# Perception of Tae Kwon Do a Problem?



## Zepp (Aug 3, 2004)

Ya know, it was really bothering me for a while how other martial artists view Tae Kwon Do.  Everyone always talks about Tae Kwon Do's great, flashy kicks, but lack of hand techniques, or mentions how the way to beat a TKDist is to get close to them, or wait for them to kick high.  The way they talk is as though TKD is lacking in basic fundamentals that are part of any martial art.:tantrum:  I know it's not their fault that they've had crappy instruction themselves, or that the TKDists they've met have had crappy instruction, but it still almost made me angry to hear/read it.  Of course, this perception of Tae Kwon Do is propagated by McDojang's and by organizations that put Olympic competition ahead of quality martial arts instruction.

Then I thought: why does this frustrate me so much?  It shouldn't really bother me at all, should it?  So what if other martial artists think Tae Kwon Do is crap?  It doesn't affect what I practice.  If anything, it just gives me an advantage the next time I spar some cocky UFC fanboy who thinks I can't hit him with hands or elbows.

So now my questions for all of you:  Is there a problem with the way other martial arts perceive Tae Kwon Do?  If so, in what ways does it affect us?  If there isn't a problem, is it perhaps a good thing that we get so little respect?


----------



## TigerWoman (Aug 3, 2004)

Zepp said:
			
		

> Then I thought: why does this frustrate me so much?  It shouldn't really bother me at all, should it?  So what if other martial artists think Tae Kwon Do is crap?  It doesn't affect what I practice.  If anything, it just gives me an advantage the next time I spar some cocky UFC fanboy who thinks I can't hit him with hands or elbows.
> 
> So now my questions for all of you:  Is there a problem with the way other martial arts perceive Tae Kwon Do?  If so, in what ways does it affect us?  If there isn't a problem, is it perhaps a good thing that we get so little respect?



It didn't bother me before I got on this board. But lately it has too. See: my newest pet peeve.  My school is/was not a McDojo-Karate, McDoJANG for Taekwondo-- by any means.  So how many of us "good guys" are out there?  Maybe we are there in alot more quantity than most other disciplines would like to think.  Maybe it is the most popular sport/discipline/art for a reason.  Maybe they haven't experienced Taekwondo so they can't really criticize it.  Just like I haven't experienced Kenpo or Hapkido or Judo so I can't criticize them either. We can talk about each others's art all we want and we will never really KNOW what it is to practice it unless we do. I would like to possibly learn Kenpo or learn of it more but I cannot KNOW it until I have devoted alot of time to it.

I wish everyone would respect each other's art for the fact that is IS and that it has a large following, and is an art to be respected and not trashed in public because "its flashy" or does that mean impressive?... and not familiar enough to them to be good in self defense.  They don't know that, because they don't walk in our shoes. I personally don't care what they think, because I and many others love TKD and we are second to none. TW


----------



## Andrew Green (Aug 3, 2004)

Zepp said:
			
		

> Is there a problem with the way other martial arts perceive Tae Kwon Do? If so, in what ways does it affect us? If there isn't a problem, is it perhaps a good thing that we get so little respect?


Only if you percieve a problem 

Seriously though, who cares?

TKD does focus heavy on kicks, yes.

TKD hand techniques are not used as frequent in sparring, yes.

TKD sparring is usually restricted, this places it at a disadvantage when sparring without those restrictions against someone who usually spars without them, yes.

But who really cares?

Is it fun, Yes.  So don't worry about how it does in competitions  under other peoples rules...


----------



## Zepp (Aug 3, 2004)

Thank you for your responses Andrew and TW.

Let me clarify something:  I didn't intend this thread to be another place for people to post their opinions about TKD.  There are already plenty of places on this board where people can, and have, done that.  What I did hope to get from people are their opinions about the common opinions of TKD.  I know that seems like a limited topic, but I'd like to see where it goes.


----------



## Tkang_TKD (Aug 3, 2004)

Hello,

I too have been a little bit bothered by some of the other MAists that make remarks about Taekwondo.  I've given it some thought and I basically decided that I won't let it bother me.

If they want to think that TKDists can only kick, or have limited hand techniques, it doesn't matter.  I train mostly tradititional TKD, but with a WTF rank structure.

My KJN always tells us that if we need to fight, or defend, we should use our training and not try to fight the other guys fight.  To explain that, it simply means that if you're fighting a boxer, don't try to box with him(her). You'd be playing to their strengths.

I know with sport TKD, alot of emphasis is placed on valid point areas (above the waist, no punching to the face, etc...)  If I were to fight where that style is ineffective, I know that I have at least been taught to properly deliver low kicks to the knee's, shins, etc...  I also do work on several grappling techniques, although nothing that would be consistent with some of the grappling arts.  My grappling comes only from a background with folkstyle/freestyle wrestling.

Just ask yourself this question:  If a differnt stylest had to fight with the restrictions placed on the sport aspect of TKD, would they really be all that effective?


----------



## Tkang_TKD (Aug 3, 2004)

Wow...I hope my message wasn't too confusing.  I think  maybe the last paragraph is all that really makes sense LOL


----------



## Tkang_TKD (Aug 3, 2004)

On the subject of why we get so little respect, I really think that has a lot to do with seeing so many TKDists getting into MMA type events and being at a disadvantage because of their unfamiliarity with grappling, submissions and what have you.

(sorry, I'm a n00b so I haven't figured out the whole concept of putting all my thoughts into one post LOL)


----------



## MichiganTKD (Aug 3, 2004)

What I have observed is this:

It is not that Tae Kwon Do is inherently worse than other styles, it is not. What it suffers from is a plague of overpublicity from the wrong sorts.
Traditional schools by definition tend to be more solitary and word of mouth, unconcerned as much with publicity and hype. You have to seek them out because they are not easy to find.
Conversely, the half-assed low class Instructors, and we all know who they are, are all too eager to get themselves into magazines, videos, and advertisements. These are the ones most people see, not necessarily the best representatives of the Art. In my area too. The Instructors I consider the worst are the ones most willing to whore themselves. Comes with the territory.
Does it irritate me? A little. However, I absolutely refuse to lower my standards to attain the number of students they have, knowing I would lose personal integrity.
It's kind of like the band that remains true to its fans by staying small. In going mainstream and acquiring lots of fans, maybe something is lost.
For example, the ATA is undoubtably bigger than our Organization. Would I join the ATA? Nope.


