# How do you view tae kwon do?



## bluemtn (Jul 18, 2007)

How do you view tae kwon do?  Do you view it as a sport, or a martial art?  Can it be both?  Are some schools only for sport (not a bad thing, in my opinion)?  

Being more focused on sporting aspect of it, to me, isn't a bad thing.  That's kind of where I want the thread to stay at, please.  There are no wrong opinions or thoughts.


----------



## arnisador (Jul 18, 2007)

Different groups do it different ways, but overwhelmingly I see it as a (martial) sport...as the S. Korean govt. does, for example.


----------



## Kwan Jang (Jul 18, 2007)

There is both a martial art and martial sport of TKD. There has been a push from the WTF since the 1980's to maximize the sport and to restrict or downplay the martial art, but there are still quite a few instructors who still train and teach the Kwan-era martial art. Some schools manage to balance both in their training as well.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Jul 18, 2007)

TKD started life as a martial art so, therefore, it is a martial art.  The development of its sporting aspect has been both a boon and a curse.  A boon in that it has an Olympic stage and has thus drawn millions into its fold.  A curse because there are now arguments over its legitimacy as a martial art and a general public perception that it is not a 'real' martial art.

How do I view Tae Kwon Do?  I see it as a martial art that has developed a very successful sporting aspect.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 18, 2007)

Steel Tiger said:


> TKD started life as a martial art so, therefore, it is a martial art.  The development of its sporting aspect has been both a boon and a curse.  A boon in that it has an Olympic stage and has thus drawn millions into its fold.  A curse because there are now arguments over its legitimacy as a martial art and a general public perception that it is not a 'real' martial art.
> 
> How do I view Tae Kwon Do?  I see it as a martial art that has developed a very successful sporting aspect.



Great post - you said what I was thinking, but better than what I would have written.  :asian:


----------



## bluemtn (Jul 18, 2007)

Steel Tiger said:


> TKD started life as a martial art so, therefore, it is a martial art. The development of its sporting aspect has been both a boon and a curse. A boon in that it has an Olympic stage and has thus drawn millions into its fold. A curse because there are now arguments over its legitimacy as a martial art and a general public perception that it is not a 'real' martial art.
> 
> How do I view Tae Kwon Do? I see it as a martial art that has developed a very successful sporting aspect.


 

I'm with Kacey!  Couldn't have said it any better!


----------



## Catalyst (Jul 19, 2007)

I see it and experience it for myself from several different perspectives.

TKD to me is:

1.) From a fitness/health perspective it's been a great way to rehabilitate a mangled leg.

2.) A Martial Art that can provides effective self-defense.

3.) A means for self-development of character attributes that really needed (and still do need) to be worked on. What I mean by this is taking values like respect, integrity, self control, perseverance,etc. that we learn in the dojang and applying them outside the dojang (at work, at home, etc.).

I honestly don't know if I can nail it down to just one thing - or maybe I'm making the question harder than it actually is?


----------



## 14 Kempo (Jul 19, 2007)

On the outside looking in ... 

I have never studied TKD in any way, I am a Kempoist. With that being said, what I have been told of TKD is not attractive, thus playing towards the public image mentioned in other posts of TKD being a sport more than a martial art.

I don't agree. TKD, as with any martial art, has its postive and negative factors. If you don't believe TKD is a martial art, just try fighting an advanced student at thier distance, good luck.

Everything is relative. If I'm fighting a TKD specialist and I'm able to get to my range, look out is all I can say. But 'look out' is what is being said to me if I'm not able to get there. I am only speaking from personal experience, and that experience is only during sparring sessions, not live fighting. 

TKD is a martial art and as with any of the arts, it's a matter of range. Each art having its optimal range. Find it and all is well.


----------



## CoryKS (Jul 19, 2007)

Is a knife a tool or a weapon?  It depends on the _application_.  If you and your opponent abide by a previously agreed upon set of rules, you are engaged in a sport.  If you are attempting to decapitate the nice man who asked you to hand over your wallet, using only your foot, you are engaged in a martial art.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 19, 2007)

I don't do TKD as such but I train occasionally with a friend's TKD class as he wants the students to train with a female blackbelt. They are a small group with only one instructor. The class is very similiar to traditional karate classes I've been in, good warm ups, line work, sparring and patterns. Good honest traditional martial arts. Sparring with the class he encourages me to do my MT kicks, clinches, takedowns. elbows, knees etc from my MMA to give them an experience of a different syle of fighting. He does self defence work with them too. I don't get the feeling that they are a 'sports' club, walking in into class it's very much a martial arts class. I enjoy going.

On the MMA side, over here we have had a good many fighters from a TKD background indicating I think it's fighting capabilities.


----------



## DArnold (Jul 19, 2007)

CoryKS said:


> Is a knife a tool or a weapon? It depends on the _application_. If you and your opponent abide by a previously agreed upon set of rules, you are engaged in a sport. If you are attempting to decapitate the nice man who asked you to hand over your wallet, using only your foot, you are engaged in a martial art.


 
Hit the nail right on the head.
The discussion is not "the answer" but the question itself is flawed.
Must a fruit be an orange or a bannana

I would suggest that you study what the Korean word "Do" means and you will find your answer!


----------



## stoneheart (Jul 19, 2007)

> How do you view tae kwon do? Do you view it as a sport, or a martial art? Can it be both? Are some schools only for sport (not a bad thing, in my opinion)?



Yes, TKD is both a MA and a sport.  Depends on the instructor or school.  I have no problems with dojangs emphasizing the sport aspect, but I do wish they would label themselves appropriately so the consumer has a better idea what they are selling.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 19, 2007)

The Ghurkha soldiers do their basic traning here in Catterick where I am, they all do TKD as part of their training.They've incorporated into their syllabus Kukri patterns they've 'invented', impressive and very scary!


----------



## DArnold (Jul 19, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> The Ghurkha soldiers do their basic traning here in Catterick where I am, they all do TKD as part of their training.They've incorporated into their syllabus Kukri patterns they've 'invented', impressive and very scary!


 
Ok, you've peaked my interest.
How is a pattern very scary?


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 19, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Ok, you've peaked my interest.
> How is a pattern very scary?


 
We have a joke here   Q. what do you call a Ghurka? A. Sir!

A Khukri is a very wicked curved knife, the 'national' weapon of Nepal. In the Ghurka's hands it is a truly scary weapon. In jungle warfare (and Afghanistan where they are also deployed) they can creep soundlessly up to the enemy and cut their throats very easily with their Kukris before the poor buggers can blink. They are relentlessly brave and ferocious, always polite and a joy to work with. They are also very bad drivers!
http://www.army.mod.uk/brigade_of_gurkhas/history/kukri_history.htm


----------



## DArnold (Jul 19, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> We have a joke here Q. what do you call a Ghurka? A. Sir!
> 
> A Khukri is a very wicked curved knife, the 'national' weapon of Nepal. In the Ghurka's hands it is a truly scary weapon. In jungle warfare (and Afghanistan where they are also deployed) they can creep soundlessly up to the enemy and cut their throats very easily with their Kukris before the poor buggers can blink. They are relentlessly brave and ferocious, always polite and a joy to work with. They are also very bad drivers!
> http://www.army.mod.uk/brigade_of_gurkhas/history/kukri_history.htm


 
Ok, makes sense.
Even if you win with a knife fighter you usually loose


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 19, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> The Ghurkha soldiers do their basic traning here in Catterick where I am, they all do TKD as part of their training.They've incorporated into their syllabus Kukri patterns they've 'invented', impressive and very scary!


