# Martial Art vs. Sport (again)



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> Then there's the wide variety of martial  arts that have no sporting aspect to them whatsoever. The vast majority  of Koryu, for instance. The various Ninjutsu organisations. Taichi.  Meifu Shinkage Ryu. Aikido (aside from Tomiki). And so on, and so on,  and so on....



Do any of the above mentioned arts have the following as all or at least part of their philosophy? 

Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the
qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism
seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good
example, social responsibility and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.


----------



## clfsean (Apr 20, 2012)

Actually Taiji organizations across the world hold tui shou competitions all the time.

The Chen Village has in the past held a nice big one to allow all comers to come get smushed. 

However... tui shou competition isn't the focus of taiji quan. It's a part of & a good way to have fun tossing people about with seriously hurting them most of the time. It's a small part. Tui Shou as a sporting aspect is miniscule compared to tui shou for practice. There's nothing for winning medals, Olympic or otherwise, in the foundation of taiji quan.

I can't speak the rest of the arts listed by Chris, but no... none of that applies to Chen Taiji Quan in my practice & experiences.


----------



## mastercole (Apr 20, 2012)

puunui said:


> Do any of the above mentioned arts have the following as all or at least part of their philosophy?
> 
> Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the
> qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism
> ...



That great majority of martial arts practitioners may never enter a tournament or test their martial art in a competitive sport arena. However, the fact that they are participating in the physical, mental, spiritual and/or artistic development of of the self, through the physical, mental, spiritual and/or artistic practices of martial arts, means they are participating in sport. Competitive or non-competitive does not matter, all martial arts are sports, according to the principles of both martial arts, and sports. 

Also, as soon as you test your skill against another practitioner, in any setting, now you are participating in a competitive sport. If a martial artist takes a physical test for rank, they are participating in a competitive sport. 

We can even say that trying to improve your physical skill in anyway is a competitive sport.

To many confuse "sport" with "competitive sport"


----------



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

clfsean said:


> I can't speak the rest of the arts listed by Chris, but no... none of that applies to Chen Taiji Quan in my practice & experiences.



What is the focus and philosophy of chen taiji quan from your perspective?


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 20, 2012)

clfsean said:


> Actually Taiji organizations across the world hold tui shou competitions all the time.


Doesn't Taiji also have Push Hands competition?

On another note...I believe Aikido also has some sort of competition as well.  I thought I remember seeing something on YouTube not too long ago.

Ninjas have their own tournaments too, but no one can ever see them.....their ninjas after all.  (Note:  Just a bit of humor)


----------



## clfsean (Apr 20, 2012)

puunui said:


> What is the focus and philosophy of chen taiji quan from your perspective?



It's a martial art. To break people when necessary. 

That's the way it's been practiced in Chen Village since it was formulated/developed. It was used to defend the village & has worked pretty ok. The village is still there since being founded by the Chen family.


----------



## clfsean (Apr 20, 2012)

miguksaram said:


> Doesn't Taiji also have Push Hands competition?



yeah sorry.... tui shou == push hands


----------



## terryl965 (Apr 20, 2012)

Glen can I ask what is your point of this thread. I only see it as starting the war once again about sport vs. art? 

But I will play the game as always every single martial art out there has a bit of sport in it and probaly more than most will like, see I see a sport vs. art as one thing sport has a rule set that must be followed and the art it self has absolutely none in a life or death stituation. Since all of the above does some type of hands on training they must follow the rules of the dojo-dojaang or workout room, hence a sport on the floor. 

I know some will dis-agree but seriously this horse has been beaten to death.


----------



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

terryl965 said:


> what is your point of this thread.



I don't want the other thread to get derailed, so I am thinking more about the other thread than this one. If this one goes short and dies a quick death, then ok; if it goes long, at least all of it is in one place.


----------



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

clfsean said:


> It's a martial art. To break people when necessary. That's the way it's been practiced in Chen Village since it was formulated/developed. It was used to defend the village & has worked pretty ok. The village is still there since being founded by the Chen family.




How does Yang taiji compare in terms of focus and philosophy? I ask because it is said that Moo Duk Kwan GM HWANG Ki spent time in Manchuria and learned that from a Master YANG Kukjin.


----------



## terryl965 (Apr 20, 2012)

puunui said:


> I don't want the other thread to get derailed, so I am thinking more about the other thread than this one. If this one goes short and dies a quick death, then ok; if it goes long, at least all of it is in one place.



Ok got it, for a minute I thought this was another one of those 1,743 threads argueing the sport vs art thing again. 

Let me ask you this question though would you not agree any thing that has a rule set should be consider a sport instead of an art?


----------



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

terryl965 said:


> Let me ask you this question though would you not agree any thing that has a rule set should be consider a sport instead of an art?



I don't distinguish between sport and art. I personally don't believe thinking in such terms benefits anyone, especially taekwondoin.


----------



## terryl965 (Apr 20, 2012)

puunui said:


> I don't distinguish between sport and art. I personally don't believe thinking in such terms benefits anyone, especially taekwondoin.



Then lets say I am a wanting to join your school and need you to tell me what is the difference between sport TKD and Art TKD, how would you go about it?

By the way thanks for taking the time to answer this because sometimes I have a hard time finding the right way of explaining to potentail students.


----------



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

terryl965 said:


> Then lets say I am a wanting to join your school and need you to tell me what is the difference between sport TKD and Art TKD, how would you go about it?



I tell them there is no difference, that taekwondo is taekwondo. But I don't think I have ever had someone come in and ask me that.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 20, 2012)

puunui said:


> I tell them there is no difference, that taekwondo is taekwondo. But I don't think I have ever had someone come in and ask me that.


Funny, we get people ask that all the time. I can honestly say one of the first two or three questions a new student will ask is "is this sport tkd?", or "what is sport tkd?". I think because all over the internet now on everything from martial arts forums to things like yahoo answers and other  martial arts chat lines the term "sport tkd" is becoming very common. There is a club down the road from where I used to live that actually says "sports tkd" on the big banner hanging out the front. It could just be a regional thing though, I can only speak on behalf of clubs over here obviously.


----------



## mastercole (Apr 20, 2012)

terryl965 said:


> Then lets say I am a wanting to join your school and need you to tell me what is the difference between sport TKD and Art TKD, how would you go about it?
> 
> By the way thanks for taking the time to answer this because sometimes I have a hard time finding the right way of explaining to potentail students.



Of the thousands of students I have signed up over the years, not one of them has ever asked me that question that I can recall.

Here are the questions you have to master to sign up students:   How much does it cost?  When can we start?  What is the schedule?  

But to address that kind of question, I would simple state "all martial arts are sports, however, you and your family never have to train for, or enter it as a competitive sport", you and your family, like all the other families here can enjoy Taekwondo as a sport of leisure, recreation, health and enjoyment


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 20, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Funny, we get people ask that all the time. I can honestly say one of the first two or three questions a new student will ask is "is this sport tkd?", or "what is sport tkd?". I think because all over the internet now on everything from martial arts forums to things like yahoo answers and other  martial arts chat lines the term "sport tkd" is becoming very common. There is a club down the road from where I used to live that actually says "sports tkd" on the big banner hanging out the front. It could just be a regional thing though, I can only speak on behalf of clubs over here obviously.



Watch this:
https://www.google.com.au/search?rl...A&biw=1366&bih=648&sei=yQ6ST_mLFbDLmAXw6bD6AQ

I think that should speak louder than words, in terms of perception, and why many choose to have a narrow view. When even KKW WTF Practitioners do non sports stuff.

In answer to the OP;
This is a matter of how You define Sport. Or more accurately, how loosely You define it.
[
[h=2]sport[/h]&#8194; &#8194;[spawrt, spohrt]  Show IPA
*noun**1.*an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess andoften of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis,golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc.

*2.*a particular form of this, especially in the out of doors.

*3.*diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime.

*4.*jest; fun; mirth; pleasantry: _What he said in sport was takenseriously._

*5.*mockery; ridicule; derision: _They made sport of him.

]_


​


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 20, 2012)

mastercole said:


> Of the thousands of students I have signed up over the years, not one of them has ever asked me that question that I can recall.



That could possibly be due to them already being in that context of Training, and thereby already knowing what it is, Good Sir


----------



## mastercole (Apr 20, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Watch this:
> https://www.google.com.au/search?rl...A&biw=1366&bih=648&sei=yQ6ST_mLFbDLmAXw6bD6AQ
> 
> I think that should speak louder than words, in terms of perception, and why many choose to have a narrow view.



It's not the many that have a narrow view, it is the few.



Cyriacus said:


> When even KKW WTF Practitioners do non sports stuff.



What non-spot stuff would that be?



Cyriacus said:


> In answer to the OP;
> This is a matter of how You define Sport. Or more accurately, how loosely You define it.
> [
> *sport*
> ...



Thank you for the definition.  This definition completely supports the idea that all martial arts are sports.  Even though it states that sports are "often of a competitive nature", it provides for that sports can also be of a non-competitive nature, and that sports are defined as an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess, and, as diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime, which all martial arts, without exception fall into these to areas of sports.​


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 20, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Watch this:
> https://www.google.com.au/search?rl...A&biw=1366&bih=648&sei=yQ6ST_mLFbDLmAXw6bD6AQ
> 
> I think that should speak louder than words, in terms of perception, and why many choose to have a narrow view. When even KKW WTF Practitioners do non sports stuff.
> ...


Yeah, that link speaks volumes  Over here we have the STA (sports taekwondo Australia), I really should give them a call and let them know there's no such thing as sports tkd. Silly them, naming an organisation after something that doesnt exist. Oh, and another one http://web.mit.edu/taekwondo/ Damn, and another http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?c=2-1720-0-0-0&sID=14584 . all these places advertising something that doesnt exist. This is why so many people come in and ask "what is sport tkd?"


----------



## clfsean (Apr 20, 2012)

puunui said:


> How does Yang taiji compare in terms of focus and philosophy? I ask because it is said that Moo Duk Kwan GM HWANG Ki spent time in Manchuria and learned that from a Master YANG Kukjin.



Depends. I'm not really up on Yang except for the generalized history about after Yang Lu Chan left Chen Village & went to Beijing. He watered down what he learned in Chen Village to prevent the Qing's, who were paying him at that point for martial arts, martial arts. There are lineages of Yang that while maintaining the less overtly martial appearance of Chen, are just as mean & ugly as Chen when hands are touched. Those lineages tend to be found from adherents of the Yang family directly, not so much students of students. I could be very off on this due to my  non-Yang background & lack of Yang research. 

Yang however is also the most prevelant to have people practicing "Tai cheeeeeeeeeeeez" as opposed taiji quan, that is to say no martial content at all while trying to hug the universe.