----------



## Anna Bastiaans (Aug 4, 2004)

The opinion of other MA's does bother me for a while. I hear very often from them (especially kickboxers and streetfighters) that they would easily overpower a TKD artist on the street. I usually don't start discussing it with them, but invite them to participate in my class, so they can experience and appreciate TKD. One of them, btw, was bragging that he will kick everybody's asses in a TKD training. But once he came and had to spar with a couple of our guys (no high ranks, btw) he said how challenging and hard TKD is. So I think that most people have all these negative ideas just as a result of ignorance. 
Another point that many MAs don't realize is that many TKD schools also teach Hapkido as a complementary skill for self-defence, which is very effective on the street. So once again, 90% of the critique we get comes from ignorance.
Anna.


----------



## MichiganTKD (Aug 4, 2004)

What many people don't understand is that in sport or Olympic-style Tae Kwon Do (which is where much of the derision is probably directed toward), technique is purposely limited in the goal of attaining points. Kicking and punching techniques have purposely lost much of their original power, because winning is emphasized over self defense. Kind of like judo vs. jujitsu. The really painful actions were removed because the need changed.
However, as stated before, in traditional Tae Kwon Do things are different. And don't kid yourself. Traditional TKD is very hard to find because of the way it is practiced. Not as much of a market for that. Anyway, traditional advocates practicing difficult techniques because if you practice difficult, other techniques are easy. If I practice head kicking often, kicking someone in the groin or knee is not going to be difficult. If someone takes me to the ground to grapple, I'm still going to use my arms and legs to kick, punch and block. Not to mention attacking vital spots. But many MMA or UFC people think Tae Kwon Do students can't or don't do this. Maybe sport Tae Kwon Do people don't. That's also why I don't practice Hapkido by the way. Not that it's ineffective, I just never felt a need for it.
Basically, I think non-TKD or UFC students deride Tae Kwon Do because they get their info from the wrong sources.


----------



## Tkang_TKD (Aug 4, 2004)

MichiganTKD,

I agree fully.  I am fortunate that I do get some of the hapkido thrown in with my training.  I tend to believe that my school is a traditional school since we put so little emphasis on olympic style sparring.

We do spar about 1 day per week, but also throw in alot of the hapkido techniques and some ground work.

Just this week I had a situation in the street that looked like it could get ugly, and during the whole thing I found it weird that I was visualizing several different techniques that I would execute, depending on what type of attack the adversary would have come out with.

Throwing kicks really never even came into play, although several and strikes and redirections came to mind.  If the scenario would have played out, it would have been my 230lbs versus a guy pushing 400+ lbs.  My main thought patterns were avoidance, and if necessary joint manipulations...I certainly don't like the thought of it coming down to grappling.  I would have been giving up way too much weight.


----------



## Hanzo04 (Aug 4, 2004)

I used to get really irritated when i would read or hear someone talking bad about TKD. i always some of it was true but people stereotype everything. it really doesn't matter what people say because they're gonna talk. they just like to hype themselves up because they suck. people have never seen my teacher and what he can do. and no he's not Korean. he's bulgarian and has been training for 15 years. extremely fast and dangerous all the teachers i've worked with have been very good. so i don't listen to people who just mouth off.


----------



## MichiganTKD (Aug 5, 2004)

It's funny. Going back to my comment about getting your info from the wrong sources: Years ago, our local paper would occasionally do a story about Tae Kwon Do, because our school was quite large and its students had very good reputations. However, instead of interviewing our Grandmaster or any of his students, they always ended up interviewing the Director of Facilities at the YMCA where our class was headquartered. This guy was not a Tae Kwon Do student, as far as I knew had never practiced Tae Kwon Do. What he was was the YMCA judo Instructor who disliked our class because it competed with his class and kept him from gaining students.
Needless to say, we came off looking like idiots because the Judo Instructor was determined to explain where Tae Kwon Do came from. And because he was the Facilities Director, the paper assumed he knew his stuff. That and the fact he was ALWAYS willing to talk to the paper about stuff he knew nothing about.
Just goes to show: be careful where you get your information from. Tae Kwon Do has suffered for years from bad publicity from nitwit Instructors who really should keep their mouths shut.


----------



## Shu2jack (Aug 5, 2004)

> It is not that Tae Kwon Do is inherently worse than other styles, it is not. What it suffers from is a plague of overpublicity from the wrong sorts.
> Traditional schools by definition tend to be more solitary and word of mouth, unconcerned as much with publicity and hype. You have to seek them out because they are not easy to find.
> Conversely, the half-assed low class Instructors, and we all know who they are, are all too eager to get themselves into magazines, videos, and advertisements. These are the ones most people see, not necessarily the best representatives of the Art. In my area too. The Instructors I consider the worst are the ones most willing to whore themselves. Comes with the territory.
> Does it irritate me? A little. However, I absolutely refuse to lower my standards to attain the number of students they have, knowing I would lose personal integrity.
> ...


Wait, people shouldn't knock on TKD for various reasons, but it is ok to knock on the ATA for basically the same reasons?

As for advertising and "whoring" ourselves out....I love to teach TKD. I love the art and I want to give back what was given to me- my life. I want to teach TKD for a living because it is a passion. For this reason I hate charging students money. I hate collecting money. I hate asking for it for my teaching fees, but my instructor explained it to me like this.

What does TKD teach? Integrity, honor, discipline, respect, self-control, etc. How much is that worth to a parent to have their children learn these things? Instructors are like candles. To illumiante the path, the instructor must sacrifice himself to do so. Isn't that time you spend and the sacrifice you make worth something? Isn't what you teach worth something? Yes, we would teach for free if we could, but the fact is we have bills to pay and our own children to feed.

This is a basic summery, but we advertise because I can be a much more effective TKD instructor and I would be much happier with my life's work if I could have 100 students. Train during the day and improve myself while others go to work and school and teach at night to help others. Much better then spending 8 hours a day doing paper work.  Does have a large school mean I have poor students? No. It means I know how to run the business side of things. As long as my students are receiving quality instruction, then having a big student base is a benifit not only to myself but also my students.

Sorry to get defensive, but when I see the same people trash the ATA are some of the same people who say others shouldn't trash TKD, it really irritates me. The ATA is like any other TKD school. We have our good and bad apples.


----------



## Zepp (Aug 6, 2004)

Shu2jack said:
			
		

> Wait, people shouldn't knock on TKD for various reasons, but it is ok to knock on the ATA for basically the same reasons?...
> 
> Sorry to get defensive, but when I see the same people trash the ATA are some of the same people who say others shouldn't trash TKD, it really irritates me. The ATA is like any other TKD school. We have our good and bad apples.



Good point.  It's easy to pick on the ATA for the same reasons it's easy to pick on TKD as a whole- it's the bad apples the world tends to see and hear from more often.

So it sounds like we all agree with regards to TKD's reputation, that we shouldn't let image affect us or our training.  Anyone think that image matters?