 
Old style TKD taught in a martial way is both brutal and effective.  Warriors like the ROK, North Koreans and Gurkha's that have added it to their curriculum are all very effective.  Only the rise of sport TKD changed the overall outlook on what Tae Kwon Do is.  Fortunately there are still quite a few old style TKD practitioners out there and if you get a chance to meet one and train with them you will be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Decker (Jul 20, 2007)

Hi.

How would "old style" training be different from "sport" training? E.g. would there be a greater emphasis on forms or..?

Where I train, it isn't really a dojang per se, it's more like a club in my school. What we learn is very heavily form-oriented (poomsae/WTF forms), and we only take part in poomsae tournaments (and sweep plenty of the trophies, I gotta admit). Downside is we're much weaker on the sparring side.

I guess based on my experience of TKD I'd consider it to be more of a sport here, but I wanna discover more of its martial art aspect too.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 20, 2007)

I imagine 'old style' training would be a lot more 'full on', harder contact, and with a greater emphasis on actually walking away from a fight when your opponent doesn't! I think it's the difference perhaps between sparring for trophies and fighting for yur life. I imagine too that forms/katas/patterns were vital teaching tools and not just 'dancing'.


----------



## searcher (Jul 20, 2007)

Though it has the ability to adapt to different circumstances, I look at TKD as a martial art.

I feel it is like Western Boxing in its simplicity(in appearance) and in its effectiveness when used properly.    I feel that we, as TKD students and instructors, need to let the public see that we can use our art effectively.    Many have helped it have a bad reputation and we are in desperate need of a rejuvination, IMO.


----------



## IcemanSK (Jul 20, 2007)

Decker said:


> Hi.
> 
> How would "old style" training be different from "sport" training? E.g. would there be a greater emphasis on forms or..?
> 
> ...


 
I began training in 1982. The change from "old school" to "sport" seemed to be just turning. I judge this by things like the introduction of foam sparring gear. I trained with a lot of folks who had trained in the 70's. They told stories of sparring full contact wearing a mouth piece & cup as the only protective gear. Chest protectors were rare & head gear was non-existant. These guys bragged about their scars & broken ribs, etc. Forms were also very important to these folks. 

I guess the difference could be stated in one word: intensity. Training was very intense all the time. That is my sense of it. I would welcome the thoughts of my seniors on this board who did train in the days before pads for their insights. Their words have more weight on this subject.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 20, 2007)

IcemanSK said:


> I began training in 1982. The change from "old school" to "sport" seemed to be just turning. I judge this by things like the introduction of foam sparring gear. I trained with a lot of folks who had trained in the 70's. They told stories of sparring full contact wearing a mouth piece & cup as the only protective gear. Chest protectors were rare & head gear was non-existant. These guys bragged about their scars & broken ribs, etc. Forms were also very important to these folks.
> 
> I guess the difference could be stated in one word: intensity. Training was very intense all the time. That is my sense of it. I would welcome the thoughts of my seniors on this board who did train in the days before pads for their insights. Their words have more weight on this subject.


 
TKD isn't alone in this, my instructor has been in MA for over thirty years and he talks of fighting full contact karate in the same way as you describe. His first MA was Judo and he teaches us what he calls old style Judo, he says 'modern' Judo has been watered down.
  I run what I call a women's martial arts class  but the women prefer to call it kick boxing as it's fashionable! They don't want contact, they want the fitness and to boast they do kickboxing to their mates. I take them because I can help their fitness and teach them some self protection techniques plus how to kick and punch properly as opposed to the gym 'boxercise' stuff. I think it's what a lot of people want these days...instant martial arts along with most other things. People can't work towards things anymore, it all has to be now. Who works and saves up for anything now that credit is available everwhere? The same with martial arts, you want a blackbelt? ok I'll make the grading easier! It's not just about dojos making money,though there's plenty of that, if they offered free lessons a lot of people still would want things done easily I think.   

Health and Safety along with litigatious nature of people these days means we have to be careful of not letting anyone even break a fingernail!


----------



## TjThunder (Jul 21, 2007)

As said before I think it can be both as long as the full spectrum of the style is trained.  If you train for sport but still keep the traditional aspects then TKD can be both art and sport.  It also can vary with the individual.  One student may only care about trophies and medals and learning patterns so they can "place" in the next tournament, then in the same school another person may be training because they view TKD as a form of personal expression and study it for it's own intrinsic purposes.  TKD is different things to different people.


----------



## foot2face (Jul 22, 2007)

I studied in a "WTF style" school, but we never competed in any tournaments.  I didn't even know what "Olympic Style" was until after I earned my BB. I recall the first time I went to a tournament( as a spectator). I was very excited, based on how my master descried the tournaments he competed in as a young man in S. Korea and how we sparred(a fight between friends) at my school I expected something in the middle of _Best Of The Best_ and _Bloodsport, _boy was I disappointed.

I view TKD, based on what I was taught, as a very hard, fast and extremely aggressive fighting system.  Sadly, I feel my style is dying and being replaced with one that values winning a match over winning a fight(worst of all they don't always know the difference between the two).


----------



## jfarnsworth (Jul 22, 2007)

It's a martial art but you can tailor it to fit whatever needs you want. A martial art, sport, for fun, fitness whichever.


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 23, 2007)

tkdgirl said:


> How do you view tae kwon do? Do you view it as a sport, or a martial art? Can it be both?


 
I think it is misleading to view "Taekwondo" as anything other than a word. What one person says is Taekwondo, another person might say, "No, that's not Taekwondo." Many people are doing all sorts of things and calling it "Taekwondo." To define what Taekwondo is, I think it would vary depending on the source of the definition (Koreans, or non-Koreans; Martial Artists or non-Martial Artists; Taekwondoists or non-Taekwondoists; Combat oriented students; Health and fitness minded; sports focused individuals).

From my perspective, "Taekwondo" is an *education*. What you apply that education to might vary. The requirements of what you learn, and the focus of specialized skill will vary depending on what you intend to apply that education to. If you are only interested in using the knowledge for improved health, then the training might be weak in other areas. If you are primarily focused on the sport aspect, then you might sacrifice training time for real-life combat.

Although I believe you can do both, and do them both well, in my opinion, doing these specialized training programs is what leads to "watered down" versions of any Martial Art system. That might not be bad for the individual, but could be bad for the Art itself.

If you ask if Taekwondo is a "Martial Art, then you must consider that there is also the additional debate of what a "Martial Art" is. If you believe that the Marital Art is merely training to fight, and to win in combat, then "Taekwondo" only needs to accomplish that task. However, I believe the Martial Art (the way I was taught to interpret it) is a complete education of the mind, body, and spirit. The term "Do" is a unique concept that is rarely understood outside of serious, dedicated students of the Martial Art.

To me, "Do" represents everything the Martial Art is designed to accomplish. It is a way of life, and a philosophy of life for the warrior who possesses the skill to end life with relative ease. The Chinese philosophy of the I-Ching represented in the Yin and Yang symbol is carried over and shared in the Korean "Taegeuk" symbol of Um and Yang. It means, "nothing is left out." A system of training to improve every aspect of your life, and give the student the tools and skills to handle any adversity, and accomplish any goal possible.

If taken to mean the Korean National Martial Art, Taekwondo is, at its core, a Martial Art, but that entails much more than just learning to fight effectively. It can include sport competition, but that should not detract from the core purpose. Without the "Do" Taekwondo is nothing more than "punching and kicking." Nothing more than crude fighting.

