For All The Taekwondo Bashers The Real Truth On Taekwondo From My View

[skribs]

I just don't think it's logic. Don't get me wrong. I'm tracking what you're saying. I was trying to be polite. If someone jumps you on a street, and you can't even handle yourself in a duel that's 2 months away, what makes you think you can handle yourself without any warning in a much more dire situation? That's just not a reasonable position to take. It defies logic.

Let's step back. Let's take me and TKD out of it. Because it's not exclusive to TKD. Every single art has the same problem. There are gaps. This goes for arts that are more common in MMA, like boxing and wrestling. A boxer or wrestler will need additional training to excel in MMA. Yet, there's countless times you see people with just boxing or just wrestling who defend themselves very well.

I'll leave it to you to figure out why that is, since you're apparently so much smarter than me. Why is it that a boxer can defend himself in a sudden street fight, or a BJJ fighter can handle a bully on the basketball court, but the same fighters could easily lose an MMA match if the other fighter knows their weaknesses?

 

[drop bear]

I'm not going terminator, I'm assuming they are.

The difference is in preparation. I can adjust my training to prepare for an MMA fight. A real fight you don't have that luxury.

For example, if I schedule an MMA fight for next Thursday, then I can try and work takedown defense and head punches into my game. If I'm fighting for my life, then I don't have the time to add those things into my training. Thus, I have to use what I know.

What I know are effective techniques. There are holes in my game. I recognize this, but as of yet I haven't rectified it. However, I do have legitimate techniques that can give me a chance.

Why don't you have take down defense or head punching in preparation for a street fight?

 

[drop bear]

Let's step back. Let's take me and TKD out of it. Because it's not exclusive to TKD. Every single art has the same problem. There are gaps. This goes for arts that are more common in MMA, like boxing and wrestling. A boxer or wrestler will need additional training to excel in MMA. Yet, there's countless times you see people with just boxing or just wrestling who defend themselves very well.

I'll leave it to you to figure out why that is, since you're apparently so much smarter than me. Why is it that a boxer can defend himself in a sudden street fight, or a BJJ fighter can handle a bully on the basketball court, but the same fighters could easily lose an MMA match if the other fighter knows their weaknesses?

Because if you fight a better guy you will probably loose.

So if you can punch and the other guy can punch kick and wrestle. He has the advantage of a better system.

 

[skribs]

Why don't you have take down defense or head punching in preparation for a street fight?

Why don't boxers train kick defense or takedown defense?

Because if you fight a better guy you will probably loose.

So if you can punch and the other guy can punch kick and wrestle. He has the advantage of a better system.

Wow, boxers must suck, they have the worst system!

BJJ must suck, since all they can do is groundfight.

 

[Steve]

Let's step back. Let's take me and TKD out of it. Because it's not exclusive to TKD. Every single art has the same problem. There are gaps. This goes for arts that are more common in MMA, like boxing and wrestling. A boxer or wrestler will need additional training to excel in MMA. Yet, there's countless times you see people with just boxing or just wrestling who defend themselves very well.

I'll leave it to you to figure out why that is, since you're apparently so much smarter than me. Why is it that a boxer can defend himself in a sudden street fight, or a BJJ fighter can handle a bully on the basketball court, but the same fighters could easily lose an MMA match if the other fighter knows their weaknesses?

Hold on. No reason to get snarky, and to be clear, I'll get to your "why is it questions" in a minute. But first, I think when you talk about transfer of learning, you're making an excellent point. BJJ fighters train for BJJ matches. If they want to be able to compete in a Judo tournament, they would train accordingly. If they want to compete in an MMA match, they would train accordingly. While there is no single bright line from untrained to street fighter, I think it's pretty easy to see the accumulation of skills and complexity.

