New WTF sparring rules

[Adept]

I dont think we should make it easier, we just need t make sure the referees know how to score punches.
I don't like the iea of electronic scoresystem because it's not reliable at this point.

I don't like the idea of blow-by-blow scoring at all. I prefer the round by round scoring, as used by the UFC and other organisations. In that the round 'winner' gets 10 points, and the loser gains nine points or less depending on how badly they sucked. You base 'winning' on things like ring control, aggression, technique, power, etc. It's usually pretty easy to tell who was in control for a particular round, and you use three (or five) judges to make sure you don't get split decision draws.

(I'm sorry for my English but I'n not a native English speaker)

Don't sweat it. You speak english a lot better than I speak any other languages.

 

[Digger70chall]

it is usually apparent to us who is in control but i've seen plenty of fights where i can only imagine what the judges were watching, it's going to be like that in any sport with ref/judges. I think scoring hits is a more decisive way of keeping track. It definitely leaves out lotsa factors in the fight though.
respectfully,
Derrick Ransom

 

[Adept]

it is usually apparent to us who is in control but i've seen plenty of fights where i can only imagine what the judges were watching, it's going to be like that in any sport with ref/judges.

Heh, I remember reading a sci-fi book set in the future with robotic referees who were (close to) perfect. But in order to simulate reality they were programmed to make one incorrect call per game.

I think scoring hits is a more decisive way of keeping track. It definitely leaves out lotsa factors in the fight though.

Decisive, but IMHO innacurate. The true 'value' of a blow should lay in how badly it hurt the opponent. It is practically impossible to judge that for the majority of blows in a round. Sure, you get the 'Oooh, that will leave a mark!' hits where the crowd winces, but most of the time it's much harder. Did he connect, or did the other guy sufficiently change his stance in order to cause the blow to glance off? Was that a punch that jerked his head back, or was he pulling it back out of effective range? Did that shot to the ribs hurt him? Did he even feel it?

 

[FearlessFreep]

Heh, I remember reading a sci-fi book set in the future with robotic referees who were (close to) perfect. But in order to simulate reality they were programmed to make one incorrect call per game.

If I guess correctly, that was in the Piers Anthony series based on a slave/gamer in one world (Proton) who crosses to an alternate reality version of the same world (Phaze) where he has magic power. In the 'technology' world they have an elaborate gaming system. In one game, the hero is playing football against an opponent and everyone on the field but the two opponents are robots. Anyway the refs are robots and a mistake call goes against the hero and the mistake by the robot refs is explained as being built into the system that there would be one random blown call per game

Decisive, but IMHO innacurate. The true 'value' of a blow should lay in how badly it hurt the opponent.

That sorta applies both ways. A flurry of light blows versus a few very hard blows, who wins the round? You could say one side is being 'aggressive' and the other side is being 'tactical'. I think it may be more subjective on a per-blow basis to award blows on contact and be subjective if their is 'enough; contact, but in the end '6-4' landed blows is less subjective than awarding per round. At least you know what the judge is scoring and can work toward that.

Besides, even blows not scored have an effect. The ideal is that you are hitting your opponent hard, not *just* to score but also to keep them from coming back. You hit the hogu hard enough to knock the wind from the guy...he doesn't come back as fast or may be open for multiple hits while he catches his breath. He hit hard to a target area are but the guy blocks it...well...no point but if you hit hard then now he's a little sorer, meaing he'll be a bit less likely to be effective blocking in the future. So you say "the true 'value' of a blow should lay in how badly it hurt the opponent." but there is a tactical advantage to making that happen ablve and beyond scoring. At least that's how my instructor teaches (hit hard, not just for points but for physical/psychological effect) and that's my understanding of how it's to be done.

 

[JanneM]

I don't like the idea of blow-by-blow scoring at all. I prefer the round by round scoring, as used by the UFC and other organisations. In that the round 'winner' gets 10 points, and the loser gains nine points or less depending on how badly they sucked. You base 'winning' on things like ring control, aggression, technique, power, etc. It's usually pretty easy to tell who was in control for a particular round, and you use three (or five) judges to make sure you don't get split decision draws.