The South Korean Government's desire to use the popularity of Taekwondo as a marketing tool is understandable, and should not detract from what it is. The WTF, or any other such organization, is made up of people (mostly Koreans at the top level) who are attempting to market Taekwondo on the international scene. Calling it a "Martial Sport" is a marketing ploy that focuses on one particular aspect. It does not change what Taekwondo is, unless you change what you do, and what you are calling Taekwondo.

For the most part, the Korean Taekwondo Masters know that only a handful of dedicated people will want to study "old school" genuine Taekwondo, but a mass market will be interested in "Martial Sport" and modernized Taekwondo. Thus, it is about economics on the world scale, but be assured that they are still preserving the Best of the nature of Taekwondo (the ROK and every bit of Korea's historical input) as their own curriculum. They are not too concerned if foreigners get that genuine, hard-core training or not, and most non-Asians don't know the difference, or don't seem to care.  I am honored, and lucky enough to have been taught the true Korean Taekwondo perspective.  I am proud to continue with teaching that tradition, but I do not condemn the co-existence of the Sport aspect since it does not detract from my core training.

That's my personal perspective and opinion.
Chief Master D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## terryl965 (Jul 23, 2007)

What are my views of Tae Kwon Do

Well lets start with the truth:

Tae Kwon Do is the equivalent to Karate Truth or mishap

Tae Kwon Do is century old: truth or mishap

Tae Kwon Do is a Sport only endeavor: truth or mishap

Tae Kwon Do is an effective SD Art: truth or mishap

Tae Kwon Do is a marketing ploy: truth or mishap

Tae Kwon Do is only about the money: truth or mishap.

You see by asking these question one can come to the conclusion it is all and yet it is or could be only one. For me it is a way of life it means so much more than fighting or sport aspect, it is a deeper presence that makes me want to train day in and day out. My Tae Kwon Do has everything my mind, body and soul can handle. My Tae Kwon Do is a meaning in understanding the true essence of oneself. My Tae Kwon Do is what My GM say it is when he says it is. One day that can be some type of groundwork, the next day it is about kicks, the next punches and then on another it is about finding myself all over again. The more I grow in my Tae Kwon Do the less I personally know, but my journey will always be the very best that I can be within that time frame.

I hope that everybody that has ever taken Tae Kwon Do had a feeling once that everything was perfect for only that split second only to find out, we need to train more, for no man can ever be perfect and we all strive everyday or at least I do and for me and my family the journey has only begun for the future is what Tae Kwon Do is.


----------



## Karatedrifter7 (Jul 23, 2007)

TKD is a martial art, and an athletically changelling one at that. I suppose thats where the sports boon came into play?  It was also my first martial  many many moons ago. Its also one of the preferred martial arts skills, if
 you wanna do stunts or MA acting in Hollywood. Thats what I think.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jul 24, 2007)

Kacey said:


> I'm sorry you've not seen truly _good_ TKD - which is _extremely_ combat effective. As far as letting bygones be bygones - IMHO the above was hardly an apology, and while you may not have intended it to be the focus of your post, I can assure you that quite a few people will be focusing on it.
> 
> To return to the topic at hand, which is multiple attackers, I won't bother to repeat the truly excellent responses which have already been posted - but I will add, as an addendum to running and taking on opponents 1-on-1 whenever possible, that staying out the middle of the group is generally advisable.


 
It is *I* who am sorry. Truly good TKD is just Karate. Now if some Koreans were better at it than Japanese or Okinawans has nothing to do with TKD. And I know about the Koreans in Vietnam and all that.

I am not talking out of my **** here. I studied TKD for years. And TKD is not the exception these days, just a glaring example of what MA have been watered down to. Wushu is exactly the same. I came to China to study CMA to get away from useless TKD only to find that it was the same. Imagine how pissed off I am. Most MAists are dillusional when it comes to how far their techniques can take them. I believe that sports/martial dancing/combat ineffective MA are not MA at all. They are a danger to all that practise them and are oblivious to the fact that, were they to engage with an enemy, these techniques/training methods would fail them when they need them most. This is irresponsible.

In the past it was weapons that were used for self defense. Why should anything have changed since now? Ancient warriors would have used all the weapons in their arsenal down to the last butter knife (You know what I mean =P ), rather than fight unarmed.

Another thought: Assuming that you are alone during the attack: Parkour


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 24, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> It is *I* who am sorry. Truly good TKD is just Karate. Now if some Koreans were better at it than Japanese or Okinawans has nothing to do with TKD.


 
Me thinks you don't know too much about WTF? Like those guys at the Olympics. You know they only get a point for kicking someone hard enough to knock them back, make them fall over, or go night night. Not to mention the way they condition those strikes is very UN - Karate.

Now, in the states is that true, MAYBE. But in Korea, we have a whole other monster going on people. Not to mention, by your deffinition, I am doing Shotokan. And you are doing a basterized version of Muay Thai. You do Sanda, which is based off Kick Boxing, which is based off Muay Thai.
Now, if I were to go to a Shotokan school and say "I'm a San Kyu in Shotokan", they'll laugh me out of the school. The same will be said if you were to say anything along the same lines to a Kick Boxing or Muay Thai school.

So in the future, please think a little more about what you say. Thank you.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jul 25, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Me thinks you don't know too much about WTF? Like those guys at the Olympics. You know they only get a point for kicking someone hard enough to knock them back, make them fall over, or go night night. Not to mention the way they condition those strikes is very UN - Karate.
> 
> Now, in the states is that true, MAYBE. But in Korea, we have a whole other monster going on people. Not to mention, by your deffinition, I am doing Shotokan. And you are doing a basterized version of Muay Thai. You do Sanda, which is based off Kick Boxing, which is based off Muay Thai.
> Now, if I were to go to a Shotokan school and say "I'm a San Kyu in Shotokan", they'll laugh me out of the school. The same will be said if you were to say anything along the same lines to a Kick Boxing or Muay Thai school.
> ...


 
HAAA! Way to read my profile!

I was never refering to What The ****?! Taekwondo. I was refering to the "Good TKD". Why don't you learn how to read what I stated in my earlier posts? TKD = STK Karate with useless flashy kicks, a fabricated history, and General Choi worship added.  _**hate speech removed**_

And I quit Sanda for the very reason that it is another "copy" of the kickboxing molde and, because like most MMA practitioners, its practitioners lack the spirit and creativity that developed them in the first place. They are just egotistical brutes.

I hope that there is no future with you still in this thread.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jul 25, 2007)

Adept said:


> I can assure you that this (quite bizarre) definition of what techniques and strategies define the styles of karate and taekwondo is very much unique to yourself.
> 
> There are many techniques and strategies which are very effective in the real world, and which are also commonly recognised as taekwondo.


 
I have yet to see a single one. Rapidly poking people with my toes and taking myself off balance is sure to anger multiple opponents. I can only hope that you also studied Parkour.


----------



## Adept (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> I have yet to see a single one.



Interesting.

You've never seen low kicks to the waist and legs, elbow strikes, or punches be effective in a real life situation?

What a sheltered life you must have led.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jul 25, 2007)

Adept said:


> Interesting.
> 
> You've never seen low kicks to the waist and legs, elbow strikes, or punches be effective in a real life situation?
> 
> What a sheltered life you must have led.


 
I'm sorry, but these hardly qualify as TKD only techniques. Most TKD schools are **** because they lack those very techniques. And if they were done well it would just end up being Karate, unless they cross trained in something else.

And I consider my life quite the opposite of sheltered, thank you.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> HAAA! Way to read my profile!
> 
> I was never refering to What The ****?! Taekwondo. I was refering to the "Good TKD". Why don't you learn how to read what I stated in my earlier posts? TKD = STK Karate with useless flashy kicks, a fabricated history, and General Choi worship added. _**hate speech removed - G Ketchmark / shesulsa, MT Assist. Admin**_
> 
> ...


