have to come up to speed on these techs... because so many of _them_ learned their TKD in sport-oriented schools. My feeling is, that cycle has to be broken, and soon.

But the same problem could well affect any given KF school too&#8212;there's no guarantee that your instructor there is competent in CQ combat applications either. KF also has a 'performance' aspect, after all, and it's probably the case that some schools emphasize that to the detriment of gritty applications...


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 19, 2008)

exile said:


> But the same problem could well affect any given KF school toothere's no guarantee that your instructor there is competent in CQ combat applications either. KF also has a 'performance' aspect, after all, and it's probably the case that some schools emphasize that to the detriment of gritty applications...


*HEY!!!* :cuss: Don't be disin Kung fu :uhyeah:

Actually you are correct sir. 

There are an awful lot of Kung Fu (CMA) schools out there that do not know the SD of the style they teach only form and others know form but not the proper SD for those forms (a Shaolin Long Fist school that also teaches Sanshou kind of thing) 

There are also schools out there that have "*KUNG FU"* in big letters in the front window when in fact it is maybe one Shaolin Wushu form and the rest Karate or some other non-CMA style and of course the Taiji schools that claim to teach SD that are in fact teaching Taiji forms with SD from other styles. I could go on but I shall stop and spare all the off topic rant this would inevitably turn into


----------



## newGuy12 (May 19, 2008)

Different people enjoy different things.  I will tell you this.  There is nothing like being in the class, and everyone is warmed up now, because it is freesparring time.  If at some point in the free sparring you give a GOOD counter attack, some say, jump spinning side kick answer to the round house kick (perhaps anticipating this motion, -- to make it even faster) -- there is nothing like that in the world.  You are glad to be a human, and learning this TKD then. 

I don't know if some CMA has this feeling to offer.  I honestly don't know.
But like 14 Kempo says, many prefer to be in kicking range.  I do.  I would prefer to give a shove to the partner, making them move back.

Also, the kicks get faster, faster.  It is very enjoyable.  Then again, I have never practiced any CMA.  Who knows what joy they offer?  Only those who practice.  Everyone must pick a horse and then ride.  Life is too short to jerk around.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 19, 2008)

newGuy12 said:


> Different people enjoy different things. I will tell you this. There is nothing like being in the class, and everyone is warmed up now, because it is freesparring time. If at some point in the free sparring you give a GOOD counter attack, some say, jump spinning side kick answer to the round house kick (perhaps anticipating this motion, -- to make it even faster) -- there is nothing like that in the world. You are glad to be a human, and learning this TKD then.
> 
> I don't know if some CMA has this feeling to offer. I honestly don't know.
> But like 14 Kempo says, many prefer to be in kicking range. I do. I would prefer to give a shove to the partner, making them move back.
> ...


 
Depending on which style of CMA yes. 

Depending on which style of CMA no.

I have a bit of a problem with the title of this post actually "Tae kwon do vs. Kung Fu"

Tae kwon do is a korean style of martial arts. Kung Fu is a generic label to lump together hundreds of CMA styles. That is why the very first post I made here pointed to this list

In that list alone there are over 80 styles listed and that is not all of them. There are also, in some cases, multiple styles within styles, various styles of Baguazhang, Xingyiquan, Taijiquan, Wing Chun, White crane, etc.

So to compare TKD to Kung Fu you are comparing one style to hundreds and it is likely that any thing you come up with to compare (Other than the Korean language and I am not sure about that - there is a Korean minority in China) exists in one of the many CMA styles know generically as Kung Fu


----------



## SageGhost83 (May 19, 2008)

newGuy12 said:


> Different people enjoy different things. I will tell you this. There is nothing like being in the class, and everyone is warmed up now, because it is freesparring time. If at some point in the free sparring you give a GOOD counter attack, some say, jump spinning side kick answer to the round house kick (perhaps anticipating this motion, -- to make it even faster) -- there is nothing like that in the world. You are glad to be a human, and learning this TKD then.
> 
> I don't know if some CMA has this feeling to offer. I honestly don't know.
> But like 14 Kempo says, many prefer to be in kicking range. I do. I would prefer to give a shove to the partner, making them move back.
> ...


 
I have practiced both, and yes, that feeling does exist in CMA. I would say to an even greater extent because the sparring, at least as it was done in my Wing Chun class, was much faster, plus it was full contact to the head with no pads. Talk about a rush! Everything took place at close range where you had to engage...or be engaged :lol:! I personally like going at close range because there is nowhere to hide and it is far more intense. I enjoyed TKD sparring, but what I did in Kung Fu was far more realistic and far more intense than what I did in TKD, it had the feel of actually fighting moreso than sparring. I guess because I wasn't trying to score points, I was trying to *really* knockout out my sparring partner and he was trying to do the same. It all comes down to what you seek in a martial art. Not all arts are for all people. TKD gives me a long range option to complement my close range preference, so it definitely adds another dimension to my game. If I had to choose one over the other though, and this is very hard for me, I would have to pick Kung Fu despite my love of TKD. I trust it more for self defense than I trust TKD.


----------