----------



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

clfsean said:


> Depends. I'm not really up on Yang except for the generalized history about after Yang Lu Chan left Chen Village & went to Beijing. He watered down what he learned in Chen Village to prevent the Qing's, who were paying him at that point for martial arts, martial arts. There are lineages of Yang that while maintaining the less overtly martial appearance of Chen, are just as mean & ugly as Chen when hands are touched. Those lineages tend to be found from adherents of the Yang family directly, not so much students of students. I could be very off on this due to my  non-Yang background & lack of Yang research.



Not going to hold you to it, but do you know if there is a branch of yang taiji in manchuria, especially close to the north korea border?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 20, 2012)

terryl965 said:


> Then lets say I am a wanting to join your school and need you to tell me what is the difference between sport TKD and Art TKD, how would you go about it?
> 
> By the way thanks for taking the time to answer this because sometimes I have a hard time finding the right way of explaining to potentail students.


Terry, the way we explain it to students is that the sport of tkd has gained much popularity particularly since becoming an olympic sport. We explain that it is a great sport to get into and there are many competitions around the place and many avenues to compete. We also advise that if this is the avenue they, or their kids, want to go down that they are best finding a club who focuses on this form of sparring and understand the 'game' of sparring, For example, how points are scored, how many points are required to win a match, the rules, which techniques have the most success, the best way to counter such moves etc . We also tell them that certain safety gear is worn in these matches and that anyone wanting to compete should find a club that encourages wearing this sort of gear so they can get used to wearing it while sparring. We also let them know that clubs specialising in this form of competition will have instructors/coaches who understand how the game is played and provide a platform for a student to improve their knowledge of the sport and their chances of success. We tell them that the non sport schools tend not to focus on that form of sparring so much, may wear different padding or no padding at all when sparring, generally their students dont compete as they are not well versed in the sport of tkd and often spar under different rulesets and that the instructors are usually not qualified to really be teaching the ins and outs of olympic sparring as they usually have not competed themself, or may not even know the rules. we go into all the self defense side of things as well. There is more to it but thats the basis of what we say.  If people see competition as an avenue they may wish to go down we are more than happy to pass on some numbers of local sports clubs.


----------



## mastercole (Apr 20, 2012)

Sport Taekwondo is martial arts.


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 21, 2012)

mastercole said:


> It's not the many that have a narrow view, it is the few.
> 
> *In the Martial Arts Community, Yes. But to the onlooker, most of what You find is of that archetype.*
> 
> What non-spot stuff would that be?



Im really not in the mood to debate exact definitions, semantics, and specification.
Mostly because it can only cascade downwards. Im not referring to You, of course. Im referring to the cascade of people whod inevitably dive on the whole concept of the discussion.


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 21, 2012)

mastercole said:


> Sport Taekwondo is martial arts.


Yes, it is.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 21, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Yes, it is.


you are correct, I dont think anyone has disputed that. Sport and non sport martial arts are still both martial arts. One is just geared more towards the sport aspect. But like you, I just cant be bothered debating semantics, so we may just have to all agree to disagree on this one. It could be discussed forever, and probably will be .


----------



## mastercole (Apr 21, 2012)

For those interested. A recommendation for children who shy away from competitive sports to instead try non-competitive sports.  They have listed Karate, but any martial art can apply as both a competitive sport, like sparring, and a non-competitive sport, like makiwara practice.

"If your tween backs down from competition, organized team sports, or just needs a temporary break from competition, consider introducing him to a non-competitive alternative. If you're worried that your son or daughter won't take away as much from a non-competitive sport as from football, basketball, or baseball, take a breath. Experts say as long as your child has your full support and interest, he'll come out a winner. In addition, non-competitive sports do offer competition, in some form.Rather than competing against a team or another player, your tween is really in competition with himself, to improve his score, his time, or improve his abilities. For example, the sport of kayaking emphasizes not speed, but stroking, following safety guidelines, and enjoying the outdoors.There's another advantage to non-competitive sports, say child advocates. They often eliminate the ugliness that takes place on the playing field. Who hasn't heard the story about the ill tempered coach, or the foul-mouthed parent who loses it in front of everybody? Also, non-competitive sports or activities give your tween the luxury of learning or improving his skill in his own time.Parents can find non-competitive sporting options in a number of places. The first place to call is your local department of parks and recreation, followed by area YMCAs, YWCAs, and after school clubs or groups.​[h=3]Non-Competitive Sports to Consider[/h]

Canoeing


Kayaking


Archery


Aerobics


Recreational Dance


Hiking


Backpacking


Fishing


Surfing


Walking


Skateboarding


Cycling


Billiards


Karate


----------



## Archtkd (Apr 21, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Terry, the way we explain it to students is that the sport of tkd has gained much popularity particularly since becoming an olympic sport. We explain that it is a great sport to get into and there are many competitions around the place and many avenues to compete. We also advise that if this is the avenue they, or their kids, want to go down that they are best finding a club who focuses on this form of sparring and understand the 'game' of sparring, For example, how points are scored, how many points are required to win a match, the rules, which techniques have the most success, the best way to counter such moves etc . We also tell them that certain safety gear is worn in these matches and that anyone wanting to compete should find a club that encourages wearing this sort of gear so they can get used to wearing it while sparring. We also let them know that clubs specialising in this form of competition will have instructors/coaches who understand how the game is played and provide a platform for a student to improve their knowledge of the sport and their chances of success. We tell them that the non sport schools tend not to focus on that form of sparring so much, may wear different padding or no padding at all when sparring, generally their students dont compete as they are not well versed in the sport of tkd and often spar under different rulesets and that the instructors are usually not qualified to really be teaching the ins and outs of olympic sparring as they usually have not competed themself, or may not even know the rules. we go into all the self defense side of things as well. There is more to it but thats the basis of what we say. If people see competition as an avenue they may wish to go down we are more than happy to pass on some numbers of local sports clubs.


 Ralph, I don't know if you have said this in earlier threads. Does your taekwondo system have any sort of competition in sparring or forms, even at the inter-club level?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 21, 2012)

Archtkd said:


> Ralph, I don't know if you have said this in earlier threads. Does your taekwondo system have any sort of competition in sparring or forms, even at the inter-club level?


For those who wish to test their skills against others we do have a comp once or twice a year. Its a pretty good event actually, I think it is especially good for kids as they often feel the urge to compete, and even some of the older guys like to re live their younger days. Only a very small percentage of student are interested in competing but we still usually end up with 500-600 students, most want to compete in the self defence section or timber breaking. Students wishing to compete practice for it in their own time, no class time is put aside for preparation and certain instructors encourage competing more than others. My instructor hates it, but is more than happy for his students to enter if they wish. Our GM doesnt like the idea and doesnt attend, it is run by a group of 7th dans.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 21, 2012)

mastercole said:


> For those interested. A recommendation for children who shy away from competitive sports to instead try non-competitive sports.  They have listed Karate, but any martial art can apply as both a competitive sport, like sparring, and a non-competitive sport, like makiwara practice.
> 
> "If your tween backs down from competition, organized team sports, or just needs a temporary break from competition, consider introducing him to a non-competitive alternative. If you're worried that your son or daughter won't take away as much from a non-competitive sport as from football, basketball, or baseball, take a breath. Experts say as long as your child has your full support and interest, he'll come out a winner. In addition, non-competitive sports do offer competition, in some form.Rather than competing against a team or another player, your tween is really in competition with himself, to improve his score, his time, or improve his abilities. For example, the sport of kayaking emphasizes not speed, but stroking, following safety guidelines, and enjoying the outdoors.There's another advantage to non-competitive sports, say child advocates. They often eliminate the ugliness that takes place on the playing field. Who hasn't heard the story about the ill tempered coach, or the foul-mouthed parent who loses it in front of everybody? Also, non-competitive sports or activities give your tween the luxury of learning or improving his skill in his own time.Parents can find non-competitive sporting options in a number of places. The first place to call is your local department of parks and recreation, followed by area YMCAs, YWCAs, and after school clubs or groups.​*Non-Competitive Sports to Consider*
> 
> ...


From your experience Mastercole, what percentage of kids coming through your door end up competing at any level? Do you find kids like to compete more than adults, or the other way around?


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 21, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Funny, we get people ask that all the time. I can honestly say one of the first two or three questions a new student will ask is "is this sport tkd?", or "what is sport tkd?". I think because all over the internet now on everything from martial arts forums to things like yahoo answers and other martial arts chat lines the term "sport tkd" is becoming very common. There is a club down the road from where I used to live that actually says "sports tkd" on the big banner hanging out the front. It could just be a regional thing though, I can only speak on behalf of clubs over here obviously.



We're the same.  I've explained the difference many times to a prospective student.  I think that is the honest thing to do for a student, so that they know precisely what the training will involve and what the goals are going to be upfront.  I can't remember anyone ever coming to me looking for sport training.  I attribute that to the way I've set up my website as well as word-of-mouth advertising.  I don't market one way of training over the other, or market one as all-inclusive.  I think it is dishonest to do so from a professional point of view.  If I did have someone come to me that wanted sport-oriented training I'd point them to another school.  Though we've had many TKD schools close in the last few years (and one TSD), there are still some around the area that would serve them well.  When asked what the difference is, I simply explain the teaching methodology of each as well as the overall goals/focus of the programs.  Again, that isn't putting one above another, that is explaining what the differences are and allowing the student to choose what is best for them.  In this way, it doesn't have to be an 'X' vs. 'Y' kinda thing.  

Fortunately, due to the net, as well as personal interactions among people, the differences are becoming better known.  This helps to prevent one methodology program from claiming it covers both.  This is of benefit to the student as ultimately, they should receive the product they desire and are paying for.


----------



## Gorilla (Apr 21, 2012)

Wether you choose to compete is up to the individual.  If you want to compete your training should on that.  If not focus on some other part of the Martial Arts.

It is personal preference!  One is not more valid than the other.  If you want to train old school rather than new school (whatever that means) perfectly fine.

We should be able to have debates on this board with out people getting hurt feelings and threads being locked.

This is not a critic of the Mods but if how this group acts.  Get a thicker skin.

Allot of people have attacked Master Cole and Puunui recently for things that they ultimately do themselves.  Can we have lively discussions without all the tattling!!!!


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 21, 2012)

Gorilla said:


> Wether you choose to compete is up to the individual.  If you want to compete your training should on that.  If not focus on some other part of the Martial Arts.
> 
> It is personal preference!  One is not more valid than the other.  If you want to train old school rather than new school (whatever that means) perfectly fine.
> 
> ...


The tattling is mostly how they word some of their views 
Personally, I just watch the debates and giggle.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 21, 2012)

I think the point needs to be made (again), that it isn't an 'us vs. them' kinda thing. At least not on the part of 'us'. I don't see it as something to really debate. SD training isn't a viable vehicle for a sports-oriented competitor. Conversely, sports-oriented training isn't the best vehicle for SD. That isn't putting one higher than the other. It isn't putting one down in favor of the other. They are different training vehicles, with different methodologies for different destinations. 