 
So, what is the differnce between "good Tae Kwon Do" and World Tae Kwon do Federation Tae Kwon Do? I mean honestly now, you started the hate, lets see you defend it. 

Nextly, how much experince do you have in Shotokan? And how do you know that the flashly kicks are useless? Maybe there not about fighting in of themselves? Ever heard of application?

Now, it's fine if _YOU'RE _a homophobe (such a useless thing to hate/be afraid of) but, don't spread your hate to me. Next time, you will regret it (meaning you will be the first to get negitive rep from me).

So, you quite a Martial Art, becuase like ALL Martial Arts, it is based off one or anouther? Wow, that's.... wow.

Say, just as a thought. Since this little side discussion between me and Marteen (some of the other users) is getting off target, can we move to the Tae Kwon Do forum?


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 25, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Say, just as a thought. Since this little side discussion between me and Marteen (some of the other users) is getting off target, can we move to the Tae Kwon Do forum?


 


MJS said:


> Folks,
> 
> We're getting a bit off track here. Lets stick with the questions that I asked in the beginning please! If the subject of TKD is going to come up, lets discuss the ways TKD deals with multiple attacks. If anyone is interested in rehashing a TKD debate, take a look at some of the existing TKD threads and continue there. If someone is interested in discussing another aspect of TKD, start a new thread.


 
MJS, I did ask if we could break off the part about whether or not Tae Kwon Do is relivent. I don't suppose you would mind breaking this part of the thread off into a seperate one in the Korean Arts area?


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 25, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> MJS, I did ask if we could break off the part about whether or not Tae Kwon Do is relivent. I don't suppose you would mind breaking this part of the thread off into a seperate one in the Korean Arts area?


I'll be glad to do that.


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 25, 2007)

Maarten - - I will attempt to respond to some of your comments as politely, and directly as possible.



MaartenSFS said:


> I also think that Taekwondo and Wushu would be useless (Good TKD is no longer TKD  - FLAME ON!!!).


If that is what you think, you would be wrong. The "Taekwondo" you learned might be useless for you, but my Taekwondo works quite well!



MaartenSFS said:


> My meaning was that if it's good (I.E. combat effective), it cannot be TKD, which is quite the opposite.


You have been misinformed, and understand little about true Taekwondo. Taekwondo, taught correctly, is combat effective.



MaartenSFS said:


> Truly good TKD is just Karate.


You are very much mistaken here, Maarten. I have studied both Taekwondo and Karate (to the level of Black Belt in each) and there is quite a difference. Regardless of the interim confusion over occupational, and post WWII Japanese influence, the real nature of what Taekwondo came to represent is much different than Japanese Karate. If you had *in-depth* training in genuine Taekwondo from a qualified instructor, you would know this.



MaartenSFS said:


> I am not talking out of my **** here.


Quite frankly..... yes you are! :moon:

You have obviously had limited knowledge and training in Taekwondo (if any) and that would have been from a poor source. Unfortunately, it appears that the few Dojang that you have personally entered, and witnessed what they do have been of the lesser quality imitation schools.



MaartenSFS said:


> I studied TKD for years.


In all my years of experience, the most dangerous, and misinformed opinions about Taekwondo come from someone who has "studied TKD for years." 



MaartenSFS said:


> And TKD is not the exception these days, just a glaring example of what MA have been watered down to.


Then it is apparent that you have experienced schools of "watered down" versions of Taekwondo. If you ever get the chance to see the real thing, you would not have such an opinion about Taekwondo as a whole, and you would not make such generalized statements about an entire art.



MaartenSFS said:


> TKD = STK Karate with useless flashy kicks,


This is absolutely false. It appears more and more that you have little to no training in genuine Taekwondo, because only a color belt, or non-Taekwondoist would hold this opinion. Black Belts know better, and Masters are barely amused by someone spouting such ignorance. Taekwondo is Taekwondo, and nothing else compares exactly to what is involved (especially at the levels of higher Dan Black Belt training). If you think TKD kicks are flashy and useless, you have obviously never been hit by one delivered by an expert. Don't even begin to claim that you have, or that they don't work.



MaartenSFS said:


> a fabricated history,


Oh..... so your one of those!  :lol2:



MaartenSFS said:


> and General Choi worship added.


I don't worship Gen. Choi (although I admire his life's work and contributions). The narrow view that Korean Taekwondo is just what Gen. Choi taught (especially in the early days of heavy Japanese influence), is very naive and misinformed.  Gen. Choi's Taekwon-do was Gen. Choi's Taekwon-do, which is somewhat different in technical curriculum than the "Taekwondo" which represents the Korean National Martial Art (which is also different from the National Martial "Sport").



MaartenSFS said:


> WTF = ********** *** _(**hate speech edited**)_.


Well, the moderator has already commented, so I will only reply with a question. Have you ever competed in a WTF national or international event? Don't give me excuses as to why you wouldn't.  If you have not, then you know nothing of the experience. Games are fun, but Taekwondo games are still deadly. The skills used in Taekwondo "tag" can still end a real fight. You've heard of "tag - you're it!" Well, it can easily become "tag - you're out!" Out cold, that is. 
:btg:



MaartenSFS said:


> I have yet to see a single one.


Herein lies the real problem. It is not what exists or does not exist in Taekwondo. It is an issue of what *YOU* have or have not seen.



MaartenSFS said:


> Rapidly poking people with my toes and taking myself off balance is sure to anger multiple opponents.


This statement clearly comes from someone who is NOT an expert in Taekwondo - - guaranteed, without a doubt!



MaartenSFS said:


> Most TKD schools are **** because they lack those very techniques.


"Most TKD schools" huh? Do you really think you have seen "Most TKD schools?" Do you really think you know what techniques most Taekwondo schools are lacking? Perhaps you have not gone to a Master's level to know what there is yet in Taekwondo. Perhaps the school(s) you trained in were not qualified to teach Taekwondo or were in fact "watered down versions."

I can say for certain that you have never been in my Dojang. :mst:

I can also be quite certain that you have never met, nor trained with any number of the Korean Grandmasters that I have known in my career.

Maarten, the best thing for you to do is to admit that your opinions are based on a limited knowledge, of one person who has witnessed a small fraction of what Taekwondo is, and that fraction did not represent the true essence of the art. Admit that you really don't know what you are talking about when it comes to Taekwondo.

I don't mean to sound arrogant, but...
do you really think you know more about Taekwondo than I do? :asian:

Keep it real!
Chief Master D.J. Eisenhart

_**Admin. note: Quoted hate speech obscured. G Ketchmark - shesulsa, MT Assist. Admin**_


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 25, 2007)

Thank you Shesulsa. Just glad I noticed that something changed on the thread this was one, lol. Just curious, are you going to PM the other folks in this (former) side discussion?


----------



## terryl965 (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> I'm sorry, but these hardly qualify as TKD only techniques. Most TKD schools are **** because they lack those very techniques. And if they were done well it would just end up being Karate, unless they cross trained in something else.
> 
> And I consider my life quite the opposite of sheltered, thank you.


 

Sir it is apparent that you have also never been to my school my TKD teaches all of this and I learn it over in Korea and my Master called it TKD, why are you so hustle over Karate or TKD? I would imagine you have never stepped into a more SD TKD school and have only visited the soft ones. This is a real crime when folks do not take the time to fully understand an Art and start to bash it, instead of trying to understand what it truely is.