----------



## Disco (Aug 6, 2004)

This is a basic summery, but we advertise because I can be a much more effective TKD instructor and I would be much happier with my life's work if I could have 100 students. Train during the day and improve myself while others go to work and school and teach at night to help others. Much better then spending 8 hours a day doing paper work. Does have a large school mean I have poor students? No. It means I know how to run the business side of things. As long as my students are receiving quality instruction, then having a big student base is a benifit not only to myself but also my students.

There are some, very few in my opinion, that can and do pull this off. The focal point on the above statement is "as long as my students are receiving quality instruction". That statement is a loaded one. Anybody can rationalize what is good instruction, as long as there are plenty of students and money rolling in. In actuality, it's serving 2 masters and that really can't be done. One will force itself above the other and it will the business - money, at least 99% of the time. As I said prior, there are some who can and do make it work. But that number is few and only temporary at best. They eventually will fall prey to the allmighty dollar. It's a flaw of human nature - greed.


----------



## Tkang_TKD (Aug 6, 2004)

While I don't run a school, I'd like to offer my perspective on school size from a student perspective.  

My school has about 60 students, combining the childrens class with the adults.  We do train separately on most days, but some days we combine the child and adult advanced students. I feel that I get much better instruction when a class size is 20 or less students. This due to the fact that having smaller classes gives my KJN the ability to tailor the training to a more personal level.  Moreso, the KJN can better evaluate rough spots in a particular students learning. With less students in the class, each individual student seems to get problem areas discovered and corrected.

I do not underestimate the need for a school to make money either though.  I would prefer that the Dojang make enough money to where there's not going to be the chance of the school closing due to lack of money.

My school doesn't advertise any other way, but seems to do well just the same.  I can't beat the deal I get for monthly fees.  I pay for 4 people in my family training what some people pay for 1 person to train monthly at other schools, and our curriculum seems to be really good as we focus on traditional TKD, along with some sport TKD aspects.

I was almost faced with having to leave my school a while back, and I looked all over within a reasonable distance from my house, and I couldn't find the type of curriculum I wanted regardless of price.

In summary, I like being a member of a smaller school, and have thoroughly enjoyed my 3+ years of training there.  If the school were to get too much bigger, I think the level of training would really go down.


----------



## Mark70Z (Oct 13, 2004)

Ok...my .02.

ATA is one of, if not the largest MA organizations in the world.  Now, it was mentioned that ATA was like any other TKD school.  Also, there are good and bad apples in every group, which is true, but you know what bad apples do for all the apples in the basket...they all rot...correct?

Now, I'm not saying all the ATA schools are bad, because I'm sure it's not the case.  It's the perception and the "real" problems with this organization.  Here's a few:

-  2nd Degree black belts at the age of 7
-  More belts, with more stripes, = more money.
-  Test every two months, with a testing fee that continues to go up as you go to higher ranks.
-  Never really learn the bunkai to the forms.
-  Don't teach you a whole form till you get to be a BB, etc. etc.

These are a "few" of the things that give TKD a bad rap.  There are many more, including not being able to defend yourself at the BB level.


----------



## bignick (Oct 13, 2004)

Mark70Z said:
			
		

> These are a "few" of the things that give TKD a bad rap. There are many more, including not being able to defend yourself at the BB level.


just because you are a black belt doesn't give you any "special" power to defend yourself..i'm about 6'5''(1.95 m) and 335 lbs(152 kg)...technique matters...a lot...but strength and size matter too...i know quite a few black belts that probably couldn't defend themselves against me...and they've admitted this...this is an ego boost on my part...i know quite a few black belts that could eat me alive...including one that only weighs about 160 lbs...soaking wet......

just trying to expose the myth of the almighty black belt...


----------



## Marginal (Oct 13, 2004)

There's a difference between expecting a BB to be invincible and expecting a BB to be competant. One's delusion, the other's just flat out dissapointing to witness when the expetation's not met. Doesn't even have to be physical. If they're mentally just playing around, haw haw-ing about how much they stink at doing a turning/round kick, if they are in terrible shape for no better reason than they simply don't try etc, then you are being presented with someone that makes you wonder why the heck you're bothering with the school at all. 

Along those lines, if an org is awarding BB's in 1 1/2 years, but has brown belts opening schools, that would indicate that they don't even care about basic technical competency being a requirement for an instructor. Dunno how theyr'e going to turn out a BB that's anything but a joke with that kinda zippy turnaround.


----------



## Hwoarang_tkd26 (Oct 13, 2004)

Zepp, you stole my thread, I should have writen this. (just joking)

I know exectly what you mean, and yes it bothers me, maybe a little too much because I tend to defend the name TKD not only with words, but with my hands and feet as well (sometimes), only if the person trashing TKD is overly confident/cocky. 
Then in that case it usually ends up in a rule-less sparring match, only so that I can humble this individual and give them a better knowledge of what TKD's capabilities are (note we aren't fighting, because I wont fight someone over something that stupid).
Also one thing that my TKD class does when we hold a local tornament, is that we invite other schools that are close to our town (that are not TKD) to our tornaments, which I think is great.
But for some reason the other schools dont ever show, exept the Shotokon class.

Shoot, me and a couple of my friends that study differents styles, picked out a certain Dojo in our erea (Im not saying what the name of it is) that is known to have the most dishonerable, cocky,"We are the best", and "My MA is better than yours, especially if it's TKD"-attitude with their instructors and students than any other dojo in my town.
So my two friends went to this dojo (politely) and asked if it was ok if we sceduled a time to spar with them(I couldn't come with them because something came up), the intsructor abliged. 
And nothing was said about what style we (my two friends and I) study, or what school we come from, and I plan to keep it that way, all we said is that we have MA expereance, that is all.
So the date is set for us to spar with them, Im not sure when exactly, my friends have the time.

Anyways all this mumbo-jumbo that I have been talking about is just to show you all how much I dislike "Hot Shots", "Heman wannabe's", people that think they are "The Best", and people who slam other styles than there own especially if it's TKD.
I think that all MA styles are equal in their own element and need the proper respect that they deserve, I respect all MA styles why cant some people respect mine.

- Hwoarang_tkd26


----------



## Mark70Z (Oct 14, 2004)

Big:

I don't know where I said that getting a BB gives you "special" powers to defend yourself.  What I'm trying to get across is that once you get to the BB level you should be "able" to defend yourself.  The person should know the basics (at least) and be able to punch and kick correctly.  In the ATA schools I have gone to this just isn't the case.  Like Marginal said to at least be competant in the art.  I know there are a lot of great MA in the ATA, but it seems like the organization is going to the almighty buck.