As far as TKD competitions, KKW TKD is the bomb. It has a well organized structure in place and lots of opportunity for the sports practitioner. From a SD perspective, it isn't the best option. That is my professional opinion and not to be taken as a jab at KKW TKD. A jeep is great for off-road, but not very handy competing in the Indie 500. The methodology is great for one venue and insufficent for another. That isn't ego or agenda. Just stating what should be fairly obvious. 

The goal is to simply have an open, honest and unemotional discussion on the merits of each in-and-of-themselves and how and why they differ. Then no one gets flamed or insulted or offended. People can then look forward to viewing the thread. Then we can all hold hands and sing songs afterwards :ultracool

BTW, Ralph your PM box is full.


----------



## Archtkd (Apr 21, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> For those who wish to test their skills against others we do have a comp once or twice a year. Its a pretty good event actually, I think it is especially good for kids as they often feel the urge to compete, and even some of the older guys like to re live their younger days. Only a very small percentage of student are interested in competing but we still usually end up with 500-600 students, most want to compete in the self defence section or timber breaking. Students wishing to compete practice for it in their own time, no class time is put aside for preparation and certain instructors encourage competing more than others. My instructor hates it, but is more than happy for his students to enter if they wish. Our GM doesnt like the idea and doesnt attend, it is run by a group of 7th dans.


 Very interesting. What you are describing sounds like what happens in a lot of Kukkiwon taekwondo circles around the world.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 21, 2012)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I think the point needs to be made (again), that it isn't an 'us vs. them' kinda thing. At least not on the part of 'us'. I don't see it as something to really debate. SD training isn't a viable vehicle for a sports-oriented competitor. Conversely, sports-oriented training isn't the best vehicle for SD. That isn't putting one higher than the other. It isn't putting one down in favor of the other. They are different training vehicles, with different methodologies for different destinations.
> 
> As far as TKD competitions, KKW TKD is the bomb. It has a well organized structure in place and lots of opportunity for the sports practitioner. From a SD perspective, it isn't the best option. That is my professional opinion and not to be taken as a jab at KKW TKD. A jeep is great for off-road, but not very handy competing in the Indie 500. The methodology is great for one venue and insufficent for another. That isn't ego or agenda. Just stating what should be fairly obvious.
> 
> ...


I will have to empty that pm box. Your above post is spot on, sums it up nicely.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 21, 2012)

Gorilla said:


> Wether you choose to compete is up to the individual.  If you want to compete your training should on that.  If not focus on some other part of the Martial Arts.
> 
> It is personal preference!  One is not more valid than the other.  If you want to train old school rather than new school (whatever that means) perfectly fine.
> 
> ...


I cant recall anywhere where puuini or mastercole have been 'attacked'. People disagree with them regularly but from what Ive seen its always in a polite, respectful manner.


----------



## Carol (Apr 21, 2012)

To me, 'sport' has meant competition with another entity, under a ruleset.

To use a logical construct: 

If {sport} ===> then {competition under ruleset}

The contrapositive:

If not {competition under ruleset} ====> then not {sport}

There are a lot of physical activities...including my favorite (hiking) that are not sport per se.  They might be considered athletics, recreation, training, aerobic, anaerobic, healthy, fun, awesome and other forms of physically active goodnesss....but they aren't necessarily a sport, at least to me.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 21, 2012)

Carol said:


> To me, 'sport' has meant competition with another entity, under a ruleset.
> 
> To use a logical construct:
> 
> ...


Thats pretty much how I see it aswell. Technically, a guy standing there boucing a tennis ball is 'sport' if you want to get technical, but I wouldnt consider it sport. If two people are bouncing a tennis ball in a form of competition it then becomes sport, becaue then when they train they have tht ruleset in mind and start to train in such a way that it will adhere to the ruleset they use. Just like a cricketer doesnt spend hours on end practicing to bat against underarm bowling, because they know they will never have to face that in a real game. If Im an elite sports martial artist training regularly to become the best and in my ruleset you cant punch to the face (for instance), then I wont waste my time spending hour upon hour working on defence against a head punch because it just cant happen. So what starts out as "anything physical is sport", can veer off once people start actually adapting their training to a sport/ruleset. As I said in an earlier post, when I asked a mate of mine who is a sports tkdist why they dont work on punching very much, he replied "because punches dont score". He has clearly adapted his martial arts training to suit the ruleset he spars under.


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 21, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I cant recall anywhere where puuini or mastercole have been 'attacked'. People disagree with them regularly but from what Ive seen its always in a polite, respectful manner.


Usually, when people say a user is attacked for their views, its because they support those peoples views, or those people. Im not saying anything, just that thats usually what it means.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 21, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Usually, when people say a user is attacked for their views, its because they support those peoples views, or those people. Im not saying anything, just that thats usually what it means.


So very, very true.


----------



## puunui (Apr 22, 2012)

Gorilla said:


> Allot of people have attacked Master Cole and Puunui recently for things that they ultimately do themselves.  Can we have lively discussions without all the tattling!!!!



If it is going to be that big of a deal, then we'll just leave.


----------



## Gorilla (Apr 22, 2012)

puunui said:


> If it is going to be that big of a deal, then we'll just leave.



I would hate to see that....if you and Maste Cole left... We would go back to the old BBS....which was rather boring....stay and  keep the discussion going!


----------



## Gorilla (Apr 22, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Usually, when people say a user is attacked for their views, its because they support those peoples views, or those people. Im not saying anything, just that thats usually what it means.



I support in part the views of most people on this BBS.  I disagree at times with everyone. I support the right for people to speak out.  I hate when people try to sensor peoples opinions.  Hell i never agree with twin fist but he is one of my favorite posters.


----------



## StudentCarl (Apr 22, 2012)

puunui said:


> If it is going to be that big of a deal, then we'll just leave.



Sir,

The trees with character are those along a windward shore that have had to withstand the biting wind. Those without character stand straight in the midst of a planted forest, all identical, reaching in only one direction for a tiny window of light. They don't know the wind.


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 22, 2012)

Gorilla said:


> I support in part the views of most people on this BBS.  I disagree at times with everyone. I support the right for people to speak out.  I hate when people try to sensor peoples opinions.  Hell i never agree with twin fist but he is one of my favorite posters.



Same here. I tend to find most of the conversation constructive. Other conversations can be weird, or amount to little or nothing. And then theres the pointless debating


----------



## Archtkd (Apr 22, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I cant recall anywhere where puuini or mastercole have been 'attacked'. People disagree with them regularly but from what Ive seen its always in a polite, respectful manner.


 You and I go at it quite a bit, but I must ask you: is this Australian humor?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 22, 2012)

Archtkd said:


> You and I go at it quite a bit, but I must ask you: is this Australian humor?


Probably just Australian humour In all seriousness though, I find this quite a peaceful place, I really dont recall people making personal attacks or being disrespectful. I think when people start "investigating" others it goes a bit far, but I cant say Ive ever sunk to that level. Thakfully, anytime they start investigating and dragging up names of clubs or instructors who have nothing to do with this board the thread gets locked pretty quickly. Thats a good thing I think.


----------



## Gorilla (Apr 22, 2012)

Somebody negative reped me for some posts I made about Master Cole and Punuui.  Thanks I never knew how that worked.  I have a real hard time understanding why people do all the reporting. Some people tried to get me kicked off when I started on this BBS and the Mods did a terrific job.

Agree with them or not let them speak!!!  It keeps the BBS lively.  I enjoy everyone on this board even those who dont like me.  I would never want anyone silenced.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Apr 22, 2012)

Gorilla said:


> Somebody negative reped me for some posts I made about Master Cole and Punuui.  Thanks I never new how that worked.  I have a real hard time understanding why people do all the reporting. Some people tried to get me kicked off when I started on this BBS and the Mods did a terrific job.
> 
> Agree with them or not let them speak!!!  It keeps the BBS lively.  I enjoy everyone on this board even those who dont like me.  I would never want anyone silenced.



Especially given the level of knowledge on this board I'm shocked at how sensitive people can be. Seems they'd rather live in a bubble than open their eyes and really learn. I was very much guilty of this not that long ago.


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 22, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I think when people start "investigating" others it goes a bit far, but I cant say Ive ever sunk to that level.



Yeah.



Gorilla said:


> Somebody negative reped me for some posts I made about Master Cole and Punuui. Thanks I never new how that worked. I have a real hard time understanding why people do all the reporting. Some people tried to get me kicked off when I started on this BBS and the Mods did a terrific job.
> 
> *Agree with them or not let them speak!!! *It keeps the BBS lively. I enjoy everyone on this board even those who dont like me. I would never want anyone silenced.



This can be an odd place


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 23, 2012)

clfsean said:


> yeah sorry.... tui shou == push hands


Plus there is this competition of Taiji masters


----------



## clfsean (Apr 23, 2012)

miguksaram said:


> Plus there is this competition of Taiji masters



There is that... :bangahead:


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 23, 2012)

I used to see Sport TKD and Art TKD as two different things.  I think it was mostly because I looked at the popularity of TKD growing the the Olympic movement and seeing a lot of the school capitalizing on that by teaching mostly the sport branch of it.  They found that this is what worked best for them in terms of keeping their doors open.

However, as I learned more about the history and what a lot of the goals of the pioneers were through that research, it became a bit more clear that it should never be a sport vs art....because honestly it is like a less filling vs taste great debate.....it's the same beer...you just enjoy it for different reasons (well if you like Miller...that is a whole different thread).  

The problem is that practitioners need to have balance in their training.  Example:  If I train ONLY the SD aspects, I miss out on a lot of great physical conditioning that sport training provides, which can help in a SD situation.  On the flip side, if I focus on only sport training, then I miss out on how to handle situations that do not happen in the ring, but will happen in the outside world.  So you see, some balance in training is the key.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 23, 2012)

miguksaram said:


> The problem is that practitioners need to have balance in their training.  Example:  If I train ONLY the SD aspects, I miss out on a lot of great physical conditioning that sport training provides, which can help in a SD situation.  On the flip side, if I focus on only sport training, then I miss out on how to handle situations that do not happen in the ring, but will happen in the outside world.  So you see, some balance in training is the key.



Okay Jeremy, this has piqued my interest, so let's talk about it from an unemotional, rational, non-art vs. sport perspective and see where it takes us. 

Let's take a look at the conditioning aspect to begin with.  I agree that the sport training methodology side of the house can have a fantastic conditioning component.  And yes, great conditioning can be of tremendous benefit in a SD situation (or emergency survival situation for that matter as well as life in general).  However, if one trains with a SD training methodology, why would you suggest that the conditioning component is inferior?  Not putting you on the spot, just looking for discussion on the point you've put forth so take it in that light please.