And generally speaking, one's ability to transfer learning from one context A to context B depends on two simple things. How skilled you are in context A? How similar is context A to context B? So, for example, it will be easier for a skilled Judoka to compete in a BJJ tournament than for a skilled TKDist. It will be easier for a skilled Thai Boxer to transition to kickboxing than a Judoka. And so on. A guy like @Tony Dismukes who has wrestled, boxed, sumo'd, jiu jitsu'd, and ninja'd his way through his martial arts training has a lot of accumulated experience not just in the styles, but in synthesizing the skills and transferring his learning.

You have control over both of these things, because you can accumulate skill if you train well, and you have agency over which contexts you choose to train for. Meaning, if you want to train striking, you can. Just do it. And if you want to learn to be a skilled striker, well, that's a different discussion, but point is, you have some control over that. What you can't control is the other person/people. Their skills and abilities are outside of your control. So, if self defense is your goal, what sense does it make to presume that potential foe is unskilled? That's backwards.

MMA is a context in which there is striking and grappling, standing and on the ground. It is pretty much the least restrictive rule set around right now for unarmed fighting, and I would view street fighting (not de-escalation, emotional intelligence, not being a jerk, or any other "self defense" type things) as being on the OTHER side of MMA in terms of skills that may come into play, complexity, scope, and risk. Simply put, if you aren't prepared for an MMA match against someone who is roughly your same skill level, size, and age, how could you believe you are prepared for something riskier, more complex, and potentially broader in scope?

So to your "why is it" questions. The answer is about context. If a boxer gets into a situation that plays to his skill set, he has a better chance of transferring his learning. If a boxer is taken to the ground, whether on a mat, in a cage, or on the street, he's going to be in trouble. If a BJJ guy gets into a situation that plays to his skill set, he's going to have a good chance of transferring his learning. Same thing with TKD, etc.

 

[skribs]

Hold on. No reason to get snarky, and to be clear, I'll get to your "why is it questions" in a minute. But first, I think when you talk about transfer of learning, you're making an excellent point. BJJ fighters train for BJJ matches. If they want to be able to compete in a Judo tournament, they would train accordingly. If they want to compete in an MMA match, they would train accordingly.

While there is no single bright line from untrained to street fighter, I think it's pretty easy to see the accumulation of skills and complexity. And generally speaking, one's ability to transfer learning from one context A to context B depends on two simple things. How skilled you are in context A? How similar is context A to context B? So, for example, it will be easier for a skilled Judoka to compete in a BJJ tournament than for a skilled TKDist. It will be easier for a skilled Thai Boxer to transition to kickboxing than a Judoka. And so on. A guy like @Tony Dismukes who has wrestled, boxed, sumo'd, jiu jitsu'd, and ninja'd his way through his martial arts training has a lot of accumulated experience not just in the styles, but in synthesizing the skills and transferring his learning.

MMA is a context in which there is striking and grappling, standing and on the ground. It is pretty much the least restrictive rule set around right now for unarmed fighting, and I would view street fighting (not de-escalation, emotional intelligence, not being a jerk, or any other "self defense" type things) as being on the OTHER side of MMA in terms of skills that may come into play, complexity, scope, and risk. Simply put, if you aren't prepared for an MMA match against someone who is roughly your same skill level, size, and age, how could you believe you are prepared for something riskier, more complex, and potentially broader in scope?

So to your "why is it" questions. The answer is about context. If a boxer gets into a situation that plays to his skill set, he has a better chance of transferring his learning. If a boxer is taken to the ground, whether on a mat, in a cage, or on the street, he's going to be in trouble. If a BJJ guy gets into a situation that plays to his skill set, he's going to have a good chance of transferring his learning. Same thing with TKD, etc.

You started with the snark. Don't complain when it comes back at you.

The why is because I'm assuming the person who is attacking me has less training and less awareness of my abilities than an MMA fighter I'd be up against.

Would I feel better if I also had experience with boxing and BJJ? Yes. And at some point I'd like to have that training. But I am confident that if someone were to pick a fight with me, my kicks will serve me well. This is based on numerous videos I've seen of martial artists with only one type of training who dominate a fight against a typical street opponent.

