Instructor: "No, that's wrong!"

[isshinryuronin]

This started as a reply to Skrib's post in the thread about "drop ins" at one's school and I thought it was a good topic. He wrote, "I also think TKD masters, in general, have a tendency to look at techniques as right or wrong instead of seeing variants." Not to say instructors are never wrong, but in most cases, there IS a right way.

To be a "variant" there must first be a "stem" way of doing it for the variant to branch off from. If the stem technique is not done right, the variants can suffer or become non-existent. It's similar to driving and being in the wrong lane and missing a turnoff on the road or having to recklessly cross over several lanes of traffic to make it. If one was in the "right" lane, these dangerous situations could have been avoided.

It may be the master is aware of this even if the student is not. This may be one reason he's called "Master." Doing a technique correctly, the right way, allows for variants to be launched off from it. This is important in kata and resulting options for bunkai. Only once the stem technique is done the correctly can one start to consider variants. I'll leave it as this for now to allow others to comment.

 

[hoshin1600]

For my art there may be no "stem" or original template. It's a matter of application. Karate is very muddy because the meaning behind the movements is quite obscured and often unknown. Any given master has their own interpretation of what a move is ment to accomplish which is often very different from other masters. If my application and your application is different then who can say what is right or wrong? The entire picturesque kata thing where every muscle on the body is scrutinized can only be applied to sport karate and competition. In real life, was the strike effective? Yes, then it doesn't matter if it was two inches higher or lower. If my application is a takedown and yours is a push, if they are both effective then they are both right.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I think this assumes that the master was at the peak, and everyone after him is playing catch up. A variant may be better than the original - this is how arts can evolve. There are also many different reasons for a variation (a technique works flawlessly if the opponent sidesteps one way, but the second they sidestep farther or less far, a 'variation' has to be done, the technique works differently for people of different body types, they were taught slightly differently from the same master, or there are parts that aren't important to the base technique).

And if an organization is large enough, what was the 'original' may be lost...or just may not matter at all.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Specifically in skribs thread, it's referring to someone who was taught a variant. So if the master of School A teaches the technique with variant 1, and the master of school B teaches the technique with variant 2, how do you decide which is correct, right, and deserves to be the "master"?

 

[Hot Lunch]

To be a "variant" there must first be a "stem" way of doing it for the variant to branch off from. If the stem technique is not done right, the variants can suffer or become non-existent. It's similar to driving and being in the wrong lane and missing a turnoff on the road or having to recklessly cross over several lanes of traffic to make it. If one was in the "right" lane, these dangerous situations could have been avoided.

It may be the master is aware of this even if the student is not. This may be one reason he's called "Master." Doing a technique correctly, the right way, allows for variants to be launched off from it. This is important in kata and resulting options for bunkai. Only once the stem technique is done the correctly can one start to consider variants. I'll leave it as this for now to allow others to comment.

I'm not sure that's going to matter. The correction from the instructor is far less likely to be "that's wrong," and more likely to be "that's not how we do it here."

 

[skribs]

What is the right way to do a roundhouse kick: with the ball of foot, instep, or shin? Ask a traditional TKD student, they will say ball of the foot, because that's best for penetration and board breaking. Ask a sport TKD student, they will say instep, because that's what scores points in competition. Ask a Muay Thai fighter, they will say shin, because that one offers the overall strongest striking implement.

One thing I've thought of, there are several levels of "wrong" for a technique:

• Wrong because it's not the way it's done in the kata.
• Wrong because it's bad for the sport.
• Wrong because it's not the drill we're doing today.
• Wrong because it's objectively bad in every situation.

It's wrong to keep your hands up in front of your face in a kata, because your other hand should be doing the pull back. It's wrong to kick with your shin in TKD sparring, because it's against the rules. It's wrong to sweep your opponent to side control in a BJJ drill where you're drilling sweeps to mount. And it's wrong to punch with a loose fist because you can break your fingers.

The technique that specifically comes to mind is the back kick. The back kick can be done as a short kick going straight back, or as more of a spinning side kick. The later has better height, reach, and sometimes a better angle. The former is good as a short range counter-kick and may have more power. If a TKD Master says to do a back kick, one of those is "wrong" and the other is "right" even though they both are better in different circumstances.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

A student of mine went to another Chinese wrestling school and did the "front cut". She did as I taught her - push on the throat. The instructor said, "We don't push on the throat, we push on the shoulder".

That instructor only considers the jacket training - grab the side door and push. I considered the non-jacket training - one can control better by pushing on the throat than by pushing on the shoulder.

 

[HighKick]

What is the right way to do a roundhouse kick: with the ball of foot, instep, or shin? Ask a traditional TKD student, they will say ball of the foot, because that's best for penetration and board breaking. Ask a sport TKD student, they will say instep, because that's what scores points in competition. Ask a Muay Thai fighter, they will say shin, because that one offers the overall strongest striking implement.

One thing I've thought of, there are several levels of "wrong" for a technique:

• Wrong because it's not the way it's done in the kata.
• Wrong because it's bad for the sport.
• Wrong because it's not the drill we're doing today.
• Wrong because it's objectively bad in every situation.