Secondly, SD methodology as I've mentioned takes into account multiple things that are important that I've never seen sports training methodology cover in passing, let alone in-depth.  NOT a slam on sport methodology, just posting an observation.  Additionally, TKD that uses the sport methodology, in my experience concentrates on kicks/strikes in a controlled-environment perspective and does not cover in a meaningful way things such as locks, throws, chokes, cavity pressing, ground defense, escape & evasion, de-esculation etc which are necessary (or at least highly useful) in a SD situation.  This limits the responses possible and makes it more one dimensional as far as possible options.  

And again, this isn't putting one above the other, so it should not be taken in that light.  I'm wording everything carefully so there is no misunderstanding as to the intent of the post.  I'm pointing out differences (and similarities) within the two venues.  Others are free to offer their thoughts as well.  

Thank you.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 23, 2012)

I think the question should be more along the lines of why do some instructors only teach sport when, their MA offers so much more. There is no balance in some schools, even only S/D would be totally off balance. I am KKW so I know what balances my art, I am sure it is the same with any art that has "DO" at the end of the name. The issues are about the school not the art.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 23, 2012)

leadleg said:


> I think the question should be more along the lines of why do some instructors only teach sport when, their MA offers so much more. There is no balance in some schools, even only S/D would be totally off balance. I am KKW so I know what balances my art, I am sure it is the same with any art that has "DO" at the end of the name. The issues are about the school not the art.



Valid questions, let's take a look, using KKW TKD as an example.  From a sport methodology it's the bomb.  No argument.  But is it balanced from the perspective of SD methodology?  Let me ask you, does your KKW TKD curriculum consider/cover in-depth the O.O.D.A. loop, escape and evasion, flinch response, gross motor skill sets, adrenaline induced responses, grappling, locks, throws, cavity pressing or ground defense (just to name some of the basic SD methodology considerations)?  And again, not a jab at KKW TKD, simply looking at what it does, and does not offer.  Does KKW TKD train in a controlled environment using only certain skills against a single opponent who is unarmed using a prescribed, mutually agreed upon rule set?  I would suggest that KKW TKD has a focus on sport competitions and not SD.  And that is okay if you're goal/focus is on competition.  It does not necessarily make you unbalanced as a martial artist unless you are expecting KKW TKD (or any sport art) to be effective for SD also.  Similarly, SD only is only unbalance if you expect it to have a sport related component.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 23, 2012)

The answer would be yes except on grappling and throwing and cavity press.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Apr 23, 2012)

KKW Taekwondo doesn't officially include any grappling. My master has added some, including basic throwing, wrist locks, armbars, etc.


----------



## Steve (Apr 23, 2012)

ETinCYQX said:


> KKW Taekwondo doesn't officially include any grappling. My master has added some, including basic throwing, wrist locks, armbars, etc.


I've seen some of this, and there are some real hazards. The question being is your master qualified to teach basic throwing, wrist locks or armbars?  Where did he learn them?   Not a knock, and it may be that your coach has crosstrained and it qualified.  But taking a seminar and working in elements outside of your style without being well grounded is potentially very shifty.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 23, 2012)

leadleg said:


> The answer would be yes except on grappling and throwing and cavity press.



Thank you for the reply, and a thumbs up for your program.  In my experience you would be the exception and not the rule.  As an example, most sparring I've seen would entail the two individuals lining up at a prescribed distance apart and then attempting to strike/kick each other in certain areas/certain ways, according to a mutually agreed upon/prescribed set of rules and then resetting to begin again.  If I'm understanding you, you allow the competitors to escape and/or evade the encounter prior to physical contact?  They have an opportunity (at least occasionally) to try de-esculation techniques?  They train to disengage or 'stun n run'?  One can attempt to use a hidden weapon or improvised weapon?  Or other attackers can enter the sparring session? Is training conducted in dim-light?  Is it conducted outside the dojang on other surfaces like grass or slopes or on stairs or in an enclosed space like an elevator?  I was unaware that KKW TKD offered ground defense, what does it entail?  Is it geared more towards sport like MMA or would it be considered more defensive in nature?  

Thank you.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Apr 23, 2012)

Steve said:


> I've seen some of this, and there are some real hazards. The question being is your master qualified to teach basic throwing, wrist locks or armbars?  Where did he learn them?   Not a knock, and it may be that your coach has crosstrained and it qualified.  But taking a seminar and working in elements outside of your style without being well grounded is potentially very shifty.



The way I understand it, the curriculum is basic Hapkido. Not sure where it came from. However, I cross train in Judo and it's all mechanically sound and safe.


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 23, 2012)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Let's take a look at the conditioning aspect to begin with.  I agree that the sport training methodology side of the house can have a fantastic conditioning component.  And yes, great conditioning can be of tremendous benefit in a SD situation (or emergency survival situation for that matter as well as life in general).  However, if one trains with a SD training methodology, why would you suggest that the conditioning component is inferior?


 Never said nor suggested it was inferior.



> Secondly, SD methodology as I've mentioned takes into account multiple things that are important that I've never seen sports training methodology cover in passing, let alone in-depth.  NOT a slam on sport methodology, just posting an observation.  Additionally, TKD that uses the sport methodology, in my experience concentrates on kicks/strikes in a controlled-environment perspective and does not cover in a meaningful way things such as locks, throws, chokes, cavity pressing, ground defense, escape & evasion, de-esculation etc which are necessary (or at least highly useful) in a SD situation.  This limits the responses possible and makes it more one dimensional as far as possible options.


Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are writing, but it seems like you are just echoing what I said.  The sports aspects of TKD will tend to focus on what will work in the ring, not so much in the street.  So no, I will not sit there and train a student how to do a joint lock when we happen to be focusing on mat control for competition in the lesson.  (Not to say I would never train a joint lock to the student, just would not do it in that particular lesson).  Now this does not mean I cannot carry over sport training philosophies into SD training.  Example mat control can be a good way of training controlling the environment to allow you the opportunity of escaping.  Not all areas of sport training will transfer over, but should I discard that aspect of TKD training simply because it is not 100% in the streets? Of course not.

In the same sense, good SD training will help a student overcome the initial shock of fight or flight reaction.  As well as it helps with the mindset of not stopping because one technique did not work as well as it should have.  This is something I can take into my sports training when I am trying to teach a student how a specific combination of techniques may not fair well so move to the next combo or improvise.  Plus the mindset of fight or flight is lessened when placed in a controlled environment such us the ring.  However, do I discard this aspect of my TKD training because it really doesn't teach me how to score my points well?  Of course not.

It is all about balance and implementing what you learn from one aspect to help you improve another aspect.  It is all TKD.  If certain training methods of one will help another why wouldn't I learn that type of training.  I do not have to be an elite fighter to want to train in competition...nor do I have to walk the bad streets in Aurora, IL to want to train in SD.  In fact where I live, I have very little need for hard core SD training....and at my age, I have very little need for elite competition training.  However, I enjoy both.


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 23, 2012)

leadleg said:


> I think the question should be more along the lines of why do some instructors only teach sport when, their MA offers so much more. There is no balance in some schools, even only S/D would be totally off balance. I am KKW so I know what balances my art, I am sure it is the same with any art that has "DO" at the end of the name. The issues are about the school not the art.


That is a great question.  I would say it could be one of two reasons, though I am sure there are more.  One reason may be that they enjoy competition and training for competition so that is what they want to focus on.  The second reason could be that is what the market is dictating.  If I want to keep my doors open and I have more people wanting to spar and do competition, then that is where I am going to focus my efforts.  Perhaps I live in a shady area, where SD training would be in more demand, then that is what I am going to focus on to keep food on my table.

A good instructor who is a good business person, which very rarely go hand in hand, can figure out that balance and still keep doors open.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 23, 2012)

Why do some instructors only teach sport when their art offers so much more? Simple. Because their organisations set standards but dont bother to check those standards are being adhered to. Then, they tell their students how lucky they are to be part of a large organisation that standardises the art. Go figure.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 23, 2012)

miguksaram said:


> Example:  If I train ONLY the SD aspects, I miss out on a lot of great physical conditioning that sport training provides, which can help in a SD situation.  On the flip side, if I focus on only sport training, then I miss out on how to handle situations that do not happen in the ring, but will happen in the outside world.  So you see, some balance in training is the key.



Alright, let me go back to your original statement, as underlined.  Sport training in most schools probably has a good physical conditioning component.  But so do the SD schools I've trained in, seen or taught. So when properly taught, SD has this component as well and the student isn't missing out on it.


----------



## Archtkd (Apr 23, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Why do some instructors only teach sport when their art offers so much more? Simple. Because their organisations set standards but dont bother to check those standards are being adhered to. Then, they tell their students how lucky they are to be part of a large organisation that standardises the art. Go figure.



Some teach the way they do because they can. They teach what they know. They teach the way they want because they are not children waiting and seeking to be supervised by some dictatorial bureaucrat who claims to be acting in their best interest. They teach the way their students want to be taught. They teach the way they want because the are very lucky to live in free countries, where their skills are appreciated. They teach the way they do because they can make a pretty good and honest living from it. They teach they way they do because they are lucky to have ambitious and talented students who use the competion skills they acquire in taekwondo to be winners in life. The list could go on .....


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 23, 2012)

Completely agree with all of that, and good on them. Problem is, they could do all of that without joining an organisation. Everything you said above applies to where I train also. Which pretty much sums up my original post.


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 24, 2012)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Alright, let me go back to your original statement, as underlined.  Sport training in most schools probably has a good physical conditioning component.  But so do the SD schools I've trained in, seen or taught. So when properly taught, SD has this component as well and the student isn't missing out on it.


As this is just going to turn into the same redundant and soon to be flamed argument, I am just going to say this last thing.  Again I never said SD training was inferior, it seems from you posts you feel that this is my message.  It is not.  What I am saying is balance is needed in training.  If you do not have it, then, in my opinion you are missing out on what TKD really is.   You may be satisfied with that type of training and only that type of training.  That is cool and nothing wrong with it.  To each his own.  I prefer to learn about all that my art has to offer and utilize all the tools available, not just on aspect of it.


----------



## miguksaram (Apr 24, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Why do some instructors only teach sport when their art offers so much more? Simple. Because their organisations set standards but dont bother to check those standards are being adhered to. Then, they tell their students how lucky they are to be part of a large organisation that standardises the art. Go figure.


I disagree, but do not want to turn this into a flame war filled with anti-KKW sentiment, which is what I am starting to read into this.  KKW has a minimum standard set for the organization.  It allows the school owner a lot of freedom to do what they feel is best for their dojang so long as when they apply for their black belt certification that they meet the minimum standards set.  No organization is perfect and there will situations where the standards are thrown out the window or people get around them and still get their rank.  Whatever.  Between these redundant posts of people pointing fingers in all directions claiming how the other side is killing martial arts and all the Republican vs Democrats pointing fingers saying how the other side is screwing up the US, I am personally tired of it all.  

I think I will just join others on the sideline with a tub of popcorn and a beer and just watch you all have at it.  If anyone wants to discuss Korean cultural issues and how they pertain to Korean arts or history issues, please feel free to PM me or contact me via FB.