----------



## jakmak52 (Oct 15, 2004)

There's a philosophy of "Contempt prior to Investigation":idunno:


----------



## Miles (Oct 15, 2004)

<<Along those lines, if an org is awarding BB's in 1 1/2 years, but has brown belts opening schools, that would indicate that they don't even care about basic technical competency being a requirement for an instructor. Dunno how theyr'e going to turn out a BB that's anything but a joke with that kinda zippy turnaround.>>

I don't think is it important how long one trains to get black belt as much as how one trains.  

If I have a student training 6 days per week, 2hrs per day, I have no problem awarding a black belt within 1.5 years.  If they are training that hard and I am a competent instructor, my student should also be competent technically.

Along the same lines though, I agree that a brown belt, (or even a first or second degree black belt for that matter) should be anything but an assistant instructor under the guidance of a more experienced instructor.

Miles


----------



## rattlerbrat (Nov 13, 2004)

MichiganTKD said:
			
		

> However, as stated before, in traditional Tae Kwon Do things are different. And don't kid yourself. Traditional TKD is very hard to find because of the way it is practiced. Not as much of a market for that.



I'm sure this is very true. Kenpo is another art that isn't very flashy or Hollywood-looking. I'm annoyed with people who think that because I don't (okay, CAN'T) and wouldn't do a double spinning side back triple kick o'Power Ranger against an opponent, then I'm somehow a "weak" martial arts student. I think some people tend to sign up for TKD (or worse, their children) thinking that they'll be doing flashy aerials in no time, not realizing that, like with any art, you have to start with the BASICS. And it's only once you've got the basics down that you can get to the more advanced stuff. Some people watch too much television!

Our dojo holds sparring every Friday night, and we've had some TKD students come in and spar with our kenpo students. TWDers have nothing but respect from me, personally. (In fact, I fully intend to study taekwondo in the future, as I think it would greatly improve my kicking skills.) I heard (I believe it was a brown belt) berating taekwondo once and Master Ingle really chewed him out! Then we all got a lesson about respecting other arts. I don't know who these so-called "ballerina" TWDers who can't throw punches or elbows are - I've never met them!


----------



## Adept (Nov 14, 2004)

rattlerbrat said:
			
		

> I don't know who these so-called "ballerina" TWDers who can't throw punches or elbows are - I've never met them!


 I have. I train with some. First, let me start by saying I have trained in TKD for over eight years, and have a 1st dan Black Belt (for what its worth...) so I am not prejudiced against TKD in any way. But...

 It is a simple reality that you will fight the way you train. Most TKD schools do not train to fight on the ground (or even defend against takedowns) or to fight at very close quarters or in the clinche. I have been fortunate to recieve training from jujitsu, karate and aikido experts as well as my TKD. I no longer follow the TKD training regime, instead incorporating everything I know (and think is effective) hence why I refer to my-self as a MMA.

 I personally know BBs and very high coloured belts who have a very limited range of capabilities. It is these people who give TKD a bad name. The actual syllabus of TKD is part of the problem. If you are teaching things not in the traditional syllabus (such as how to apply an armbar, or how to shoot for someones legs) then you are not teaching TKD anymore, but a form of MMA. To be honest, most schools teach some kind of MMA, whatever name they want to give it. I find the almost childish obsession with names quite entertaining. Who cares what your style is called, or what their style is called? Why can't we just be concerned with how effective our techniques are, regardless of what we call them?


----------



## hongkongfooey (Jun 11, 2005)

Why worry about what everyone else thinks? Just do your thing and be happy.

HKF


----------



## Miles (Jun 11, 2005)

hongkongfooey said:
			
		

> Why worry about what everyone else thinks? Just do your thing and be happy.
> 
> HKF


 Welcome to MT Hongkongfooey!

 Totally agree.  You can't change anyone else's perceptions of TKD or anything else on this forum.  All you can do is express your opinion and the experiences which help form that opinion.

 Good luck to all in their training!

 Miles


----------



## Miles (Jun 11, 2005)

Adept said:
			
		

> The actual syllabus of TKD is part of the problem. If you are teaching things not in the traditional syllabus (such as how to apply an armbar, or how to shoot for someones legs) then you are not teaching TKD anymore, but a form of MMA. To be honest, most schools teach some kind of MMA, whatever name they want to give it.


 I respectfully disagree Adept.  I don't think it's the syllabus so much as the instructor's lack of knowledge.  Armbars, breakfalls, takedowns are all part of TKD's syllabus.  

 My perception of the problem is that many master instructors either don't teach this material at all or only teach it after black belt.  Then these black belts, (who've not had an opportunity to digest this material) go out on their own and teach.  Progressively, the art becomes diluted.

 Miles


----------



## arnisador (Jun 11, 2005)

In the States, TKD is a victim of its own commercial success, I think. Between the Olympics with all the media coverage bringing in would-be athletes, and the organizations's success in opening full-time schools which leads to an emphasis on teaching kids , you see a lot of schools that focus on the athletic aspects at least as much as the martial aspects. That means lots of high kicking for sport and for advertising, and so on.

I've known TKD clubs that are very self-defense oriented and that have a good mix of feet/hands/locks/etc., and I know in Korea it's taught differently, but most of the schools I see are not very self-defense oriented, in my opinion. I'm sorry to say that I don't usually recommend the art to those looking for self-defense, because it seems so unlikely that they'd find a TKD school that really does that well.


----------



## Marginal (Jun 11, 2005)

Granted, the sporting side of TKD has drawn the bulk of the attention. (Afterall, it's shown in snippets at 3AM when the Olympics roll around. Big time...) But I'd still think that has more merit than the MA school down the block from me with a painted window that reads:

"Karate, Kung Fu, Tai Chi, Women's Self-defense!"

Least you're still getting something focused with a sporting TKD approach.


----------



## pnoy_kickfighter (Jun 16, 2005)

Some people judge TKD because they may not know what is going on in our dojangs. I think it all really matters on how one trains and strives for excellence. If one just wants to be seen whup some butt on the tourneys then maybe that person should focus on scoring points but if a person wants to survive in a street fight then that person should practice more on street self defense but retaining the flavor of true TKD. Sometimes in also depends on schools and mainly teachers.



 Sorry.....some of the things i said didnt relate to the topic.


----------



## Han-Mi (Jun 16, 2005)

it is annoying, but it just makes me strive harder to prove them all wrong


----------



## bignick (Jun 17, 2005)

People train for different things...

I know I'm never going to have the speed to compete on any relatively high level of TKD, I've known this for a long time...and that suits me just fine.  Have long lost the desire for competition.