 

[TKD Eagle]

While street fighting is potentially broader in scope than MMA, it's also significantly lower in terms of your expected opposition's talent level.

If I get into a cage match, I can expect my opponent to have several years of martial arts training, targeted specifically at cage fighting. He will be young, he will be in fantastic physical shape, and he will have had time to study me and my techniques. If I get into a street fight with someone, while there will be fewer rules (potentially no rules), my opponent almost certainly has less training than the MMA guy. He's almost certainly in worse physical shape. He may still be young, but there's a good chance he's drunk. He probably does not have a black belt in any kind of martial art, and he won't have any idea that I do Taekwondo. Not until he gets a foot upside the head.

 

[Steve]

You started with the snark. Don't complain when it comes back at you.

You think I'm being snarky? Okay. Sorry about that. I blame my writers. They never can tell humor from snark.[/quote]
The why is because I'm assuming the person who is attacking me has less training and less awareness of my abilities than an MMA fighter I'd be up against.[/quote]Alright. To be clear, your MMA opponent probably wouldn't know anything about you, either. I mean, sure, if you get to a certain point where there's some actual footage of you fighting. But at the level we're talking about, I'm thinking this is like a smoker bout between two schools type thing. You can presume that your opponent has some striking, some grappling, and has been training roughly the same amount of time as you. He would probably presume the same.

So, in a street fight, doesn't your approach seem very risky and shortsighted? What if the person attacking you has some MMA training. Or said another way, why would you presume that your opponent(s) have less training than a relatively new, amateur MMA fighter?

Would I feel better if I also had experience with boxing and BJJ? Yes. And at some point I'd like to have that training. But I am confident that if someone were to pick a fight with me, my kicks will serve me well. This is based on numerous videos I've seen of martial artists with only one type of training who dominate a fight against a typical street opponent.

Why are you so confident, considering you said earlier that you're not prepared for an MMA match against someone who is of similar size, age, and skill level as you? That also seems risky and shortsighted.

 

[Steve]

While street fighting is potentially broader in scope than MMA, it's also significantly lower in terms of your expected opposition's talent level.

Really? Are you going to make sure your agent only arranges street fights for you with people who have no talent? Can you forward your agent's name to me?

If I get into a cage match, I can expect my opponent to have several years of martial arts training, targeted specifically at cage fighting. He will be young, he will be in fantastic physical shape, and he will have had time to study me and my techniques. If I get into a street fight with someone, while there will be fewer rules (potentially no rules), my opponent almost certainly has less training than the MMA guy. He's almost certainly in worse physical shape. He may still be young, but there's a good chance he's drunk. He probably does not have a black belt in any kind of martial art, and he won't have any idea that I do Taekwondo. Not until he gets a foot upside the head.

Okay. Hold on here. Let's do some level setting. If you're new to MMA, you are probably going to be paired up with someone who has a similar amount of training as you, is about your same size, and as an amateur will be about your same age (or fitness level). He will probably expect you to have some grappling experience and some striking experience. But unless you have a record, and there's some footage of your fights, that's about all that they will know about you. Simply put, no one's going to put a TKD guy with no formal MMA training into the cage against Anthony Pettis.

Second, I'm still not clear how you can be so confident that you're going to only fight someone who has no talent (as you mentioned above), and now who is drunk, out of shape, and does not have any kind of a black belt in anything. What if the guy isn't drunk, and has a black belt in something, and is also in better shape than you? I guess, at minimum, I think you could set your bar a little higher.

 

[skribs]

Because most people who train martial arts have the incredible combination of a safe outlet to vent their aggression, and a healthy understanding of the dangers of fighting.

How good would it be for your martial arts career if you pick a fight with someone and end up getting your arm broken?

An MMA opponent would probably at least know that I train Taekwondo and have a general expectation that I will be kicking a lot.