----------



## StudentCarl (Apr 24, 2012)

I think it's a lot simpler than what's being said: school owners teach most what they know and like best. If they didn't want to, they wouldn't teach. Over time they develop preferences and priorities, even if they are well-rounded. The clientele does vary, and each instructor brings a unique set of experience and style. I'm fine with all that. It doesn't have to be sport *or* SD--what makes a good school is a quality instructor who is honest about what he offers and delivers that.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 24, 2012)

miguksaram said:


> As this is just going to turn into the same redundant and soon to be flamed argument...
> 
> I disagree, but do not want to turn this into a flame war filled with  anti-KKW sentiment, which is what I am starting to read into this...



I don't know why you keep saying this?  This has been a pretty good thread with opinions all over the spectrum, intelligent and well thought out posts on every side and plenty of courtesy.  My suggestion is to not expect something, and continue to do your part to maintain a good thread if you continue to participate in it.  I don't see it as 'anti-KKW' sentiment at all, simply looking at what it is and more importantly, what it is not.  That isn't 'anti', that is commenting on observations.  



> Again I never said SD training was inferior, it seems from you posts you feel that this is my message.  It is not.



That's fine, I'll accept this.



> What I am saying is balance is needed in training.



This is where we agree in principle, but not necessarily in practice.  True, many SD methodology oriented schools lack a competitive component.  But, in my opinion, that is a component that may be a 'want' but isn't a 'need' for balance.  Those that focus on SD methodology have plenty to work on, complete with an aggressive physical conditioning component (in my experience and what I've provided).  Competition wasn't desired.  On the flip side, sport methodology oriented schools can also offer a lot, including as you've mentioned a great physical conditioning component.  In general, again from my experience, they lack the SD component to a great extent.  But then, if it isn't desired then no problem exists.  I maintain the issue that I would have though of a sport methodology oriented school (KKW or otherwise) claiming they teach quality SD.  Most don't.  Leadleg, the other poster I'm talking with would be an exception to the rule and I give a big thumbs up for his program.  But generally speaking, KKW and other 'sport' schools do not address many/any of the SD basics that I've discussed.  Again, if that is what the students want then they are getting what they've paid for and all is fine.  If the school offers one methodology but touts itself as offering both (or other venues it has no experience in) then a problem does exist.  It isn't a flame-fest to simply point this out.  There is a difference and instructors and students should know the difference.  

Thank you.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 24, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Completely agree with all of that, and good on them. Problem is, they could do all of that without joining an organisation. Everything you said above applies to where I train also. Which pretty much sums up my original post.



Well here is where I think it is important to belong to a good organization. If you want  to compete in TKD and you want to compete at tournaments with the best or at least the most elite TKD athletes then you would want to be KKW so you can play  at WTF sponsored tournaments. Unless you don&#8217;t want to get knocked out then you need to go to another style. Another thing that organization sponsored tournaments provide is the same rule set no matter who is sponsoring the tournament. 
 As for the KKW not oppressing, I mean controlling what goes on in your school we like that. The KKW trusts its members, it is the integrity of the school owner that is at stake, not the KKW. If you or your students do not have the KKW minimum requirements you had better stay home, otherwise you will be found out rather quickly, either at a seminar or a tournament.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 24, 2012)

While I agree that some schools (KKW) may be all about the sport and little else I do not find this to be the norm. I and others know that unless you are very well known to be coaching elite athletes at the World or Olympic level you will not keep your doors open with just a sport program. Normally you will only have about 10 percent or less of your students who want to compete at a national level.
 If you have 100 students that means 90 of them want martial arts instruction not just a hard workout or taught to fight tournaments. In order to keep those students your program had better be balanced and all encompassing. The adults, teens, and children all need to be taught at their age levels and all be taught differently. In order to do this you need have many different classes per week. That means a commercial school, that means rent and good equipment. That means money, I have found that people will not pay good money for bad instruction or bad results. 
When you keep your students locked in your little fishbowl (no organization), never exposing them to the rest of the martial arts community you may be able to fool them for a while.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 24, 2012)

_Thank you for the reply, and a thumbs up for your program. In my experience you would be the exception and not the rule. As an example, most sparring I've seen would entail the two individuals lining up at a prescribed distance apart and then attempting to strike/kick each other in certain areas/certain ways, according to a mutually agreed upon/prescribed set of rules and then resetting to begin again. If I'm understanding you, you allow the competitors to escape and/or evade the encounter prior to physical contact? They have an opportunity (at least occasionally) to try de-esculation techniques? They train to disengage or 'stun n run'? One can attempt to use a hidden weapon or improvised weapon? Or other attackers can enter the sparring session? Is training conducted in dim-light? Is it conducted outside the dojang on other surfaces like grass or slopes or on stairs or in an enclosed space like an elevator? I was unaware that KKW TKD offered ground defense, what does it entail? Is it geared more towards sport like MMA or would it be considered more defensive in nature? _
My response was yes with an exception to grappling, cavity press, and throwing. I find that we need some classes just for those type activities. I am lucky enough to have an extensive background in Hapkido and some seminar time with Dr. Yang (2 times).
 I also have a second dan TKD who has  first dan in Judo and was a national champ in her day. She instructs the children and teens twice a month on falling rolling and Judo style throws and sport  style grappling.
 As for throws in self defense it is my belief that if you are talking about over the shoulder or fireman type (high) throws they are not controlled enough to use. If you mean hard and fast take downs with control then I find them beneficial. As for cavity press, limb destruction, sealing the arteries or sealing the breath, I feel these should be taught as special techniques in a special class for special students.
 I have self defense classes three times per week for 18 and older students, I usually only have about 10 to 15 students in those classes. Every Thursday I hold a free s/d class that sometimes draws in a couple of people. 
The KKW may have some types of defense I do not know as I am still studying the art and discovering some applications in the higher forms I did not realize. 
 As for scenario sparring (without a referee) we use free style where anything goes, one two and three step sparring where the outcome is known.We use Olympic style for heavy contact, and train in corners, and various size rings.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 24, 2012)

Sounds like you've got a lot of the bases covered, well done.  I'm glad to see you had the opportunity to train with Dr. Yang.  I'm assuming Chin Na?  I very much like what he and Tim Cartmell have to offer in this area.  I use these types of techniques for more than striking.  In regards to throws, I prefer them to be more controlled so that I can tailor them to the situation.  For me, I need to maintain control of them once I've taken them to the ground (cuffing/searching etc).

Good talking with you


----------



## GlassJaw (Apr 24, 2012)

Why do we spar?  Training, recreation, competition?  All three to varying degrees.

Is competitive sparring Tae Kwon Do?  Not any more than knot-tying races are sailing. They are games developed from training exercises which have then been standardized to permit competition.

Look, say, for instance, that I'm an avid hunter (well, the "hunter" part is accurate; I'm just not as avid as I would like to be).  A major aspect of training is, of course, target practice.  Such practice is not itself hunting, but rather, just an exercise to develop and evaluate proficiency for a particular subset of the skills used in hunting.  Occasionally, I might target shoot in competition with others recreationally.  Or, if I really wanted to, I could try to become ranked for sanctioned competitions.  Those competitions could become an all-consuming activity.  But no matter how good I get at it and no matter how many hunters participate, target shooting is still not hunting.

There are zillions of hunting organizations in the US.  A great number of them hold tournaments, many of which may follow standardized rules and regulations put forth by some other body (such as the NRA). But only a minority of those tournaments are NRA-sanctioned for the purpose of nationally ranking competitors.

Same is true with WTF.  It's a arm of the KKW created specifically and exclusively for the regulation (and promotion) of Tae Kwon Do sparring as competitive sport.  It focuses only on a subset of the skills related to TKD.  Meanwhile, other regulatory organizations that standardize rules for TKD sparring competitions choose to focus on a different subset of skills.  But, no matter how the game is played, it is still not, in and of itself, TKD.

Does TKD training necessarily _need_ to include sparring as part of the curriculum?  Well, I suppose not...provided that one incorporates other exercises to develop that subset of essential skills.  But I think that sparring has been shown to be a pretty effective (and certainly popular) one.

Is competitive sparring [by "competitive", I particularly mean participating in tournaments, as opposed to just sparring within one's own school--because, afterall, any sparring, whether for training or just recreation, is inherently competitive on _some_ level] an essential component of TKD training?  Not from what I've seen. But, even if inessential, tournaments are a big part of TKD culture. (I just consider it unfortunate when they overshadow the rest of the training.  But, to each one's own.)

And does competitive sparring require WTF?  Heck no.  But _someone_ has to set standards.  If you don't like WTF's, then use someone else's.  Realize, though, that if you're seeking state, national, or international ranking, your choices will be pretty limited.  But, then, if you dislike a particular format, why would you want to be ranked in it anyway?


----------



## Archtkd (Apr 24, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Completely agree with all of that, and good on them. Problem is, they could do all of that without joining an organisation. Everything you said above applies to where I train also. Which pretty much sums up my original post.



I didn't say anything about organizations, but I will ask:   Dou know the Kukkiwon is not an organization one joins? That is unless you recently became a member of the recently created Kukkiwon Overseas Membership System (KOMS) for instructors 4th Dan and up. Do you also know that the World Taekwondo Federation is not an organization that individual join? 

As a member of your dojang don't you belong to an organization, albeit a small local one?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 25, 2012)

Archtkd said:


> I didn't say anything about organizations, but I will ask:   Dou know the Kukkiwon is not an organization one joins? That is unless you recently became a member of the recently created Kukkiwon Overseas Membership System (KOMS) for instructors 4th Dan and up. Do you also know that the World Taekwondo Federation is not an organization that individual join?
> 
> As a member of your dojang don't you belong to an organization, albeit a small local one?


Yes, and I love the fact I am part of a small organisation. It means our chief instructor can drop into all the classes from time to time and ensure the curriculum set by the club is being adhered to. It also means the instructors can get together and run through what is to be taught and how it is to be taught. It also means every single student is graded by the same panel using identical grading requirements to ensure that a black belt from club "a" and a black belt from club "b" have undergone the same training and been graded by the same person using the same guidelines. It helps maintain our strong reputation because you dont get instructors 'flying under the radar' and handing out black belts like candy or lowering grading standards to help students pass. I see all these things as huge positives and is probably why I struggle to understand orgs that dont over see these things. I hate it when people say I "bash the kukkiwon", I dont. I have stated here countless times that some of my close friends are kukkiwon black belts, and they are really good martial artists which is testament to the kukkiwon curriculum and the art itself. Unfortunately I also know kukkiwon black belts who are, well ...very very ordinary. The only negative I ever speak regarding kukkiwon is that the in my mind if you are going to be an organisation for a martial art you owe it to your students and instructors to make some attempt at getting consistency accross all clubs. Its just the way I view things, perhaps because I train in an organisation  that does achieve these things. I genuinely feel sorry for the owners of kukkiwon clubs who provide good martial arts instruction and value having well trained students and they have to compete with the guy up the road who is also a kukkiwon school but has low standards and runs a belt factory. When little johnny's mother is looking for a tkd school for her son she thinks "well they're both kukkiwon, but johnny can get a black belt in 18 months at this school as opposed to the one up the road which takes 5 years. If they are both kukkiwon, why would I bother with the one up the road that takes 5 years to achieve the same result this guy can in under half the time". If I was the owner of a reputable kukkiwon school Id be livid at the dodgy ones teaching low standard tkd and slapping the kukkiwon logo all over the school and merchandise, it would just cheapen the brand in my opinion. Im proud that anyone anywhere wearing my clubs logo and a black belt has undergone exactly what I have, there are no shortcuts. But I can understnad why others dont feel this way.