I still train for speed because it is important, but my nickname isn't going to change from Big Nick to Greased Lightning anytime soon.  Because of this my training has focused mostly on developing the power of my kicks and strikes to the point where it doesn't matter if my opponent was a split second faster and managed to get a block up.  I want that blocking extremity to shatter.  Of course, they could evade...but don't tell them that.  To be able to defend yourself you need to shore up your weaknesses and focus on your strengths.  From my perspective, competition TKD has focused on developing speed beyond all else.  And that's not my game. It doesn't matter how many times you hit your opponent if they don't feel it.  Especially if there is no corner judges around to tell your attacker that they lost and need to leave now.  I don't plan on throwing alternating roundhouses at an attacking opponent, I look for that roundhouse that sounds like a gun went off and sends my hogu wearing opponent collapsing to the floor.


----------



## terryl965 (Jun 17, 2005)

Very well put big nick and remember tournament fighters may be about speed but the knock out blow will last forever.


----------



## pnoy_kickfighter (Jun 20, 2005)

terryl965 said:
			
		

> Very well put big nick and remember tournament fighters may be about speed but the knock out blow will last forever.


 The truth is beautiful. The knockout blow can help you survive.


----------



## TKDKid (Jun 21, 2005)

You know, one of my instructors said to me that part of the reason that TKD's reputation is the way it is is because it got so popular that everyone started training to beat it.


----------



## pnoy_kickfighter (Jun 23, 2005)

TKDKid said:
			
		

> You know, one of my instructors said to me that part of the reason that TKD's reputation is the way it is is because it got so popular that everyone started training to beat it.


 Its logical and could be true. Street fighters also doesnt want to get topped off by martial artists so they beat up young martial artist begginers to make it sound bad. But you know that they wouldnt touch experienced black belts.


----------



## sifu Adams (Jun 23, 2005)

As I read thru the thread I learned some new points about TKD and everyone reinforced some bliefs I had as well.  When it comes to sparing I tell my kung fu group no matter what a person knows or don't know you have to respect the persons strenghts before you throw the first attack or counter.  I use TKD as a example.  I tell them "TKD loves to kick to the head, they are good at it, and you better repect it because they will kick your head off if they get the chance"  I have ran across TKD students in the past and some are vary good and some not.  when people call and ask me what is the diffence in TKD and my Kung fu I tell them my Perception.  (please correct me if I am missing something or I am wrong.)  i never put the any system down but for the sake of this thread I will be a little more blunt.  
    The problem I see is the sport TKD that most people I see do, dose not seem to be well rounded like my KF.  TKD seem to be good if you are fighting someone of your size or smaller.  I am 5'6" tall if I am trading kicks with a 6'7"guy it would seem that his leg would reach me three days before mine would reach him.  Another probem I see is that when sparing a TKD student if I throw a dragon sweep, or drop to a real low stance or even to my back, most (that do not have other MA back ground) seem to be surpised and lost in what to do.  Another question I have is when it comes to forms/katas.  I have been to a lot of mixed MA tournaments and seen a lot (not all) of TKD forms.  the forms I seen don't seem to have a lot of kicking or kicking combonation that I seen the students use during the sparring.


----------



## TKDKid (Jun 23, 2005)

Well, I have to respectfully disagree, TKD is good if you're fighting someone larger than you are too. You just have to use a different approach. We had a guy come in to our class that had taken TKD from my instructor years ago but had to quit when he was an orange belt. Ten years later he comes back, still an orange belt, with better than orange belt skill, and I am a purple belt. He's 6'5", 250lbs, I'm 6'1", 140 lbs...quite a difference. Now, weight makes a difference in any art, I don't care what Yoda says...size matters does! Dude knocked me down three times the first time I sparred with him. I had never sparred with anyone larger than myself before, but after that first match with him I learned how I needed to change my game in order to fight someone larger than myself, and now when I spar with him he doesn't hardly get anything in on me.

  It really just takes a different approach. The guys that train just for sport probably train with guys their own size because that's who they'll be competing against. Also, in self defense, I would kick someone's knees, that'll take em out in a hurry, but that isn't exactly something you can do at a tournament.


----------



## sifu Adams (Jun 23, 2005)

good I didn't wont to upset anyone.  I am just after the knowlage. 

  How did you change the way you spared him?


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jun 23, 2005)

Well, at my school, the only two other adults I spar with are both over 6'3" (I'm 5'11" on a tall day).  It caertainly can be done.

The first thing to be away of is the difference in reach on kicks.  If you use backward foot movememt to evade a kick, you have to be able to gauge the range of different size people's attacks.  Ideally you don't want a lot of wasted energy so you want to move back as little as neccessary in order to still be in good position to counter strike.  "Little as neccessary" depends on their reach so you have to get used to or good at estimating how far someone can reach based on height.

Retreating backwards can be a bit problematic, though.  It's hard to retreat backwards from several attacks in combination against a taller person.  Better to use sidewards movement.

All things being equal, a taller person will take longer to throw an attack, so a lot of times it's easier to wait for their movement first and evade and counter strike before they can get their foot down and be balanced against your attack. It's harder to get into their range initially, but easier if you wait until they commit and counter that.

I'm just a sparring beginner so take it as it's worth, but that's what I seem to see when sparring taller people than me, and when my kids (who are shorter than me) spar against me.


----------



## TigerWoman (Jun 23, 2005)

sifu Adams said:
			
		

> The problem I see is the sport TKD that most people I see do, dose not seem to be well rounded like my KF.  TKD seem to be good if you are fighting someone of your size or smaller.  I am 5'6" tall if I am trading kicks with a 6'7"guy it would seem that his leg would reach me three days before mine would reach him.  Another probem I see is that when sparing a TKD student if I throw a dragon sweep, or drop to a real low stance or even to my back, most (that do not have other MA back ground) seem to be surpised and lost in what to do.  Another question I have is when it comes to forms/katas.  I have been to a lot of mixed MA tournaments and seen a lot (not all) of TKD forms.  the forms I seen don't seem to have a lot of kicking or kicking combonation that I seen the students use during the sparring.



If you are talking well-rounded as in general self-defense, I would agree that TKD's focus is not self-defense.  We don't incorporate self-defense in to our sparring.  Our sparring rules prevent us using self-defense even for light touch.  Beside colored belts don't have control. We use the same rules for tournaments so that is how we spar. And we don't go to the ground during sparring. We use drop low sweeps as well in self-defense, but we don't do continuous sparring type self-defense.  Our self-defense technique is meant to end it quickly.  In my opinion, our self-defense is not as strong as it should be but TKD is standup technique basically so we don't learn alot of what other disciplines are doing ie grappling.  Our master does incorporate some of the other discipline's techniques though for self-defense.  