To set the bar higher in MMA would mean lowering my bar in TKD. I train enough TKD that I can't just add something else. That time has to come from somewhere.

 

[Steve]

Because most people who train martial arts have the incredible combination of a safe outlet to vent their aggression, and a healthy understanding of the dangers of fighting.

Unfortunately, a lot of real scum bags train martial arts.

How good would it be for your martial arts career if you pick a fight with someone and end up getting your arm broken?

I don't know the stats, but I'd guess that somewhere around 1 to 5% of people who train in a martial art (any art) have a "martial arts career."

An MMA opponent would probably at least know that I train Taekwondo and have a general expectation that I will be kicking a lot.

They might. They might also be aware you have no grappling experience. True.

To set the bar higher in MMA would mean lowering my bar in TKD. I train enough TKD that I can't just add something else. That time has to come from somewhere.

It's about your goals. I'm not suggesting that you change your training. I'm simply pointing out to you that you are not training for a street fight in exactly the same way you are not training for MMA. And you're gambling on things you can't control that the street fight you do get into will play to your strengths to facilitate a transfer of learning. As I said before, that just seems risky and short sighted... if self defense is the goal.

 

[skribs]

I can live in fear of my shortcomings or have confidence in my abilities when I get into a fight. I am not trying to pick a fight, so this confidence isn't likely to get me into trouble.

Should I get into a fight, I'm going to lean on my training and muscle memory. I KNOW that I have a better chance with my traininv than I would have had without. If it doesn't work, then that's unfortunate. But if I go into a fight thinking I'm going to lose, then I've already lost.

I've accepted the risk of fighting a better opponent or more well-rounded opponent, in that I determine the likelihood to be very low. That's a risk I do plan to mitigate in the future. For right now, I'm not going to fear my training is insufficient, because if I give into that fear, then that will cloud my judgment if I need to defend myself.

 

[TKD Eagle]

I have no guarantees whatsoever in any sort of street fight. That's part of why I avoid them as much as possible. Given that I haven't been in one since I was like 14, I think I've done a pretty good job of that. Martial arts training is the backup plan to the backup plan. Eventually you hit a point of diminishing returns in regards to training. though.

 

[Steve]

I can live in fear of my shortcomings or have confidence in my abilities when I get into a fight. I am not trying to pick a fight, so this confidence isn't likely to get me into trouble.

Should I get into a fight, I'm going to lean on my training and muscle memory. I KNOW that I have a better chance with my traininv than I would have had without. If it doesn't work, then that's unfortunate. But if I go into a fight thinking I'm going to lose, then I've already lost.

I've accepted the risk of fighting a better opponent or more well-rounded opponent, in that I determine the likelihood to be very low. That's a risk I do plan to mitigate in the future. For right now, I'm not going to fear my training is insufficient, because if I give into that fear, then that will cloud my judgment if I need to defend myself.

On one hand, you believe you have a better chance with your training. On the other, you talk about acknowledging your false confidence and a completely unsubstantiated risk assessment.

This discussion we've had has been an object lesson in cognitive dissonance. Well, as long as you know it's inconsistent and unrealistic, I guess more power to you. Just, please, don't tell your students you're teaching them self defense. That would be dishonest of you.

 

[Steve]

I have no guarantees whatsoever in any sort of street fight. That's part of why I avoid them as much as possible. Given that I haven't been in one since I was like 14, I think I've done a pretty good job of that. Martial arts training is the backup plan to the backup plan. Eventually you hit a point of diminishing returns in regards to training. though.

Sure. And to be clear, I agree with you about this.

The larger point I'm making is that what you say above is honest and realistic. To then go on about how, even if you do get into a fight, you'd round house kick the poor, fat, drunk, slob, is taking a turn into La La land because you know they'd be untrained, out of shape, drunk, and whatever else.

And if you pass that fiction onto students for profit, that's getting into some shady areas that are less benign. A consumer entertaining these fantasies is one thing.

Let's just be realistic about what we know and don't know, and acknowledge the way human beings learn and apply skills.