----------



## andyjeffries (Apr 25, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I hate it when people say I "bash the kukkiwon", I dont. I have stated here countless times that some of my close friends are kukkiwon black belts, and they are really good martial artists which is testament to the kukkiwon curriculum and the art itself. Unfortunately I also know kukkiwon black belts who are, well ...very very ordinary. The only negative I ever speak regarding kukkiwon is that the in my mind if you are going to be an organisation for a martial art you owe it to your students and instructors to make some attempt at getting consistency accross all clubs.



So if the Kukkiwon did require all grading examiners to have sat the Foreign Instructor's Course in Korea, would that alleviate your only negative?

I don't think it's practical to have the Kukkiwon travel round looking at each school (there are FAR too many), but at least requiring that instructors have sat (and passed) the course in Korea shows they should know how to do Taekwondo reasonably well and that they know how to teach it.

Note: I don't personally think this is necessary, I'm throwing it out for discussion.

FWIW I haven't sat the FIC, but I plan to next year along with a few others I know that are going...


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 25, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> So if the Kukkiwon did require all grading examiners to have sat the Foreign Instructor's Course in Korea, would that alleviate your only negative?
> 
> I don't think it's practical to have the Kukkiwon travel round looking at each school (there are FAR too many), but at least requiring that instructors have sat (and passed) the course in Korea shows they should know how to do Taekwondo reasonably well and that they know how to teach it.
> 
> ...


Yeah, Andy that is my only real negative, although Im not a fan of skip dans and other very minor things, but overall, as Ive said here for ages, my only real gripe is that they dont ensure their standards are adhered to. One of my kukkiwon friends (who doesnt come here, so I think Im safe to say this) is really, really ordinary for a black belt. The guy running his school is just a businessman, its all about money and very little about quality martial arts instruction. My friend got his black belt in about 18 months, cant throw a punch, his kicks are sloppy, his form is really bad and has been taught no self defence/one steps at all. He regularly tells me how great it is that because he trains at a 'kukkiwon' club his rank has meaning and tells me how he can travel anywhere, walk into a kukkiwon dojang and his rank stays put. If he ever enters a quality kukkiwon dojang he will get the shock of his life, and while he may be allowed to wear ablack belt he will be way below standard. The instructor of his current club has ripped him off in my opinion, they slap the kukkiwon and WTF logos all over their website, dojang, merchandise, paperwork etc and are basically using the kukkiwon brand to cover up the fact that what they teach is very low standard martial arts. I bite my tongue everytime my mate tells me how he loves being part of the kukkiwon because it means his instructor is adhering to the "kukkiwons strict standards". My instructor could go out tomorrow, start a kukkiwon club and teach absolute rubbish, hand out black belts like candy, teach only a small part of the tkd curriculum, charge ridiculous amounts of money for gradings and pump out thousands of crappy martial arts students all under the kukkiwon banner, whose name he could abuse to trick students into thinking "well he must be good, the kukkiwon are the biggest governing body out there", and theres not a thing the kukkiwon could or would do about it. I cant stress enough that I dont have an issue with what the kukkiwon teach at all. I have heard enough from the likes yourself, Ethan, mastercole, Terry etc etc to know that I would gladly train at any of your clubs, as you all teach a very well rounded curriculum and would no doubt pump out quality martial artists.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 25, 2012)

GlassJaw said:


> Why do we spar? Training, recreation, competition? All three to varying degrees.
> 
> Is competitive sparring Tae Kwon Do? Not any more than knot-tying races are sailing. They are games developed from training exercises which have then been standardized to permit competition.
> 
> ...



Good post, thank you.


----------



## Archtkd (Apr 25, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I genuinely feel sorry for the owners of kukkiwon clubs who provide good martial arts instruction and value having well trained students and they have to compete with the guy up the road who is also a kukkiwon school but has low standards and runs a belt factory. When little johnny's mother is looking for a tkd school for her son she thinks "well they're both kukkiwon, but johnny can get a black belt in 18 months at this school as opposed to the one up the road which takes 5 years. If they are both kukkiwon, why would I bother with the one up the road that takes 5 years to achieve the same result this guy can in under half the time". If I was the owner of a reputable kukkiwon school Id be livid at the dodgy ones teaching low standard tkd and slapping the kukkiwon logo all over the school and merchandise, it would just cheapen the brand in my opinion. Im proud that anyone anywhere wearing my clubs logo and a black belt has undergone exactly what I have, there are no shortcuts. But I can understnad why others dont feel this way.



Again, there is no such thing as a Kukkiwon club -- as in one belonging  to, or managed by. What you see are clubs that practice either good,  mediocre or really bad Kukkiwon style style taekwondo. There are many  others that purport to teach Kukkiwon style taekwondo, the same way that  thousands of other dojangs around the world might claim they teach  "classic", "original, "traditional", "realistic", "roots", "Korean" or  "real American" taekwondo.

I think you have a dangerously flawed  concept of  what the Kukkiwon is, who Kukkiwon teachers are, and what Kukkiwan  standards are supposed to be. The Kukkiwon is an international  certifying, learning, training and research institution for Kukkiwon  style taekwondo masters. 

The Kukkiwon has never and will never  be involved in the business of running local dojangs, the same way that  educational institutions are not involved with monitoring, supervising  or managing their graduates and alumni. Think of it this way: Harvard  has produced some of the best business and science  leaders that the world has ever known. But, its graduates also include  Jeff Skilling, the former CEO of the now defunct Enron Corp. and  Theodore Kacynski, the Unabomber.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Apr 25, 2012)

Archtkd said:


> Again, there is no such thing as a Kukkiwon club -- as in one belonging to, or managed by. What you see are clubs that practice either good, mediocre or really bad Kukkiwon style style taekwondo.




FWIW, it doesn't seem to me that Ralph is implying that the KKW somehow "manages" any school. Quite the opposite, in fact. Then again, I don't know of any large organization that actually _manages_ individual clubs (with the possible exception of the ATA; I don't know how their franchise-thing works). 



> I think you have a dangerously flawed concept of what the Kukkiwon is, who Kukkiwon teachers are, and what Kukkiwan standards are supposed to be. The Kukkiwon is an international certifying, learning, training and research institution for Kukkiwon style taekwondo masters.



 I'm not sure how such a misconception - if it is accurate that anyone holds itt - would be "dangerous." It might be annoying to some KKW people, but dangerous? I don't know.

I personally would be interested in knowing what KKW standards are, however, and how they relate to the KKW certifying people as black belts (if at all).

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2012)

GlassJaw said:


> Look, say, for instance, that I'm an avid hunter (well, the "hunter" part is accurate; I'm just not as avid as I would like to be).  A major aspect of training is, of course, target practice.  Such practice is not itself hunting, but rather, just an exercise to develop and evaluate proficiency for a particular subset of the skills used in hunting.  Occasionally, I might target shoot in competition with others recreationally.  Or, if I really wanted to, I could try to become ranked for sanctioned competitions.  Those competitions could become an all-consuming activity.  But no matter how good I get at it and no matter how many hunters participate, target shooting is still not hunting.
> 
> There are zillions of hunting organizations in the US.  A great number of them hold tournaments, many of which may follow standardized rules and regulations put forth by some other body (such as the NRA). But only a minority of those tournaments are NRA-sanctioned for the purpose of nationally ranking competitors.
> 
> ...


So, if a hunter is to hunt, what would you say the equivalent is to a complete TKD practitioner?  This is a puzzle I've been trying to sort out for a long time.   

Fill in the blank for me:  Hunting is to hunter what _________ is to TKD Practitioner.

Is the answer self defense?  Well, not really if you never or rarely defend yourself.  Golfers golf.  Carpenters build things with wood.  Computer programmers write code.  Hunters hunt.  What do martial artists do?

If this is a tangent, I'll gladly start another thread.  I just appreciate the point made above as skirting very close to a question I've been struggling to answer for a long time.


----------



## terryl965 (Apr 25, 2012)

_*Life Journey *_is to a TKD Practitioner


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2012)

terryl965 said:


> _*Life Journey *_is to a TKD Practitioner


Okay.  But couldn't that be said about any life sport or hobby?   How is a life journey unique to TKD?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 25, 2012)

Steve said:


> So, if a hunter is to hunt, what would you say the equivalent is to a complete TKD practitioner?  This is a puzzle I've been trying to sort out for a long time.
> 
> Fill in the blank for me:  Hunting is to hunter what _________ is to TKD Practitioner.
> 
> ...


what do martial artists do? perhaps they "prepare" for self defence situations. I really dont know actually, but a good question Steve. May make an interesting new thread.


----------



## terryl965 (Apr 25, 2012)

Steve said:


> Okay. But couldn't that be said about any life sport or hobby? How is a life journey unique to TKD?




OK Steve with TKD life journey does not end with sport, Self Defense and training. It is about growing your mind, spirit and training. See with MMA you are only as good as your last fight, with most other arts once the training stops so does the ettiquete and respect for it but in TKD it is always there for the real TKD'ers. Hopefully that helps but probaly not can't really explain it once it is in your blood.


----------



## GlassJaw (Apr 25, 2012)

Steve said:


> Fill in the blank for me:  Hunting is to hunter what _________ is to TKD Practitioner.



Isn't is right there in the term "Tae Kwon Do practitioner"?  It's the practice of TKD.

Hunting is to the hunter as doing Tae Kwon Do is to the Tae Kwon Do doer.


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2012)

terryl965 said:


> OK Steve with TKD life journey does not end with sport, Self Defense and training. It is about growing your mind, spirit and training. See with MMA you are only as good as your last fight, with most other arts once the training stops so does the ettiquete and respect for it but in TKD it is always there for the real TKD'ers. Hopefully that helps but probaly not can't really explain it once it is in your blood.



Please don't deflect this onto me.  I'd argue that sport is far more clear.  The MMAist competes just as a golfer golfs or a bowler bowls.   But you could argue, as I said, that excellence in either represents a life journey that grows the mind and spirit.  

So what does a TKDist do?  FWIW, BJJ is absolutely a lifestyle. Im sure many would say that golf is the same.   Etiquette and respect are simply synonyms for the culture of the activity and every activity has a culture. TKD isn't unique in that.