It's wrong to keep your hands up in front of your face in a kata, because your other hand should be doing the pull back. It's wrong to kick with your shin in TKD sparring, because it's against the rules. It's wrong to sweep your opponent to side control in a BJJ drill where you're drilling sweeps to mount. And it's wrong to punch with a loose fist because you can break your fingers.

The technique that specifically comes to mind is the back kick. The back kick can be done as a short kick going straight back, or as more of a spinning side kick. The later has better height, reach, and sometimes a better angle. The former is good as a short range counter-kick and may have more power. If a TKD Master says to do a back kick, one of those is "wrong" and the other is "right" even though they both are better in different circumstances.

Is this post a vent, a jaded opinion, or a little of both?

Naturally, in a rules bound environment or competition (which covers almost everything) there will be a 'right' and 'wrong' way to do things. However, there are many, many variants to Every kick. A good fighter will learn them and how/when to exploit them.
Since you started talking about the roundhouse, let's answer the question with a question. How many different roundhouse kicks do you know or can think of? As far as foot position, there is good purpose in all three contact areas, but there is also bad in all three areas (relative to the kicking situation).
I do not differentiate the back kick and side kick as much as some. They have marginally different positional advantages, and yes, if there are no other limitations which is rare, a back kick should be the stronger kick, but is usually a harder kick to focus into a small area in a dynamic environment.

In your TKD analogy, I don't think either kick would be wrong unless you were told up front to do the other kick. If a TKD instructor says "do X kick" and you do not understand, ask. Or take the chance that you are familiar enough with them to know what they are thinking.

Is it really that big of a deal?

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Is this post a vent, a jaded opinion, or a little of both?

Naturally, in a rules bound environment or competition (which covers almost everything) there will be a 'right' and 'wrong' way to do things. However, there are many, many variants to Every kick. A good fighter will learn them and how/when to exploit them.
Since you started talking about the roundhouse, let's answer the question with a question. How many different roundhouse kicks do you know or can think of? As far as foot position, there is good purpose in all three contact areas, but there is also bad in all three areas (relative to the kicking situation).
I do not differentiate the back kick and side kick as much as some. They have marginally different positional advantages, and yes, if there are no other limitations which is rare, a back kick should be the stronger kick, but is usually a harder kick to focus into a small area in a dynamic environment.

In your TKD analogy, I don't think either kick would be wrong unless you were told up front to do the other kick. If a TKD instructor says "do X kick" and you do not understand, ask. Or take the chance that you are familiar enough with them to know what they are thinking.

Is it really that big of a deal?

Its a response and explanation of why there would be variation to the op. Did yoi read the original post, or only skribs response?

 

[Badhabits]

The fellow I've been training under the past few years generally only tells us a technique is outright wrong if the way you do it sucks for getting the job done or it's done in a way that can cause injury to the person doing it. He's pretty cool that way. The occasional deviation from the official way it's done isn't a big deal in certain circumstances. The system itself doesn't have a vertical fist for example but he'll allow it at times. Especially various types of sparring or self defense he'll let you use what works for you as long as it gets the job done. Of course if we're practicing side kicks or roundhouse or whatever he wants you to practice the way he teaches it.
But as long as the base is there- power/momentum heading the right directions, not going to injure yourself, stances and transitions are doing their jobs etc he's fairly lenient on variations. It's when he's sees someone doing or trying to do something that he just doesn't see as being effective that he'll jump in and start making puking noises at them.

 

[skribs]

Is this post a vent, a jaded opinion, or a little of both?

It's in response to OP's post, which is in response to something I said in another thread.

Naturally, in a rules bound environment or competition (which covers almost everything) there will be a 'right' and 'wrong' way to do things. However, there are many, many variants to Every kick. A good fighter will learn them and how/when to exploit them.
Since you started talking about the roundhouse, let's answer the question with a question. How many different roundhouse kicks do you know or can think of? As far as foot position, there is good purpose in all three contact areas, but there is also bad in all three areas (relative to the kicking situation).
I do not differentiate the back kick and side kick as much as some. They have marginally different positional advantages, and yes, if there are no other limitations which is rare, a back kick should be the stronger kick, but is usually a harder kick to focus into a small area in a dynamic environment.

In your TKD analogy, I don't think either kick would be wrong unless you were told up front to do the other kick. If a TKD instructor says "do X kick" and you do not understand, ask. Or take the chance that you are familiar enough with them to know what they are thinking.

Is it really that big of a deal?

If a TKD instructor says "do X kick" and you do it the way you were taught at your old TKD school, and he tells you it's wrong because you didn't have your foot at exactly a 135-degree angle, are you really "wrong"? Were you really taught incorrectly before?

Let's use a different analogy. Who played Batman? If you say anything other than Christian Bale, I'm going to say "you're wrong". Now you may say Michael Keaton or Adam West. But I say you're wrong, because that's my favorite batman. Are you wrong? Or are you right, and I'm also right (in that Christian Bale played Batman), but I'm wrong for saying he's the only one?