Edit: Just to add quickly that all of the above is independent of the suitability of the training. That's where that whole transfer of learning occurs. Some styles are better suited for combat simply because they are trained better than others. And this is a completely different discussion.

 

[skribs]

On one hand, you believe you have a better chance with your training. On the other, you talk about acknowledging your false confidence and a completely unsubstantiated risk assessment.

This discussion we've had has been an object lesson in cognitive dissonance. Well, as long as you know it's inconsistent and unrealistic, I guess more power to you. Just, please, don't tell your students you're teaching them self defense. That would be dishonest of you.

I trust my car to get me to work. The other day, I had a flat tire. A couple years ago, I had a problem with the braking and steering. Yet, for the majority of the time, my car does get me to work. You can realize risks and limitations, and still have confidence, without having false confidence.

 

[skribs]

Let me put it a different way. I am confident that I am reasonably prepared for common self defense situations. I believe the situations I am not well prepared for to be uncommon. Thus, I am confident that I have a good chance to defend myself.

Fear of those uncommon situations would put me on edge and make me less effective in those common situations. It will not give me any benefit in an uncommon situation. Thus, I will stick woth my confidence, pray that I don't need to defend myself at all, and hope that if I do, it falls into what I consider an expected value for a self-defense situation.

 

[TKD Eagle]

Sure. And to be clear, I agree with you about this.

The larger point I'm making is that what you say above is honest and realistic. To then go on about how, even if you do get into a fight, you'd round house kick the poor, fat, drunk, slob, is taking a turn into La La land because you know they'd be untrained, out of shape, drunk, and whatever else.

And if you pass that fiction onto students for profit, that's getting into some shady areas that are less benign. A consumer entertaining these fantasies is one thing.

Let's just be realistic about what we know and don't know, and acknowledge the way human beings learn and apply skills.

Edit: Just to add quickly that all of the above is independent of the suitability of the training. That's where that whole transfer of learning occurs. Some styles are better suited for combat simply because they are trained better than others. And this is a completely different discussion.

Our school is very competition oriented. Nobody talks about defending yourself from an attacker. Everybody talks about what tournament judges are looking for. I just happen to think that some of it is useful for self-defense purposes.

When I started TKD, I was so out of shape that I couldn't finish our stretching exercises without needing a water break. I had to just stand up in the middle of stretches, go get water, and rest. This summer we've been doing classes in an outside pavilion in the heat. Yesterday I skipped the first water break the class took because I didn't need it and was working on my forms. I'm not saying this makes me some ultra-badass. I'm saying that Me + TKD is way more effective than Me without TKD.

I'm a big guy, and every big redneck holds the belief that he could whoop somebody's *** if he had to. I'm much closer to being able to actually do that than I used to be.

 

[Steve]

I trust my car to get me to work. The other day, I had a flat tire. A couple years ago, I had a problem with the braking and steering. Yet, for the majority of the time, my car does get me to work. You can realize risks and limitations, and still have confidence, without having false confidence.

This isn’t what you’re saying, though. You’re acknowledging the car won’t get you to work without doing some maintenance, but if you ever have to race it, you have faith.

 

[Steve]

Our school is very competition oriented. Nobody talks about defending yourself from an attacker. Everybody talks about what tournament judges are looking for. I just happen to think that some of it is useful for self-defense purposes.

When I started TKD, I was so out of shape that I couldn't finish our stretching exercises without needing a water break. I had to just stand up in the middle of stretches, go get water, and rest. This summer we've been doing classes in an outside pavilion in the heat. Yesterday I skipped the first water break the class took because I didn't need it and was working on my forms. I'm not saying this makes me some ultra-badass. I'm saying that Me + TKD is way more effective than Me without TKD.

I'm a big guy, and every big redneck holds the belief that he could whoop somebody's *** if he had to. I'm much closer to being able to actually do that than I used to be.

seems reasonable to me.