Taekwondo beng an Olympic sport doesent allow round by round judgin. Poinst scored is the only way IOC accepts winner to be diceded. Thats why we have an sudden death round these days. To avoid decisions made by favoritisim or voting.

As I said I think current rules with new implaments are just fine.

We are living exciting times for competition taekwondo because continuance of Olympic spot is on a line and up coming world championships of poomsae.

 

[TX_BB]

There seems to be some misconceptions on how points are awarded at WTF tournaments. Points are awarded with contact and demonstration of power, not just contact. There is a certain amount of judging on how hard a strike is. Standards of power are different for both head and body shots. Points need to be validated by at least 2 of three judges who are located equidistant around the ring. So unlike some sports it’s not the total number of strikes that each player can accumulate, there is a judgment of power and accuracy.

Writing about what I’d like to see covered weapons or target areas. I like covering the striking areas. It makes it visually clear where the hitting areas are for both player and spectator.

The problem I have with covering the weapons is two fold. Number 1, we do not cover all the striking tools, so that if you were to get kicked with a back kick to the torso there would probably be more broken ribs. Number 2, is in order to protect the opponent the padding alters the action. Look at boxing, if you were allowed to use bag gloves in boxing just imagine the knockouts and broken ribs.

 

[Marginal]

Number 2, is in order to protect the opponent the padding alters the action. Look at boxing, if you were allowed to use bag gloves in boxing just imagine the knockouts and broken ribs.

How would that signifigantly differ from a UFC style striking exchange?

 

[TX_BB]

You grapple.

 

[JanneM]

Why should we allow fist to the head in a first place in WTF style TKD sparring?
I think that would cahnge the fight so mouch that it would just not be the same anymore.

We have a goos sport at the moment and we should amke the best out of it. If someone wants to depart them selfs from the Kukkiwon and WTF then they are not practising taekwondo anymore.

I think there is only two types of taekwondo that can call them selfs taekwondo. Kukkiwon/WTF style and ITF style. Only those two organisations have some ground in calling them selfs taekwondo.
All others are just something that rides on the fame of taekwondo.
But all this is another topic.

 

[Marginal]

You grapple.

Doesn't answer my question. I asked how boxing with lighter gloves would differ from a UFC style STRIKING exchange.

Where are the shattered ribs?

 

[Miles]

We are living exciting times for competition taekwondo because continuance of Olympic spot is on a line and up coming world championships of poomsae.

Totally agree with you JanneM. Everyone should be brushing up on their Poomsae.

Miles

 

[TX_BB]

Doesn't answer my question. I asked how boxing with lighter gloves would differ from a UFC style STRIKING exchange.

Where are the shattered ribs?

If your grappling your not striking. If all you do is strike and not hold or grapple you will be doing more exchanges. The game is different in the UFC an in order to provide some form of safety the purposely diminish the tools of a striker.

 

[bignick]

We have a goos sport at the moment and we should amke the best out of it. If someone wants to depart them selfs from the Kukkiwon and WTF then they are not practising taekwondo anymore.

Exactly, if you only train under these rules you are playing the sport of taekwondo. And if you look at it through the sport mindset the current way is great...and there is nothing wrong with that. But I would rather see people be able to use more of the art of taekwondo.

I think there is only two types of taekwondo that can call them selfs taekwondo. Kukkiwon/WTF style and ITF style. Only those two organisations have some ground in calling them selfs taekwondo.
All others are just something that rides on the fame of taekwondo.
But all this is another topic.