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2012)

GlassJaw said:


> Isn't is right there in the term "Tae Kwon Do practitioner"?  It's the practice of TKD.
> 
> Hunting is to the hunter as doing Tae Kwon Do is to the Tae Kwon Do doer.


and what does that mean?  What is the point of doing TKD?  What's the measure?  What's the product?  The point was made that target practice is to a hunter what sparring is to a TKDist.  So, the hunter hunts and that's the measure.  The result is food.  Or at the very least a dead animal. 

So, if the point is self defense, but you never defend yourself, can you call yourself a martial artist?   And if not self defense, the what defines TKD?


----------



## leadleg (Apr 25, 2012)

Fill in the blank for me:  Hunting is to hunter what training is to TKD Practitioner. Perfection of technique is the quest. Is it different than other arts or sports? Only if you want it to be.


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 26, 2012)

leadleg said:


> Fill in the blank for me:  Hunting is to hunter what training is to TKD Practitioner. Perfection of technique is the quest. Is it different than other arts or sports? Only if you want it to be.


Perfection of technique is the quest? Um... Thats an interesting opinion to have. I hope You dont mean Technique in the sense of the exact movements behind exactly how You execute a Kick, or Im afraid Ill have to confront You with a wall of text.

If You more meant Method of Striking, rather than the technical aspects of the strikes themselves, thats ok.


----------



## StudentCarl (Apr 26, 2012)

Steve said:


> and what does that mean? What is the point of doing TKD? What's the measure? What's the product? The point was made that target practice is to a hunter what sparring is to a TKDist. So, the hunter hunts and that's the measure. The result is food. Or at the very least a dead animal.
> 
> So, if the point is self defense, but you never defend yourself, can you call yourself a martial artist? And if not self defense, the what defines TKD?



When I was in the infantry, we trained to fight wars, but only the naive think they want to go to war. The political answer might be that we train so we won't have to fight--that by becoming dangerous and confident that we both deter violence and increase our chances of survival if TSHTF. I think the truer answer is that young men train as soldiers to explore a part of their identity and humanity (not the nice side, either). We have a capacity to violence. Watch sometime how little boys at play will turn anything into a weapon. Even with overprotective parents who try to prevent them from having any weapon toys, sticks and spoons and shoes become clubs, knives and guns. 

Not that it's necessarily a large part (depends on the person and the art, I think), but studying any skill that relates to violence makes you address a less-civilized part of who you are, a potential we all have and know we might need. If you are facing that part of yourself and training, even if you only think about it occasionally before you fall asleep at night, you are a martial artist. If someone never thinks of that, then I think there's an argument that the word 'martial' may not apply. One does not need to get in fights or have a real need to defend oneself to be a martial artist. I think the superior artist successfully avoids such situations.

I think TKD is fundamentally martial. Even if it only increases your health, confidence, and athletic skills, those things make you less susceptible to being taken advantage of by more predatory people--you are no longer the weak gazelle at the back of the herd that the lion takes first.


----------



## Steve (Apr 26, 2012)

leadleg said:


> Fill in the blank for me:  Hunting is to hunter what training is to TKD Practitioner. Perfection of technique is the quest. Is it different than other arts or sports? Only if you want it to be.


Perfection of technique brings us full circle.  The guy who practices at the range to perfect his aim , but never actually hunts.  Can he be called a hunter?  According to GlassJaw, he cannot.  And I agree with him, even though this guy might have perfect technique.


----------



## Steve (Apr 26, 2012)

StudentCarl said:


> When I was in the infantry, we trained to fight wars, but only the naive think they want to go to war. The political answer might be that we train so we won't have to fight--that by becoming dangerous and confident that we both deter violence and increase our chances of survival if TSHTF. I think the truer answer is that young men train as soldiers to explore a part of their identity and humanity (not the nice side, either). We have a capacity to violence. Watch sometime how little boys at play will turn anything into a weapon. Even with overprotective parents who try to prevent them from having any weapon toys, sticks and spoons and shoes become clubs, knives and guns.


I'm trying to understand you here.  I hear you saying that the political answer is that people train in TKD to avoid violence, but that the real answer is to simply give a more constructive outlet to our more violent nature? 

If so, I'm not sure I can agree with the former, political answer.  While we can all think of activities where you train in order to do something, I can't think of any activity that trains actively to *not *do something.  

The second answer I can actually agree with somewhat.  It avoids the conundrum of training for self defense, but not actually ever defending oneself, or training to fight, but not actually ever getting into fights.


----------



## StudentCarl (Apr 26, 2012)

In that paragraph I was talking about the military specifically, as the use of the military is subject to national command authority. If you ask civilians why we have an army, I think that reasonable people will see the intent that it be a deterrent, rather than something we want to use (as in "Hey, we've got these divisions sitting around; let's start something so we can get our money's worth out of all that training.") I remember training to fight and wanting to fight to prove I was good...that was youth and naivete. You do what needs to be done, but it changes you. 

There's a difference between fighting and self-defense. I discourage the former and encourage the latter.

Taekwondo is an individual activity, so there are limits to the parallel with the military. I was suggesting that while people may or may not claim self-defense as a reason they train, there is something in our human nature that recognizes the potential for violence in all of us. I think people also train to explore their own nature, beyond the practical defense, social, fitness and other benefits.


----------



## Archtkd (Apr 26, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Yes, and I love the fact I am part of a small organisation. It means our chief instructor can drop into all the classes from time to time and ensure the curriculum set by the club is being adhered to. It also means the instructors can get together and run through what is to be taught and how it is to be taught. It also means every single student is graded by the same panel using identical grading requirements to ensure that a black belt from club "a" and a black belt from club "b" have undergone the same training and been graded by the same person using the same guidelines. It helps maintain our strong reputation because you dont get instructors 'flying under the radar' and handing out black belts like candy or lowering grading standards to help students pass. I see all these things as huge positives and is probably why I struggle to understand orgs that dont over see these things.



There is another question about another post i put on this thread that I would like to answer, but it will help if ensure I understand some things: Is your taekwondo organization made up of several clubs owned or operated by different owners, who trained under different master instructors? Or is it an organization run students of one grandmaster who has financial interests in all the affiliated clubs? 

Where do the dues and testing fees that individual members at individual clubs end up? 

Are the instructors at clubs employees of the organization or independent operators/franchisees, etc?

 Actually what is a taekwondo club? A tax exempt non-profit entity that operates in facilities it rents or has built or is it a for-profit business?


----------



## leadleg (Apr 26, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Perfection of technique is the quest? Um... Thats an interesting opinion to have. I hope You dont mean Technique in the sense of the exact movements behind exactly how You execute a Kick, or Im afraid Ill have to confront You with a wall of text.
> 
> If You more meant Method of Striking, rather than the technical aspects of the strikes themselves, thats ok.


I mean the perfecting of technique in all aspects of TKD, from stances to transistions............etc. What else is there after all? I do not go out and fight, I have not had anyone acost me since the 70's but I still love doing TKD and HKD. Self inspection as you are trying to perfect technique can be enlightning in many ways.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 26, 2012)

Steve said:


> Perfection of technique brings us full circle.  The guy who practices at the range to perfect his aim , but never actually hunts.  Can he be called a hunter?  According to GlassJaw, he cannot.  And I agree with him, even though this guy might have perfect technique.



He would be called a sharpshooter? Yes I can agree with your scenario about not using your martial art to fight,  that is not why I train nor probably anyone in any "do" style art. We are training in the long run for perfecting what we do, 20years and more in some martial art with no need to defend yourself leads one to realize training is not only about fighting.


----------



## Steve (Apr 26, 2012)

leadleg said:


> He would be called a sharpshooter? Yes I can agree with your scenario about not using your martial art to fight,  that is not why I train nor probably anyone in any "do" style art. We are training in the long run for perfecting what we do, 20years and more in some martial art with no need to defend yourself leads one to realize training is not only about fighting.


It sounds like you're in the camp that TKD has no real self defense or fighting emphasis, which echoes what StudentCarl said.  And if that's the case, I can kind of see your point.  The inconsistency starts to appear when you assert that your goal is self defense or learning to fight.  If you never defend yourself or fight, you are learning to do neither in the same way that a sharpshooter isn't learning to hunt.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 26, 2012)

Steve said:


> It sounds like you're in the camp that TKD has no real self defense or fighting emphasis, which echoes what StudentCarl said.  And if that's the case, I can kind of see your point.  The inconsistency starts to appear when you assert that your goal is self defense or learning to fight.  If you never defend yourself or fight, you are learning to do neither in the same way that a sharpshooter isn't learning to hunt.



That is what the sport side or sparring is about, seeing if you can stay in the ring with others is as close to fighting or self defense as most are going to get. A lot of good it is to hunt if you can't hit the side of a barn. What about you do you learn to fight or defend yourself or is it fantasy training. Do yougo to classes to learn how to fight,really? I think if one wants to learn to fight they should get out there and fight.Practical expierence is better than the gym,dojo,dojang.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 26, 2012)

puunui said:


> I don't distinguish between sport and art. I personally don't believe thinking in such terms benefits anyone, especially taekwondoin.


I used to, but for a variety of reasons, no longer do.


----------



## Steve (Apr 26, 2012)

leadleg said:


> That is what the sport side or sparring is about, seeing if you can stay in the ring with others is as close to fighting or self defense as most are going to get. A lot of good it is to hunt if you can't hit the side of a barn. What about you do you learn to fight or defend yourself or is it fantasy training. Do yougo to classes to learn how to fight,really? I think if one wants to learn to fight they should get out there and fight.Practical expierence is better than the gym,dojo,dojang.


I don't go to class to learn to fight or to learn self defense, and I never allege to.  As I said before, the inconsistency begins when people say they're learning to do something that they never actually do, or even further, have no intention of ever actually doing.  

And in the context of this thread, I'm highlighting that it's all artificial to a degree.  Whether it's sparring, sport, kata or choreographed two steps, if the goal is "learning to fight" or "self defense," but you aren't fighting or defending yourself, you're operating in a blind spot.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 26, 2012)

Yeah, I see your point but if you are learning to kick and punch, correctly, so as to have more power, or just be better at punching and kicking then what is that if not learning defensive or offensive skills? I would guess that the difference in learning to do a sport is that the sport( specific skill set) is what you get. In a martial art you are learning fighting skills but are actually looking and getting more than a specific skill set. I am not argueing here but seeing if I can flesh out the question. 
Oh, if you go hunting but don't bag any game are you a hunter?


----------



## Cyriacus (Apr 26, 2012)

leadleg said:


> I mean the perfecting of technique in all aspects of TKD, from stances to transistions............etc. What else is there after all? I do not go out and fight, I have not had anyone acost me since the 70's but I still love doing TKD and HKD. Self inspection as you are trying to perfect technique can be enlightning in many ways.