I wish you the best in your so call world being shelter is also a crime in life.


----------



## DArnold (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> I'm sorry, but these hardly qualify as TKD only techniques. Most TKD schools are **** because they lack those very techniques. And if they were done well it would just end up being Karate, unless they cross trained in something else.
> And I consider my life quite the opposite of sheltered, thank you.


 
Juniors who are insecure in what they do usually have a better time on sites like http://www.bullshido.com 

I would suggest that if you have something constructive to add it would be nice, otherwise I would suggest that others ignore this drabble as it is a waste of time.

Weeds flourish where it takes cultivation and work to produce a flower of beauty.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 25, 2007)

DArnold said:


> Weeds flourish where it takes cultivation and work to produce a flower of beauty.


 
Very true. If only Maarteen understood this. Some of his views show he doesn't.

And (for the record) my Sensei (before Cuong Nhu) did Tae Kwon Do. One of my training partners is a Black Belt in Tae Kwon Do. One of the upper ranks at my school is a fifth dan in Tae Kwon Do. And let my assure you, they consistetly whoop my butt!


----------



## exile (Jul 25, 2007)

tkdgirl said:


> How do you view tae kwon do?  Do you view it as a sport, or a martial art?  Can it be both?  Are some schools only for sport (not a bad thing, in my opinion)?
> 
> Being more focused on sporting aspect of it, to me, isn't a bad thing.  That's kind of where I want the thread to stay at, please.  There are no wrong opinions or thoughts.



OK... just to have the OP staring down at me as I respond, to keep from going off on tangents. :wink1:

It's clear that TKD is viewed as a sport by millions of people. You don't get into the Olympics unless that's the case. That's not _my_ vision of, or interest in TKD, though. 

I see TKD as a martial art, battle-tested, literally. The TKD that Tae Hi Nam and Gen. Choi devised on the basis of their Shotokan training (in Japan with Funakoshi  and in Korea under Lee Wan Kuk respectively) was, so far as I know, the only TMA ever taught to a whole military cadre as a national military combative technique, and it proved itself spectacularly in the two horrific modern wars in which the RoK was a belligerant. Those Kwan era techniques are still part of the bedrock technical core of TKD. Anyone with a time machine who doubted the combat effectiveness of TKD would be very ill-advised to return to the 1950s and 60s to try conclusions on the matter with members of the Tiger commando units of those two wars, or with the RoK 11th Division Marines, IMO. 

I see TKD as Korean karate, an elaboration in the Korean context of the vision of a hard, linear art incorporating certain kinds of locks, pins and controlling moves to expedite linear finishing strike to vulnerable points on assailant's bodies that Bushi Matsumura and Anko Itosu contributed to the MAs of Asia. Trained for street (or battlefield) use, with emphasis on the close quarter range, it's devastating&#8212;and it has a public track record in the Korean and Vietnamese contexts that should compel respect from anyone who knows even a little about those two conflicts. That same art is still there, completely independent of sport competition, if that's how practitioners have the will to train it...


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> And TKD is not the exception these days, just a glaring example of what MA have been watered down to. Wushu is exactly the same. I came to China to study CMA to get away from useless TKD only to find that it was the same. Imagine how pissed off I am.


 
While you may have a valid point in seeing a general trend in some cases, it is very myopic to apply this judgement to an art as a whole, or all schools that give instruction in that art.  There are certainly good instructors in any art, that teach quality material and hold the students to a high standard.  The reverse is also true, that there are schools in any art that are teaching watered-down material with low standards.  But don't make blanket statements, 'cause it just ain't true.

I don't know why you would feel the need to flee your home and go to China in search of quality Chinese martial arts.  I can certainly understand that as a foreigner, you might not get access to the better instructors in a place like that, and without someone to make introductions it could be a downright mistake to go there.  You are probably seen as a tourist, and the tourists get Modern Wushu/Performance Art.  Without some kind of connection, you may not ever get the good stuff.  While I don't know where you are originally from, I can certainly attest to the quality of instruction available in the US in places like San Francisco. There are no "magic kingdoms" in the martial arts, where the best of the best are to be found.  Good stuff is found everywhere, but sometimes you need to look under a few rocks before you find them.

While my sifu has always been very open with me and willing to teach what he knows, I am also aware that I made a real breakthru with him after about 4 years.  It took him a while to have complete trust in me, in my intentions and dedication to training, before he was willing to really open the door in subtle ways he hadn't before, and I hadn't even realized it before.  This stuff isn't just handed out to any schmoe who walks in the door and sticks a wad of cash under the sifu's nose.  It takes more than that...


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jul 25, 2007)

Talking about multiple attackers...

It was quite uncalled for to break it off as a thread and put it in the TKD sympathisers forum. And out of context as well. I tried to end it before it got out of hand, but it was all of you that continued. Infractions and negative rep points are not the most important things in my life. That's the hole that my training fills. If it cannot be tolerated that one have an opinion that does not conform to the norm, then there is no place for me here.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Talking about multiple attackers...
> 
> It was quite uncalled for to break it off as a thread and put it in the TKD sympathisers forum. And out of context as well. I tried to end it before it got out of hand, but it was all of you that continued. Infractions and negative rep points are not the most important things in my life. That's the hole that my training fills. If it cannot be tolerated that one have an opinion that does not conform to the norm, then there is no place for me here.


 
Most people here have some pretty strong opinions, and people often find themselves in disagreement.  Thats called "discussion", and disagreement is part of discussion.  You made some strong statements that people chose to dispute.  There is a place for you here as long as your discussions, including disagreements, remain respectful.  And that's a two-way street for those who choose to respond as well.


----------



## terryl965 (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Talking about multiple attackers...
> 
> It was quite uncalled for to break it off as a thread and put it in the TKD sympathisers forum. And out of context as well. I tried to end it before it got out of hand, but it was all of you that continued. Infractions and negative rep points are not the most important things in my life. That's the hole that my training fills. If it cannot be tolerated that one have an opinion that does not conform to the norm, then there is no place for me here.


 

MaartenSFS what did you expect to happen when you call it waterdown and not effective and TKD homosexual, I for one find it annoying and somebody that truely has no ideal what TKD is and when it is above the norm. I for one also see you as an assit here on MT and hope you stick around remember the is alway heat coming from the kitchen and if you do not like the heat then stay in the living room.


----------



## exile (Jul 25, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Talking about multiple attackers...
> It was quite uncalled for to break it off as a thread and put it in the TKD sympathisers forum.



But no, actually. Since the OP in the earlier thread was about the possibility of handling multiple attackers, and the best means of doing so, it was exactly the _right_ thing to do to split off a subthread which had gone off the original topic and was now focusing on properties of the martial art TKD, and relocate that subthread in the TKD forum. If (i) you'd made parallel comments about the ineffectiveness of karate, based on the fact that karate, like TKD, has a significant martial sport aspect where people train for tournament competition, not the street or battle field, and (ii) people had challenged you on that point in a way parallel to the way you were challenged about TKD, then it would have been entirely appropriate to relocate that element of the thread (which would have been just as off-topic as this one was) to the karate forum. Or if had been Silat, to the FMA forum. Or if Northern Mantis, then to the northern systems forum. Or.... What would have been _in_appropriate would have been allowing this discussion to derail the central issues raised in the OP: is a defense against multiple attackers possible, and if so, what form does it take? 




MaartenSFS said:


> And out of context as well.