Regarding the larger opponent.  I'm 5'7" and have to spar a 6'4 larger guy.
His leg does get to me faster and he's fairly flexible, so head shots are easy.  My best defense against him is to get inside his range. I can then jump back or kick to his head.  But he can kick me against the wall like a fly so there still is respect for his legs. 

Poomse is the Korean word for forms.  They are meant as learning tools not really exhibitions of skill.  I know for some tournaments they incorporate a lot more kick combinations, tumbling, aerial jump kicking. But that's not traditional TKD.  Most forms have some kicks.  Front, round, crescent, side and double side, jump front, flying side.  Our school is WTF, which are Taeguek forms,  but I had to also learn the Chang-Hon forms from ITF.  They include some kick combinations but still are pretty simple.  Mostly what you learn from form is breathing, balance, strength, and agility and the proper way to execute stances, blocks, and strikes.  It has some fighting moves but you would have to dissemble them from the I formation and use them separately in my opinion.  

No offense, your tone is a humble one and a learning one!  TW


----------



## Gemini (Jun 23, 2005)

sifu Adams said:
			
		

> Another question I have is when it comes to forms/katas. I have been to a lot of mixed MA tournaments and seen a lot (not all) of TKD forms. the forms I seen don't seem to have a lot of kicking or kicking combonation that I seen the students use during the sparring.


Kata's (poomses) are based in Traditional TKD. They contain a more balanced share of kicking, punching and blocking which better reflects the art itself. Sparring is only one aspect of TKD. Consider it the branch, not the tree.


----------



## Marginal (Jun 23, 2005)

sifu Adams said:
			
		

> The problem I see is the sport TKD that most people I see do, dose not seem to be well rounded like my KF.  TKD seem to be good if you are fighting someone of your size or smaller.  I am 5'6" tall if I am trading kicks with a 6'7"guy it would seem that his leg would reach me three days before mine would reach him.  Another probem I see is that when sparing a TKD student if I throw a dragon sweep, or drop to a real low stance or even to my back, most (that do not have other MA back ground) seem to be surpised and lost in what to do.



This is something that bothers me. Why is it that people can't agree upon sparring rules beforehand? If you're not used to sparring where low hits are allowed etc, it's not something one would automatically assume if they happened to be randomly asked for a sparring bout. Creates two people going into a sparring match who have just both been rendered blind. 

That aside, why are you randomly falling onto your back?



> Another question I have is when it comes to forms/katas.  I have been to a lot of mixed MA tournaments and seen a lot (not all) of TKD forms.  the forms I seen don't seem to have a lot of kicking or kicking combonation that I seen the students use during the sparring.



Not sure why they would. Those are covered in drills.


----------



## bushi jon (Jun 23, 2005)

I think tkd got a bad wrap from all the ata mill schools(my opion) Anybody who slams tkd should also slam shorin ryu,isshin ryu and gojo ryu because if you look at some of the kata they very similar in application. This is coming from a outsider Jujutsu guy


----------



## MountainSage (Jun 23, 2005)

I have been observing this post and though it is time for another opinion.  The perception problem has arisen from many changes in philosophy of TKD from a martial art to a sport/performing art.  Forms: the palgwe forms are more SD and combat skill; it teaches basic skills of fighting, the taeguks are more showy and oriented toward perform for show while developing some important skills.  Organizations:  There are many of them all proclaiming to be the TRUE TKD and promoting to gain market share.  Philosophy: Lack of a single minded direction, as much as many TKDers would like to believe, you CAN NOT combine sport and nonsport because of conflicting philiosophy.  I usual example is kicking to the head.  A high scoring move in sport and a good way to die in a combat senerio.  We could have an entire discussion of the effectiveness of kick at given heights, yet I will say kick to the head leaves a good portion of your lower body exposed, speed of the kick is not relevant.  I'll have to think more on the subject.

Mountainsage


----------



## Shane Smith (Jun 23, 2005)

It is my honest opinion that many people have a disrespect for TKD because there are far too many Instructors selling blackbelts for all manner of reasons that don't relate to martial capability. This is a martial art after all but it is become a social event in many schools I think. You put in "X" amount of time and you get your belt. This kind of "pay as you go" mentality is what has caused this credibility problem I believe. There are entirely too many marketers and not enough martial artists running Dojangs.


----------



## Gemini (Jun 23, 2005)

MountainSage said:
			
		

> I have been observing this post and though it is time for another opinion. The perception problem has arisen from many changes in philosophy of TKD from a martial art to a sport/performing art. Forms: the palgwe forms are more SD and combat skill; it teaches basic skills of fighting, the taeguks are more showy and oriented toward perform for show while developing some important skills. Organizations: There are many of them all proclaiming to be the TRUE TKD and promoting to gain market share. Philosophy: Lack of a single minded direction, as much as many TKDers would like to believe, you CAN NOT combine sport and nonsport because of conflicting philiosophy. I usual example is kicking to the head. A high scoring move in sport and a good way to die in a combat senerio. We could have an entire discussion of the effectiveness of kick at given heights, yet I will say kick to the head leaves a good portion of your lower body exposed, speed of the kick is not relevant. I'll have to think more on the subject.


  As much as I agree with several things you said, I have to disagree on a couple of points.

 First was about the forms. I think the Palgwe forms are much more diverse than the Taeguks. I'd like to know (honestly) what it is in the Taeguks that you find flashy. If anything I find them mundain in comparison.

 The second was conflicting philosophy. THD teaches high and low kicks. In a real situation, your best bet is to aim low. Sparring is no different, IMO. As a competitor, I found it takes less time to hit someone low than high. Now I teach it (and prove it) on a regular basis. I very seldom aim high. Just enough to avoid being predictable. It's the same for both.


----------



## TKDKid (Jun 24, 2005)

sifu Adams said:
			
		

> good I didn't wont to upset anyone.  I am just after the knowlage.
> 
> How did you change the way you spared him?


  Well, what I did was take a more defensive approach. You see, you made a good point about someone large like that having a much greater reach...that's very true. Hehe, his arms are as long as my legs. The fact that he has massive leg muscles serves him with great power, but it also causes him to use more energy than I do to kick, and it also takes him much longer to execute a kick. Basically what I do is this; I draw him into a kick some how, usually by intentionally leaving something open. When he kicks I dodge, block, redirect, whatever and move in while he's still off balance. It's that split second you've got when he's putting his leg back down where he's got openings you can work off of.

  Ofcourse, when he gets wise to this I'll have to figure something else out =P


----------



## MountainSage (Jun 24, 2005)

Gemini,
On your second point, I need more information.  What do you define as a low kick?  My definition is removing that bothersome knee joint of your opponent, a practice that is against the rules in sport sparring.  On your first point, any jumping technique for height is the only one that comes to mind at this time.  I am embrassed by my lack of prep on that subject.