Now had I said "Who played Batman opposite Heath Ledger", then there's clearly one answer. If I say "Who played Batman" and you say "Natalia Portman", then you're wrong.

This has been my experience in TKD schools (which is what the OP was referencing).

 

[Badhabits]

Micheal Keaton was the best Batman

 

[skribs]

Micheal Keaton was the best Batman

Actually the reason I made that analogy was this old Trivial Pursuit question: Who has never been Batman - Ben Affleck, Christian Bale, George Clooney, Val Kilmer, or Adam West?

The card was printed in 2008.

 

[isshinryuronin]

my experience in TKD schools (which is what the OP was referencing).

I wasn't really responding to your particular case, but rather to the general topic of instructor authority and his presumed superior knowledge of how something should be done for the specific purpose he's teaching. What is the "why" of his saying it's wrong? As for a visitor from another school of the same style, Hot Lunch's" quote further below is fitting.

there are several levels of "wrong" for a technique:

• Wrong because it's not the way it's done in the kata.
• Wrong because it's bad for the sport.
• Wrong because it's not the drill we're doing today.
• Wrong because it's objectively bad in every situation.

Or the biomechanics are wrong or doing it a certain way may cause injury to you in a particular application.

if my application is a takedown and yours is a push, if they are both effective then they are both right.

But if the app being taught is a takedown requiring a pivot, and you're doing it without the pivot as in a push app (for example), then you are doing it wrong.

The correction from the instructor is far less likely to be "that's wrong," and more likely to be "that's not how we do it here."

This is a better answer in many cases. Also, for other cases, "That way is wrong because for this particular application........will be more effective." and then demo the difference.

A main point is that TMA runs deep. What the instructor is teaching you today may not be fully understood. But
the purpose of that teaching will become obvious to you tomorrow: "Oh," That's why sensei kept telling me to do it that way." If in spite of this, you think the instructor doesn't know what he's doing to how to teach, leave.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

"that's wrong," and more likely to be "that's not how we do it here."

If your teacher teaches you "1 step 3 punches" as jab, cross, jab and if you do it as:

- jab, hook, uppercut,
- hook, back fist, overhand,
- hook, uppercut, jab,
- ...

Will your teacher say that you are doing wrong? Your teacher teaches you the grammar. You should be able to use that grammar to write many different sentences.

 

[_Simon_]

It may also not be just a  variant from some original 'right' technique, but simply another way of expressing or doing the technique. For example like when the different roundhouse kicks were discussed in one of the other threads. Muay Thai version vs the TKD version. Are they different kicks? Or different ways of doing the same essential kick? Which is the 'variant' and 'original'?

Some may argue that it's a different technique altogether. *shrugs*

 

[skribs]

But if the app being taught is a takedown requiring a pivot, and you're doing it without the pivot as in a push app (for example), then you are doing it wrong.

The way I'll phrase it in BJJ is "That is a correct technique, but it's not the way we're doing it today."

 

[drop bear]

Another aspect of drop ins and better technique. Is there is a bunch of stuff I kind of can't do.

So often as a drop in I will try the stuff but just be unsuccessful and have to do things my way to do things at all.

 

[Buka]

Another aspect of drop ins and better technique. Is there is a bunch of stuff I kind of can't do.

So often as a drop in I will try the stuff but just be unsuccessful and have to do things my way to do things at all.

Yeah, me too.

 

[HighKick]

It's in response to OP's post, which is in response to something I said in another thread.

If a TKD instructor says "do X kick" and you do it the way you were taught at your old TKD school, and he tells you it's wrong because you didn't have your foot at exactly a 135-degree angle, are you really "wrong"? Were you really taught incorrectly before?

Let's use a different analogy. Who played Batman? If you say anything other than Christian Bale, I'm going to say "you're wrong". Now you may say Michael Keaton or Adam West. But I say you're wrong, because that's my favorite batman. Are you wrong? Or are you right, and I'm also right (in that Christian Bale played Batman), but I'm wrong for saying he's the only one?

Now had I said "Who played Batman opposite Heath Ledger", then there's clearly one answer. If I say "Who played Batman" and you say "Natalia Portman", then you're wrong.

This has been my experience in TKD schools (which is what the OP was referencing).

This has been my experience in TKD schools (which is what the OP was referencing).

For sure. Really and truly, there are more than three variants of TKD since it has fractured just like every other style. In your example, when you take it to the school level, the school/instructor has the choice to say what is 'right' or 'wrong'. But a good instructor is going to take previous training into account and explain the differences.
I have to ask is this more about you thinking your way is the 'right' way more than the instructor saying yours is the 'wrong' way?
I have trained and taught at a Lot of schools across North America. Maybe 20% of them follow a hard curriculum across the board, most of them being ITF. WT/KKW schools chase the goal of building great competitors and worry less about Uber specific technique. There have been far more hybrid schools that follow one form set or the other and then sprinkle in there own material (a Kwan school for example). Generally, there is Much more variety in these schools and the emphasis is higher on technique.