On the contrary: it was the original off-topic subthread which was out of context. You were raising questions about the overall effectiveness of a particular MA. You didn't even bother to link your attack on that MA to the issue of multiple attacks; it was a wholesale condemnation of the effectiveness of TKD on the street, which you made in the virtual presence of quite a few people who are in a position to show that your comments are unfounded. `Multiple attack'? The point is, if you're going to tell a bunch of people who adepts in a particular MA that their art is ineffective, you'd better have your facts right. Because given the amount of time they've spent studying, practicing and _using_ it, they know much more than you do about it. Surely that's not surprising?




MaartenSFS said:


> I tried to end it before it got out of hand, but it was all of you that continued.



Well, you said a number of things about TKD that people who actually know something about TKD are in a position to refute from any number of points of view, on the basis of their extensive training in that art. Are you saying that in an open discussion forum the proper thing for them to do would be to keep their mouths shut and not challenge negative statements from someone whose knowledge and understanding of their art is far less than their own? Why on earth would you expect them to give up their right to respond to you? _You_ showed no particular restraint in challenging their art; why should they be silent in the face of your statements? Do you
actually expect people to accept that kind of double standard??



MaartenSFS said:


> Infractions and negative rep points are not the most important things in my life.



No, of course not. They merely register others' perceptions of your behavior, and the degree to which that behavior violates norms of civility and the conventions of posting behavior that you agreed to in joining the board. If those considerations are unimportant to you, then clearly infraction records and negative rep are equally unimportant. 



MaartenSFS said:


> That's the hole that my training fills. If it cannot be tolerated that one have an opinion that does not conform to the norm, then there is no place for me here.



I'm not sure what `it' is intended to refer to here, but what people are having a hard time tolerating is just what I referred to: an evident lack of civility in the way you discuss things. There is no place for homophobic statements, for deliberate rudeness to other members, for personal attacks. We have plenty of heated discussions on MT without infraction points or neg rep being fired around. It's all in _how_ it's done....


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 25, 2007)

As usual Exile, you have posted a great deal of depth on the topic. Unlike usual, I would have expected that you would analised his comments on Tae Kwon Do.


----------



## exile (Jul 25, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> I would have expected that you would analised his comments on Tae Kwon Do.



Thanks for the kind comment, CN; as for discussing the point at issue... I did post something a few messages earlier, and it states as well as I can why I think that the remarks about TKD that triggered this whole discussion are _way_ off base. But the fact is, I'm not sure there's enough common groundeven about how a discussion should be carried onto revisit those remarks and critique them in greater detail. It takes two to tango... we might do better just to overlook the comments in question, for which there's clearly very little sympathy from anyone else, and press on with the discussion from a more constructive angle. After a while, you just wind up with a bad headache when it goes on like _this_ for too long:


----------



## Brother John (Jul 25, 2007)

tkdgirl said:


> How do you view tae kwon do?  Do you view it as a sport, or a martial art?  Can it be both?  Are some schools only for sport (not a bad thing, in my opinion)?
> 
> Being more focused on sporting aspect of it, to me, isn't a bad thing.  That's kind of where I want the thread to stay at, please.  There are no wrong opinions or thoughts.


As a reinterpretation of Japanese Karate-Do, and progressively more and more sport focused.

Your Brother
John


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jul 26, 2007)

exile said:


> But no, actually. Since the OP in the earlier thread was about the possibility of handling multiple attackers, and the best means of doing so, it was exactly the _right_ thing to do to split off a subthread which had gone off the original topic and was now focusing on properties of the martial art TKD, and relocate that subthread in the TKD forum. If (i) you'd made parallel comments about the ineffectiveness of karate, based on the fact that karate, like TKD, has a significant martial sport aspect where people train for tournament competition, not the street or battle field, and (ii) people had challenged you on that point in a way parallel to the way you were challenged about TKD, then it would have been entirely appropriate to relocate that element of the thread (which would have been just as off-topic as this one was) to the karate forum. Or if had been Silat, to the FMA forum. Or if Northern Mantis, then to the northern systems forum. Or.... What would have been _in_appropriate would have been allowing this discussion to derail the central issues raised in the OP: is a defense against multiple attackers possible, and if so, what form does it take?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Without responding to each and every point made here, let me give it a go... (This post being the only one worth responding to)

The way that I communicate is always strong and saying that "TKD = homosexual tag" is not a homophobic statement, but a humourous gesture. So what if I have a vulgar voice? It's the theories that I discuss that should be addressed, not disecting my every phrase. Go back and read some of my earlier contributive posts.

And saying that I have little experience in TKD is as much more of an insult to me than calling me some generic name. Because this is certainly not the case. I believe that 99% of MA taught today are ineffective. I have been around the world, visiting schools and training what I can, been in hostile situations, et cetera. I know, at least for myself, what works and what doesn't, what is rubbish, what is gold... Gold in the MA is rare. In every country.

And an MA community that discourages questioning everything and putting it all to the test is just aiding the demise of real MA. Soon we can do nothing but pick up a rifle and join the ranks of the armed forces or go to the 8 Mile after 18:00 if we want to learn how to fight. And whoever talked about Bullshido... They are just as hypocritical. Everyone is following some trend/cult. Where are the people that just want to perfect the art of war, ranks, lineages, world titles aside? 

And unless these "adepts" you speak of have perfected their techniques through "battlefield experience", I hardly consider them as such. Just more arseholes on the internet, which is what we all are, after all. The reason I singled out TKD and Wushu *is* because I have extensive experience with both. And, yes, I have been to both WTF and ITF tournaments. China has also been overrun by TKD in all its ****tastic glory. Excuse me for making it personal and curse those that say that I am not experienced if I disagree with them. I stand by my opinion, accept any challenge that comes, and firmly believe that TKD and Wushu are useless in a multiple attacker scenario because, were it to be successfully used, it would no longer be TKD in my book. And I never said Karate was so good. I scoff at most empty hand MA. Just because swimming, climbing, and gymnastics could aid one in a fight does not make them *MA*.

Go ahead, flood me with negative rep points, Exile me from this forum.. I will never surrender my logic to the mass that is the ignorant majority.


----------



## MaartenSFS (Jul 26, 2007)

Brother John said:


> As a reinterpretation of Japanese Karate-Do, and progressively more and more sport focused.
> 
> Your Brother
> John


 
Amen.


----------



## tntma12 (Jul 26, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Without responding to each and every point made here, let me give it a go... (This post being the only one worth responding to)
> 
> The way that I communicate is always strong and saying that "TKD = homosexual tag" is not a homophobic statement, but a humourous gesture. So what if I have a vulgar voice? It's the theories that I discuss that should be addressed, not disecting my every phrase. Go back and read some of my earlier contributive posts.
> 
> ...


 
In my experience, I have seen both watered down versions of TKD as well as TKD schools that offer great, effective, all around training.  But this is true for many different arts.  Its one thing to say that there are many useless trainers out there, giving ma a bad name, but to say that 99% of MA taught today are ineffective, wow, thats going just a little far.  This would make me question the training you have seen or studied if this is your opinion on the martial arts in general today.


----------



## Adept (Jul 26, 2007)

MaartenSFS said:


> Go ahead, flood me with negative rep points, Exile me from this forum.. I will never surrender my logic to the mass that is the ignorant majority.



Blessed is the mind too small for doubt.

You will not be missed, Maarten.


----------



## Catalyst (Jul 26, 2007)

I won't reply to Maarten's comments since I see he's been Banned.

The only thing I'll say is:


Adept said:


> Blessed is the mind too small for doubt.
> 
> You will not be missed, Maarten.


 
Amen


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

Catalyst said:


> I won't reply to Maarten's comments since I see he's been Banned.
> 
> The only thing I'll say is:
> 
> ...