Mountainsgae
Michael Wood


----------



## evenflow1121 (Jun 24, 2005)

So long as you are happy practicing your style is all that matters, because no one on this forum or anywhere for that matter should be significant enough to make you change systems on account of their general opinion of TKD. That said, I studied TKD for a bit when I was smaller and you are right in that a lot of schools put competition ahead of self defense, that does not mean however, that a good tkd instructor can not teach his or her students how to defend themselves.


----------



## Gemini (Jun 24, 2005)

Michael, Glad to clarify.



			
				MountainSage said:
			
		

> Gemini,
> On your second point, I need more information. What do you define as a low kick? My definition is removing that bothersome knee joint of your opponent, a practice that is against the rules in sport sparring.


 My point was in both instances, TKD teaches a range of kicks from high to low. Yes, the range is greater in a SD situation due to sparring's limiting rules, but the philosophy is the same. I just mentioned I don't find high kicks to be my first choice in either instance. Hope that's a little clearer.



			
				Mountainsage said:
			
		

> On your first point, any jumping technique for height is the only one that comes to mind at this time. I am embrassed by my lack of prep on that subject.


 Taegeuks offer very few types of kicking much less anything flashy. Nothing more than a front snap (ap chagi) until Taegeuk Sah Jang (4) and then only a side kick (yop chagi). Taegeuk Yook Jang (6) adds a Roundhouse (dollyo chagi). Taegeuk Chil Jang (7) an Out/In axe (pyojeok chagi, and lastly Taegeuk Pal Jang (8), double front snap (dangseong ap chagi)(x 2 with a slight variation) these last ones being the only "flying" kicks in all 8 forms. 
     Taegeuks = Very basic kicking.

     Regards,


----------



## MountainSage (Jul 3, 2005)

Gemini,
You still didn't answer my question.  What do you define as a low kick?  Stating that TKD teaches both is a misrepresentation; TKD demands high kick, accepts middle kicks, and deplores low kicks.  Please name one form that includes a true low kick and is general taught as a low kick not a middle kick for "competition" purposes.

mountainsage


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jul 3, 2005)

Being a musician, I'm sorta amused at people in the MA's saying that "Art X only does blah" and then using it as a criticism of that art.  This seems to be to be a vary narrowing view of the art.  The reason I say that as a musician is because in styles of music you can generally categarize things as being 'jazz' or 'classical' or 'rock' or whatever as defined by certain characteristics.  Nobody really owns any style of music so it's fair to say that jazz is *characterized* by certain rhymic and harmonic elements, but jazz is not defined and limited by just those characteristics.

 Maybe I'm just naive but I tend to view MA as the same way.  Unless one person or organization *owns* a particular art, then the art is just what the people using it teach it to be.WTF or ITF may have curriculum for advancement within their organization, but  they don't really define the art.

 Specfically in regards to kick heights.  TKD does use both a sidekick and a roundhouse kick.   These are not aimed at the knees in sparring for saftey reasons, but....both kicks can be used at targets off almost any height.  So within the realm of TKD, it seems to me that a low kick is certainly applicable.  Whether r not a particular instructor focuses on it is up to the instructor.  

 A high kick, on the other hand, is a high risk but high reward proposition, when in sparring or fighting.  In sparring, you don't do it if your opponent is not in a good position for you to succeed.  You don't just stand there against an opponent in fighting stance who's waiting for your attack and try to kick them in the head, you use other strikes to get them in a position where that will work.  In fighting that works out somewhat the same.  I mean (and I mentioned this in another thread on self-defense), you don't just use all haymakers to try to knoock the guy out, you jab to get their attention and shock them and get them moving back, and then use a reverse punch o deliver more damage.  It's all about combinations and having a variety of tools to use as the situation presents.  A well prepared person will have low kicks, high kicks, hand stikes, elbow strikes, etc...at their disposal.  That sport sparring only allows the use of some techniques and encourages others doesn't mean that that's all TKD can do for fighting any more than doing "Sabor A Mi" with a Im-V-I turnaround me that that's all jazz does, either.

 FWIW, I was taught sidekicks, roundhouse kick and front kick as a low kick *first* because as a beginner (and adult). I didn't have the flexbility to do those kicks much better than waist high anyway


----------



## Marginal (Jul 3, 2005)

FearlessFreep said:
			
		

> Maybe I'm just naive but I tend to view MA as the same way.  Unless one person or organization *owns* a particular art, then the art is just what the people using it teach it to be.WTF or ITF may have curriculum for advancement within their organization, but  they don't really define the art.


It has more to do with how the particular syllabus or rule set shapes how you train, and what habits/targets you start prioritizing while you're training. I understand what you're getting at, but the more you train a specific way, the more it will influence your reactions. 

So you can say "It's no harder to kick low" but unless you actively train those low kicks, what's going to come out in a stress situation? After two, three, 5 years will it occur naturally, or will your instincts have remapped so that you go for that head or body kick without much thought?

Realistically, if you don't train a technique, it doesn't exist in your repitoire.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jul 4, 2005)

_So you can say "It's no harder to kick low" but unless you actively train those low kicks, what's going to come out in a stress situation?_

  Actually, it is  I mean, it can be harder to kick low, I think. Anyway, a bit ago we were practicing a low sidekick drill. Aiming shin height, thigh height and solar plexus height. I realized that I tended to cheat a bit on the low kicks. On the lower kicks, it's easy to not come all the way around, or at least it was for me...to not fully commit to the kick. I noticed I didn't have as much punch and power when I was doing it so I had to look at myself and make sure I was doing the full kick properly.

 But yeah, I agree, you do what you train to do. In our class drills we do put an emphasis on using low kicks for self-defense; sidekicks to break knees, etc... Maybe a lot of TKD schools don't because it doesn't show up in forms or sparring, but I don't think that means it's not part of TKD and shouldn't be practiced.

 Anyone who has taken music lessons, or taught music lessons, knows that what you learn in class is just the overview. To really get it down you need to take home from the class and practice it between classes until you *really* have it down.

 I remember once talking with my instructor about the diffrence between a spinning back kick and a spinning sidekick and one of the point he made was that the angle of the foot on a spinning sidekick makes it work better against vertical targeter, particularly thighs


----------



## arnisador (Jul 4, 2005)

In a stressful situation, you'll do what you've trained--and it won't come out as cleanly as you'd have hoped. If you plan on kicking low, practice that!