I mean, that I could read perfecting Technique as being perfecting Your Stances, or perfecting how to USE Your Stances.
Im unsure of which way You meant, and would only take issue to the first one.


----------



## GlassJaw (Apr 26, 2012)

Steve wrote:





> So, if a hunter is to hunt, what would you say the   equivalent is to a complete TKD practitioner?  This is a puzzle I've   been trying to sort out for a long time.
> 
> Fill in the blank for me:  Hunting is to hunter what _________ is to TKD Practitioner.



And I replied:





> Isn't is right there in the term "Tae Kwon Do practitioner"?  It's the practice of TKD.



I  thought some more after I wrote that.  You raise a good point. My  analogy of TKD to hunting is indeed flawed.  There are specific  activities that can be described as actually _hunting_, but training activities  are generally not among them.  Whereas in TKD, most of our activities that I  would consider to be actually _doing_ TKD are part of training.   But training for what?  Advancement?  Learning?  Competition? These are  all parts of TKD (even if I don't consider them all to be _essential_ parts).  

I'm at a loss for the answer.

Yoda Sensei says "Tae Kwon Do or Tae Kwon Do not; there is no try."


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 26, 2012)

People in the army train to fight for a living but may never actually go to war. But, if war breaks out and they are sent to fight they know what to do, they can use the weapons, drive the tanks, etc etc. Is this any different to a martial artist training to fight?


----------



## Carol (Apr 27, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> People in the army train to fight for a living but may never actually go to war. But, if war breaks out and they are sent to fight they know what to do, they can use the weapons, drive the tanks, etc etc. Is this any different to a martial artist training to fight?



Mmmm....training is extremely realistic in the military.   SOCEUR may refer to Jackal Stone as "partnership building exercises" -- exercise, be damned.   Its a controlled fight, with live fire, nations that are technically allies but don't always trust one another.....and one helluva rough day at the office if things go wrong.   A US Navy UDT-SEAL museum recently opened up in Florida, this was said about the memorial at the museum:


> Following the Muster, the museum board of directors hosted a ground-breaking
> ceremony for a new UDT-SEAL memorial that is to be built on the grounds of the
> museum and will feature the names of all of the men of Naval Special Warfare who
> have* died in combat and training exercises*.


----------



## StudentCarl (Apr 28, 2012)

GlassJaw said:


> Steve wrote:
> 
> And I replied:
> 
> ...



I've always preferred deer hunting with a bow to hunting with a firearm. We call it hunting, not 'killing', because the enjoyment (at least for me) is the hunt. I think the parallel to Taekwondo is direct: I enjoy the training. If you take fighting or self-defense to its end, it's about winning and surviving respectively. So then the questions are obvious: If you go hunting and don't kill something, did you find satisfaction? What do you seek when you hunt? If you train in Taekwondo but do not have a victory over someone or get attacked, did you not find satisfaction? What do you seek when you train?

I think (Grand) Master Po would say "Before you step, Grasshopper, it is wise to know what you seek."


----------



## leadleg (Apr 28, 2012)

Steve said:


> I don't go to class to learn to fight or to learn self defense, and I never allege to.  As I said before, the inconsistency begins when people say they're learning to do something that they never actually do, or even further, have no intention of ever actually doing.
> 
> And in the context of this thread, I'm highlighting that it's all artificial to a degree.  Whether it's sparring, sport, kata or choreographed two steps, if the goal is "learning to fight" or "self defense," but you aren't fighting or defending yourself, you're operating in a blind spot.


Then all martial arts are sport unless you get into a fight?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 28, 2012)

leadleg said:


> Then all martial arts are sport unless you get into a fight?


Good point.


----------



## Steve (Apr 28, 2012)

leadleg said:


> Then all martial arts are sport unless you get into a fight?



Not necessarily.  I'd say that the sporting arts tend to be more self aware.  Some martial arts are mostly just good exercise.  Some are potentially a foundation for learning self defense...  Kind of like a shooting range is potentially a foundation for learning to hunt.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 28, 2012)

Steve said:


> Not necessarily.  I'd say that the sporting arts tend to be more self aware.  Some martial arts are mostly just good exercise.  Some are potentially a foundation for learning self defense...  Kind of like a shooting range is potentially a foundation for learning to hunt.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Would you agree that within certain arts there are avenues to train it different ways. Tkd seems a classic example of this. It can be trained totally for sport, just for exercise or totally for self defence/fighting (such as the police officers I train with).


----------



## Steve (Apr 28, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Would you agree that within certain arts there are avenues to train it different ways. Tkd seems a classic example of this. It can be trained totally for sport, just for exercise or totally for self defence/fighting (such as the police officers I train with).



Of course.  And, as I've said, if you are defending yourself regularly, as a LEO might, you would IMO be developing g self defense skills.  However, it's possible... Even likely.... That the LEO trains alongside people who aren't, even though they train in the same school at the same time.  The distinction isnt just with the curriculum.  It's also a lot to do with the student.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Apr 28, 2012)

Steve said:


> Of course.  And, as I've said, if you are defending yourself regularly, as a LEO might, you would IMO be developing g self defense skills.  However, it's possible... Even likely.... That the LEO trains alongside people who aren't, even though they train in the same school at the same time.  The distinction isnt just with the curriculum.  It's also a lot to do with the student.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I agree. I remember asking my original instructor why he didnt mind that certain students spent a lot of class standing around talking. He told me that some people come here just to get out of the house, socialise, and have a hobby. Others (like a pro rugby league player in our class) are there only for fitness and flexibilty, and others (like the leos) were there with the sole intention of learning to fight/self defence etc. He told me that his job was to cater for all of them and make sure they all benefit in their own ways from what he taught. He said the challenge was to teach the same curriculum to all, but in  a way that each could achieve their goals. Its like the guy I started training with, he was way over weight and his only goal was weight loss. When we got sent down the back to work on the kick bags I would take my time, working on technique and really watching what I was doing, whereas my mate would lay into the bag like there was no tomorrow, because his only goal was elevating heart rate and getting a sweat up to lose weight. We were both able to achieve our own goals under the one roof. My instructor's goal was to go home after each class knowing that each individual student was achieving what "they" wanted to achieve out of taking tkd.


----------



## leadleg (Apr 29, 2012)

Steve said:


> Not necessarily.  I'd say that the sporting arts tend to be more self aware.  Some martial arts are mostly just good exercise.  Some are potentially a foundation for learning self defense...  Kind of like a shooting range is potentially a foundation for learning to hunt.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I am not on board with this, the leo is learning self defense but until they use it they are just getting excersise? The ones shooting targets are in a void unless they kill something? I think what is happening here is that MA's are about anything you decide they are, self defense for just in case, self awareness if you are aware of that aspect...............so on.


----------



## Steve (Apr 29, 2012)

leadleg said:


> I am not on board with this, the leo is learning self defense but until they use it they are just getting excersise? The ones shooting targets are in a void unless they kill something? I think what is happening here is that MA's are about anything you decide they are, self defense for just in case, self awareness if you are aware of that aspect...............so on.



Can you think of another activity where you learn skills you never expect to apply?

My point is that if you are shooting targets, you aren't learning to hunt.  And if you have no intention or expectation of ever hunting, you aren't a hunter.   Of course, target shooting is great fun, and if you enjoy it, great.  But calling yourself a hunter is an indication you aren't self aware.  

Same for martial arts.  You're not learning self defense any more than any other person, if you will likely never apply what you're learning.  It might be great fun and good exercise p, but you if you don't golf, you aren't a golfer.  If you don't hunt, you aren't a hunter.  

When I say self aware, I'm not talking about learning that in a class.  I'm talking about being honest with yourself and not operating under delusion.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dancingalone (Apr 29, 2012)

Steve said:


> Can you think of another activity where you learn skills you never expect to apply?
> 
> My point is that if you are shooting targets, you aren't learning to hunt.  And if you have no intention or expectation of ever hunting, you aren't a hunter.   Of course, target shooting is great fun, and if you enjoy it, great.  But calling yourself a hunter is an indication you aren't self aware.
> 
> ...




Can you explain your distinction to me?  If I repeatedly train to defend against (say) a haymaker punch and then to counter with my own response am I training in SD?  Or do I need to go so far as to actually be attacked with a haymaker by someone before I can say that?


----------



## Steve (Apr 29, 2012)

I don't know how to make it more clear.   I would say you can't develop expertise in something you don't do.  If you never defend yourself, you can't allege to be an expert in it and if you never expect to use the skills you're learning, you're not working toward expertise.  Doesn't mean that what you're doing isn't useful or valuable, it's just not learning to fight or self defense.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## leadleg (Apr 29, 2012)

There is in your example of target practice but not hunting an activity where you are not going to apply the skill. Without learning to shoot straight you can hunt all you want, but without that particular trait you are setting up to fail. 
 If I teach someone s/d and they use it but I dont am I still unaware of my activity? If everyone I teach kicking gets into multiple fights but I dont..
 I can be an expert in teaching self defense, I am totally aware that I may use it someday, just knowing how to defend myself and the confidence it shows may be a form of defending myself every day. If those I teach, use the skills to defend themselves they are not experts at s/d but will be aware of the need they had to learn those skills.
 I do not see anyone saying they are expert fighters just because they are learning skills to fight with, but they are learning to fight, that is fact. If they ever need or want to fight that specific training will be used and knowing that is awareness.
 I trained to use cpr if I never use it that will not make me less able to save a life, if needed, the training would not be in vain, nor would I be delusional in thinking I may need it someday. Being prepared for something and training towards that end (preparedness) is not delusional nor unaware. If a person is taking a martial art for its sport aspect, planning on or competing, but ends up using it for defense were they unaware while training. If they never attend a tournament are they delusional. I will agree that noone teaching fighting or learning the skills needed for offense should call themselves a fighter if they never fight. I have not run into that before, nor have I ever heard the term expert self defender.


----------



## dancingalone (Apr 29, 2012)

Steve said:


> I don't know how to make it more clear.   I would say you can't develop expertise in something you don't do.  If you never defend yourself, you can't allege to be an expert in it and if you never expect to use the skills you're learning, you're not working toward expertise.  Doesn't mean that what you're doing isn't useful or valuable, it's just not learning to fight or self defense.



I don't think you're completely on track with this, although I don't think you're completely wrong either.  

For me personally, I DO train as if I will need those skills tomorrow even though the chances of me encountering violence actually are quite low.  I do believe we are developing skills useful for self-defense, and by way of anecdotal evidence I'd had students of mine use the skills they learned in my class - one young lady fought off a predator using a pen-augmented reverse punch and other student, a police officer, used a jacket-assisted armbar (a technique sometimes thought to be archaic and useless) to subdue a perpetrator.

So did they learn self-defense in my class or not?  The answer may be unimportant.  Certainly they were able to apply skills in a live, dangerous situation that were developed through repetition under my guidance.  If that's not self-defense, I'll just have to shrug my shoulders and go right back to what I'm doing.


----------