 
I second that Amen.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 26, 2007)

I thought you might like to see what a TKD champion can do.Please scroll down to the fight list and stop at UFC38 and the KO in 10 seconds! I was there and it was beautiful. Also note that 50% of Marks wins were by KOs. 

http://www.sherdog.com/fightfinder/fightfinder.asp?fighterID=3599


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

What are his other 50%? TKO, submission, ref stopage?


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 26, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> What are his other 50%? TKO, submission, ref stopage?


 

I can't remember lol! scroll down on the sherdog site it says there. He's also a really nice guy!


----------



## Em MacIntosh (Jul 26, 2007)

tkdgirl said:


> How do you view tae kwon do? Do you view it as a sport, or a martial art? Can it be both? Are some schools only for sport (not a bad thing, in my opinion)?
> 
> Being more focused on sporting aspect of it, to me, isn't a bad thing. That's kind of where I want the thread to stay at, please. There are no wrong opinions or thoughts.


 
To smash with hands and feet.


----------



## DArnold (Jul 26, 2007)

Catalyst said:


> I won't reply to Maarten's comments since I see he's been Banned.
> The only thing I'll say is:
> Amen


 
The sad part is when juniors base their entire view of Martial Arts on wheither you can kick someone's ***.

This is similar to... you can only be a weightlifter if you looked like Arnold S. in his prime.  The rest of you are just wattered down.

How much of what it's all about has he missed.
How hard of a wall will this person hit when they become older?

Very Sad.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> I can't remember lol! scroll down on the sherdog site it says there. He's also a really nice guy!


 
I'm lazy, I don't feel like looking, LOL. It seems like it's mostly Ref stoppage and TKO.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

DArnold said:


> The sad part is when juniors base their entire view of Martial Arts on wheither you can kick someone's ***.
> 
> This is similar to... you can only be a weightlifter if you looked like Arnold S. in his prime. The rest of you are just wattered down.
> 
> ...


 
I'm mostly hopeing that he doesn't hit the wall NOW. Imagine if he runs into a master of say (Bak Mei), and the little knuckle head says he is only teaching Wushu. Imagine what the Bak Mei master will have to say about that?


----------



## DArnold (Jul 26, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> I'm mostly hopeing that he doesn't hit the wall NOW. Imagine if he runs into a master of say (Bak Mei), and the little knuckle head says he is only teaching Wushu. Imagine what the Bak Mei master will have to say about that?


 
Yes, as my instructor says, "Ignorance is its own reward"


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

Yep. Do you know why I choose Bak Mei speciaficly?


----------



## stoneheart (Jul 26, 2007)

> Yep. Do you know why I choose Bak Mei speciaficly?



Isn't Bak Mei one of the styles favored by members of the Hong Kong underground?  Talk about running into trouble if true.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

That I'm not sure about. What I do is that Bak Mei (meaning White Eye Brows, a nick name for the fouder) was developed from Shaolin Kung Fu, and only Shaolin. The founder was kicked out of the Temple shortly after he founded the art. Why? Because he tested it on some of the other Monks of the temple, and killed allthe monks who he did that with. Talk about being "battle tested".


----------



## stoneheart (Jul 26, 2007)

There are all sorts of kung fu legends floating around about Bak Mei.  He supposedly was the traitor who opened the Shaolin temple gates to the Manchu armies in the version I heard.  For that reason, Shaolin disciples were supposed to have hunted and killed every Bak Mei student they could find.

Who knows if any of this was true, but it's fun stuff regardless.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

True. And one way or anouther, it does show that Bak Mei himself was a good fighter. Turn the greatest fighting force over to their enemies, you gotta be able to fight. Or just completely nuts.
Come to think of it, the version I heard was that Bak Mei was kicked out for killing his fellow monks, and left the gates open as he left, and told that to the Manchu so he could have his revenge.


----------



## matt.m (Jul 26, 2007)

I know I am going to start a fight here but.......Tae Kwon Do in its origin was not to be considered a sport.  That is utter non sense.  I have fellow Marines who have said that "The NVA were terrified of the ROK Marines, they were all third dans in Tae Kwon Do.  They respected us U.S. Marines but defecated themselves at the sight of the ROK."

I am sorry, but my Tae Kwon Do is not a sport.  I know that there does exist a sport version of the art but the sport is a watered down version of the art.  The USTU, Olympic, and AAU rules as well as the traditional point sparring rules vary widely.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 26, 2007)

Matt the only one about to argue with you is Maarten, and he was just kicked off. And his thought processes is that what the ROK do isn't Tae Kwon Do, it's just Shotokan with some "flashy useless kicks, and Gen. Choi worship added". Every one else is basicly telling him he is wrong.


----------



## stoneheart (Jul 26, 2007)

> have fellow Marines who have said that "The NVA were terrified of the ROK Marines, they were all third dans in Tae Kwon Do. They respected us U.S. Marines but defecated themselves at the sight of the ROK."



TKD, aside, the ROK soldiers in Vietnam did not have the same rules of engagement as the American soldiers.  One example is a ROK company had captured some VC.  The company officer ordered a nearby village to guard the communists, but they escaped or more likely were set free by the villagers.  When the Korean soldiers found out they shot the villagers in retribution.

Not exactly the same situation Americans fought under.  The ROK soldiers were rightfully feared and a big part of that was because they weren't restrained at all in the theater.


----------



## exile (Jul 26, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Matt the only one about to argue with you is Maarten, and he was just kicked off. And his thought processes is that what the ROK do isn't Tae Kwon Do, it's just Shotokan with some "flashy useless kicks, and Gen. Choi worship added". Every one else is basicly telling him he is wrong.



Right, CN. Matt, check my post here. I don't recall too many arguments about this point, except of course from a disputant who is no longer a member. And I think many people, certainly amongst the karateka, know that something similar happened in karate, though not to such a great extent (karate had no national government pushing as a battlefield combative system nor a national government pushing it as an Olympic sport; both of those were the case for TKD, at different times). Just like TKD, karate basically split into two different visionsas tournament competition and as street-ready CQ self-defenseand a lot of the internal churnings and debate in karate seem to mirror those in TKD around these two poles of the respective arts.



stoneheart said:


> TKD, aside, the ROK soldiers in Vietnam did not have the same rules of engagement as the American soldiers.  One example is a ROK company had captured some VC.  The company officer ordered a nearby village to guard the communists, but they escaped or more likely were set free by the villagers.  When the Korean soldiers found out they shot the villagers in retribution.
> 
> Not exactly the same situation Americans fought under.  The ROK soldiers were rightfully feared and a big part of that was because they weren't restrained at all in the theater.



That _will_ do it. 

Can't help wondering to what degree the ferocious brutality of the Korean War led to that sort of over-the-top ferocity. It was hard on the US and western forces, but it appears to have been an unparalleled catastrophe for the Koreans themselves. In his history of the hydrogen bomb, Richard Rhodes, I think, mentions that something like between one and two million North Koreans alone died in the war, most of them, of course, civilians. The cruelty of the fighting between the northern and southern Korean forces was said to have been indescribable...


----------



## Last Fearner (Jul 27, 2007)

stoneheart said:


> The ROK soldiers were rightfully feared and a big part of that was because they weren't restrained at all in the theater.


 


exile said:


> Can't help wondering to what degree the ferocious brutality of the Korean War led to that sort of over-the-top ferocity.


 
This kind of reminds me of the old analogy about the fox and the rabbit.  When the fox chases the rabbit, the rabbit will usually out run the fox because the fox is running for his dinner, whereas the rabbit is running for his life!