----------



## Brad Dunne (Jul 4, 2005)

"Maybe a lot of TKD schools don't because it doesn't show up in forms or sparring"

Actually it does show up in the forms, or at least it did when the forms (Taegeuk) originally were introduced. I give Koryo Poomse as an example.
From the starting movement(s) you turn into a double sidekick. The original intent of the kicks were to takeout the knee, first sidekick and the second sidekick then waist high or horizontal to the ground, to inflict damage to the stomach / hip area or if the head and chest area came down due to the first kick. However, the modern way has come to do the second sidekick as vertical as possible, just for the sake of show. No real combative application at all. One can take just about any of the forms in TKD and look at the kicks being done now and watch where the so-called target area is being attacked and honestly see were it should be. I offer this evaluation, as just another venue for folks to see where problems arise, when the art is allowed to be diluted, for the sake of showmanship.

FF - from your statement [Actually, it is  I mean, it can be harder to kick low, I think. Anyway, a bit ago we were practicing a low sidekick drill. Aiming shin height, thigh height and solar plexus height. I realized that I tended to cheat a bit on the low kicks. On the lower kicks, it's easy to not come all the way around, or at least it was for me...to not fully commit to the kick. I noticed I didn't have as much punch and power when I was doing it so I had to look at myself and make sure I was doing the full kick properly]. I am somewhat perplexed at your "it's easy to not come all the way around". I assume that you are delivering the kick with the back leg from your fighting stance. What position is the foot of the leg you are turning/standing on when you deliver the kick? If I am correct in my assumption, I may be able to offer a suggestion.


----------



## FearlessFreep (Jul 5, 2005)

_I am somewhat perplexed at your "it's easy to not come all the way around". I assume that you are delivering the kick with the back leg from your fighting stance. What position is the foot of the leg you are turning/standing on when you deliver the kick? If I am correct in my assumption, I may be able to offer a suggestion._

 Well, I figured out my problem as the drill went on.  I wasn't getting my pivot foot around enough, or my shoulders, etc...and was staying too 'square' to the target.  Easy enough to fix, but I think it's something more possible to do on a low kick; you can *kinda* get away with it...except it doesn't have much power.

 The point I was getting at is that while a low kick is physically easier to do, you still have to focus and make sure you do it right, and you need to practice it to make sure you will do it right.  I've done a lot more low kicks practicing since then


----------



## Brad Dunne (Jul 5, 2005)

"Well, I figured out my problem as the drill went on". :cheers:


----------



## searcher (Jul 5, 2005)

MountainSage said:
			
		

> Gemini,
> You still didn't answer my question. What do you define as a low kick? Stating that TKD teaches both is a misrepresentation; TKD demands high kick, accepts middle kicks, and deplores low kicks. Please name one form that includes a true low kick and is general taught as a low kick not a middle kick for "competition" purposes.
> 
> mountainsage


If Gemini will permit me to answer your question, I will do so.   Low kick as defined by Chong-han forms is one to the knee.   I personally like to the thigh about 2-4 inches above the knee both inside and outside.

As for part 2 of your post.   I have very little knowledge about WTF forms so I hope you won't mind if I answer with an ITF/Chong-han forms.    The Hyung Gwang-gae has a low to middle combination of side kicks.   It is performed on both sides(left and right).

Hope this helps out.


----------



## MountainSage (Jul 5, 2005)

Searcher,
My point of reasking the question was to get a solid answer for a WTF BB.  This is the very reason I parted ways with WTF TKD eight or so months ago.  The philosphical generalization get really old after a while. I also don't believe you can compare WTF and ITF TKD.  IMHO, ITF has stay more true to the "Real TKD" and WTF went commerical.  I could go on for hours, yet It would be off topic.  The real answer to the question that was presented is the there is a perception problem both inside and outside TKD.  Until TKD begins to understand what it is there will be no closure.


Michael Wood
Mountainsage


----------



## TX_BB (Jul 5, 2005)

MountainSage said:
			
		

> Gemini,
> You still didn't answer my question.  What do you define as a low kick?
> mountainsage



Knee to Groin is generally covered by the term low kick. Below the knee attacks are generally considered stomps.



			
				MountainSage said:
			
		

> Gemini,
> Please name one form that includes a true low kick and is general taught as a low kick not a middle kick for "competition" purposes.
> mountainsage



In Koryo the first side kicking sequence is to the knee then to the head and so is the second kicking system.


----------



## searcher (Jul 6, 2005)

MountainSage, that is why I asked if it would work to answer your question with an ITF form.   I mean no disrespect.


----------



## MountainSage (Jul 6, 2005)

Searcher, no disrespect taken.  As I advanced thru the belt in WTF TKD I became more disallusioned with the whole thing.  TXBB,  In all honesty I was a red belt when I left TKD and have no experiance with Koryo, other than observing others do the form.  One statement I do remember is from a 2nd degree from Cali that came to train while visiting family said that any kick below waist level would get marked down in competition.  This person was a major competition freak; went to 2+ tournaments a month or so all over the West.

Michael Wood
Mountainsage


----------



## TigerWoman (Jul 6, 2005)

Under WTF competition rules, its points off, or disqualified for kicking below the belt.  Even for class sparring rules, we don't kick to the knee or purposely to the groin, thigh, calf or shin.  Although newbies can't kick belt level even and that is inevitably where they strike.  

I don't even like to enter sparring events anymore because they are doing it by points--one at a time. That is probably due to the fact we were getting fewer and fewer participants and more and more were getting hurt.  

We do practice self-defense in class, below the belt also, by partner, without gear on, and with light striking or to focus pads. Not all TKD is the same. It differs with whoever runs the organization. TW


----------



## TX_BB (Jul 6, 2005)

MountainSage said:
			
		

> TXBB,  In all honesty I was a red belt when I left TKD and have no experiance with Koryo, other than observing others do the form.  One statement I do remember is from a 2nd degree from Cali that came to train while visiting family said that any kick below waist level would get marked down in competition.  This person was a major competition freak; went to 2+ tournaments a month or so all over the West.
> 
> Michael Wood
> Mountainsage



In all honesty I'm a National Referee working on my class A. I've been doing Martial Arts since 1985. I have my 2nd Dan working on my 3rd & 4th. Needless to say I've done 4-5 Senior and Junior Nationals and if the judges are following the rules as per USA Taekwondo Page 96 Article 5 section 2 subsection e. Accurate targets. They should actually lower the scores for kicks thrown excessively high, doesn't always happen and people get really upset when the most physically apealling form dosen't win but that's why there is a rule book.


----------



## Gemini (Jul 8, 2005)

Sorry I missed the debate. I've been out of the country for the past week, but it seems any issues I was involved in were answered by someone else anyway. I wasn't being evasive, I just wasn't here.

  Regards,


----------