During the Korean War (1950 - 53), the South Koreans were fighting for their lives and their country.  They were pinned down in the bottom of a peninsula with all of the forces in the north coming down on them.  The war didn't officially end in '53, but was halted with a cease-fire "truce agreement."

I would surmise that the ferocity of the ROK in Vietnam (1959 - '75) might have been a carry over from the mentality developed a decade earlier - - fight to win, or lose everything!  The unrestrained tactics of the ROK might well have been a continued fight against the communist forces that had threatened, and still do threaten South Korea.

However, I do believe that quite a bit of the ROK's fierce reputation came from their hand-to-hand combat and ability to kill the enemy at close quarters on the battlefield.  Many of the stories that I have read about the ROK related more to that than just indiscriminate shooting of villages, although I'm sure both would have contributed.

CM D.J. Eisenhart


----------



## exile (Jul 27, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> During the Korean War (1950 - 53), the South Koreans were fighting for their lives and their country.  They were pinned down in the bottom of a peninsula with all of the forces in the north coming down on them.  The war didn't officially end in '53, but was halted with a cease-fire "truce agreement."
> 
> I would surmise that the ferocity of the ROK in Vietnam (1959 - '75) might have been a carry over from the mentality developed a decade earlier - - fight to win, or lose everything!  The unrestrained tactics of the ROK might well have been a continued fight against the communist forces that had threatened, and still do threaten South Korea.



This has the ring of truth, for sure. The military culture of the South wouldn't have lost that `march or die' perspective very quickly....



Last Fearner said:


> However, I do believe that quite a bit of the ROK's fierce reputation came from their hand-to-hand combat and ability to kill the enemy at close quarters on the battlefield.  Many of the stories that I have read about the ROK related more to that than just indiscriminate shooting of villages, although I'm sure both would have contributed.



The Viet Cong field command issued a directive to their fighters in 1966, which was mentioned in an issue of _Time_ magazine, specifically directing them to avoid engagement with RoK troops _because of their highly developed hand-to-hand fighting skills_, and named a proto-version of TKD (one of the Kwan names, as I recall) as the basis of these skills. That's gotta tell you something, eh?


----------



## DArnold (Jul 27, 2007)

Last Fearner said:


> This kind of reminds me of the old analogy about the fox and the rabbit. When the fox chases the rabbit, the rabbit will usually out run the fox because the fox is running for his dinner, whereas the rabbit is running for his life!
> 
> During the Korean War (1950 - 53), the South Koreans were fighting for their lives and their country. They were pinned down in the bottom of a peninsula with all of the forces in the north coming down on them. The war didn't officially end in '53, but was halted with a cease-fire "truce agreement."
> 
> ...


 
Although General Choi did develop TKD in the Army, what the Army used and what the General brought foreward to the world as the ITF were different.


----------



## Kosho Gakkusei (Jul 27, 2007)

I don't study TKD but I think it is a beautiful art which requires athleticism and grace.  I would not quickly discount any TKD practitioner's skills.  If you end up fighting a martial artist you're not fighting their art you're fighting them.

I think Maarten's misguided perception of TKD is rooted in the proliferation of McDojos which call themselves TKD.  This has roots in the sportification of the MA TKD.  Not that martial sports are all bad.  They do alot for the promotion of the art and somewhat testing your skills at speed. The rise in popularity of sport TKD and the Power Rangers have led to the byproduct of more "TKD" schools with trophies in the windows with floors full of 10 year old black belts than there are Starbucks Coffee Shops in every town.

I have a grey haired friend that has practiced Tae Kwan Do for many years and his skills speak for themselves but these schools that pop up all over are not Tae Kwan Do but rather TaKe yer Do schools.

_Don Flatt


----------



## CuongNhuka (Jul 27, 2007)

Kosho Gakkusei said:


> I think Maarten's misguided perception of TKD is rooted in the proliferation of McDojos which call themselves TKD.


 
BINGO! How much do you want to bet he'll end up opening his own pseudo-McDojo?


----------



## terryl965 (Jul 27, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> BINGO! How much do you want to bet he'll end up opening his own pseudo-McDojo?


 

I bet he does for he see money to be made. Those that cast the stone tend to follow those that they have cast.


----------



## Papio (Jul 27, 2007)

As a really good fitness class with lots of flexibility, coordination, posture and balance elements, like yoga except with punching and kicking. 


  The TKD Ive been taught so far doesnt use the shin, knee, elbows or forehead as weapons and praises highly accurate touches to strategic locations rather than resolution of conflict though force which is how I define a fighting system or martial art.


----------



## Kacey (Jul 27, 2007)

Papio said:


> As a really good fitness class with lots of flexibility, coordination, posture and balance elements, like yoga except with punching and kicking.
> 
> 
> The TKD I&#8217;ve been taught so far doesn&#8217;t use the shin, knee, elbows or forehead as weapons and praises highly accurate touches to strategic locations rather than resolution of conflict though force which is how I define a fighting system or martial art.



Not knowing how long you've been taking TKD, I can't speak to your ability in terms of being able to hit a target accurately with the desired level of force - but if I can hit you accurately in the temple, or carotid, or philtrum, etc., while moving (and I can) then I have just resolved a conflict through force... because you'll be out cold.  

Likewise, if I punch or kick you in the diaphragm (much easier in terms of precision than the temple), then again, I will have resolved a conflict through force - but it takes longer to learn to do the first than the second, and, if I recall correctly from your other post - you're a blue belt, or thereabouts, and most blue belts have yet to develop the level of precision I described above - but they're getting there.

If your instructor has not taught you _why_ you are learning "highly accurate touches to strategic locations" - and has not explained that the level of force should vary depending on the desired outcome, then perhaps you and your instructor need to discuss that.

As far as the knee, elbow, and shin, I do teach those; I prefer to use my forehead to protect my brain, rather than as an attacking tool.


----------



## Papio (Jul 27, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Not knowing how long you've been taking TKD, I can't speak to your ability in terms of being able to hit a target accurately with the desired level of force - but if I can hit you accurately in the temple, or carotid, or philtrum, etc., while moving (and I can) then I have just resolved a conflict through force... because you'll be out cold.
> 
> Likewise, if I punch or kick you in the diaphragm (much easier in terms of precision than the temple), then again, I will have resolved a conflict through force - but it takes longer to learn to do the first than the second, and, if I recall correctly from your other post - you're a blue belt, or thereabouts, and most blue belts have yet to develop the level of precision I described above - but they're getting there.
> 
> ...


 You miss read my other post, I push kicked a blue belt and I&#8217;m still at the level of innocence in TKD so try not to take anything I say specifically about TKD as gospel.

  In terms of ability, Taekwondo is my second MA, I lacked the patience for Ju-jitsu and the constant stream of fake punches aimed off target for throws, takedowns and wrist locks. I judge my sparring by what I&#8217;m told by the high grade (red and black) belts when fighting them. My favourite partner being a scrapper red belt that doesn&#8217;t pull his kicks or ask if I&#8217;m okay after every light tap.

  My kicks and punches are fast, accurate and strong, my stances are good, I have a tendency to drop my guard during certain kicks, I keep dropping my eyes to waist height especially when fighting high belt females - staring into there eyes can become very uncomfortable especially when they smile at me, I can&#8217;t seem to get into the habit of closing distance with constant kickers and I keep getting told off for not pressing attacks after backing other students into walls.

  As for my forehead, it&#8217;s got me out of some very tense situations where fist or feet weren&#8217;t really all that useful but you&#8217;re right, it&#8217;s a last resort.


----------