Perhaps it is, but I think I need to say something. I think this is a pretty poor statement. There are WTF schools out there that aren't doing anything that looks like anything like taekwondo. There are good schools and bad schools in every organization. The forms may change, the emphasis may shift, the rules may be different, but it is still taekwondo. Organizations issue and recognize ranks and determine rulesets. That's really it. WTF isn't a style of taekwondo any more than the NFL is a football team. The ATA, KTA, and small schools without affiliation have just as much right to call what they do tae kwon do as the next school. Styles of taekwondo, like Chung Do Kwan, Moo Duk Kwan, and Sang Moo Kwan don't even really exist anymore.

 

[Marginal]

If your grappling your not striking.

Ah. So by that reasoning, boxing wouldn't change at all because boxers tend to clinch when they get in close?

(There are standup exchanges in the UFC which do not involve grappling you realize...)

 

[JanneM]

Exactly, if you only train under these rules you are playing the sport of taekwondo. And if you look at it through the sport mindset the current way is great...and there is nothing wrong with that. But I would rather see people be able to use more of the art of taekwondo.

By talking sbout the rules of WTF kyorugi we are refering to the sport aspect of the art.
Taekwondo is a martial art with different categorys and aspects of the art but we are not talking about them in this thred. I belive that we are talking about competition rules of WTF.

Perhaps it is, but I think I need to say something. I think this is a pretty poor statement. There are WTF schools out there that aren't doing anything that looks like anything like taekwondo. There are good schools and bad schools in every organization. The forms may change, the emphasis may shift, the rules may be different, but it is still taekwondo. Organizations issue and recognize ranks and determine rulesets. That's really it. WTF isn't a style of taekwondo any more than the NFL is a football team. The ATA, KTA, and small schools without affiliation have just as much right to call what they do tae kwon do as the next school. Styles of taekwondo, like Chung Do Kwan, Moo Duk Kwan, and Sang Moo Kwan don't even really exist anymore.

By refering to KTA I belive that you mean Korea taekwondo association. That is a national member organization not a club or style and they are totaly different issue.
I don't eaven want to go to ATA. I mean I don't have any real contact in ATA except from the internet. I have met GM Paul Hong thou. He was nice enough guy but we met only breafly in Kukkiwon. But anywho those camo belts...

If there is taekwondo school that doesent have taegugs and yandja poomsae or ITF tul, then it should not be called taekwondo. It should be called something alse.
If there is a school that has poomsae of them own. they should not be called taekwondo.
If there is a school that does only competition training (starting from the beginners) they should not be called taekwondo. (I can understund if there is a group of fighters who wants to emphasis on fighting but they should practise atleast up to 1.dan to do so)
if there is a school that does only poomsae and not sparring they should not be called taekwondo
If there is aschool that has Kukiwon poomsae and ITF sparring or ITF tul and WTF sparring it could be called taekwondo but they should decide what they want to be or call them selfs something else.
etc...
See my point? Taekwondo is a set and you can't say that you practise taekwondo if you dont do all thats in the set. You can do extra. but you should follow Kukkiwon instructions of taekwondo guidlines. (Or if you are on ITF side. You must follow the teachings of Choi Hong-He.)

And I don't think that we shoulc eaven duiscuss about the KWans of today in taekwondo because they stopped excisting in the 50's.

 

[bignick]

If there is taekwondo school that doesent have taegugs and yandja poomsae or ITF tul, then it should not be called taekwondo. It should be called something alse.

Well, I guess since my school practices the palgwe forms we aren't really doing taekwondo...I'll have to find out what it is I've been doing then.

 

[JanneM]

Well, I guess since my school practices the palgwe forms we aren't really doing taekwondo...I'll have to find out what it is I've been doing then.

Well. In my oppinion no your not doing taekwondo as it should be done.
If you want to practise taekwondo as it is and call your selfs taekwondoin why not do the way Kukkiwon has planed taekwondo to be done?
Palgwe is a fine set of poomsaes but it has been replaced with taeguks by Kukkiwon years and years ago. (Yudanjas I believe you make as they are suposed to be made)
Do you think that you can really represent kukkiwon if you don't follow their guidelines?

(Now remembers. I'm not judging you or your teacher. I'm trying to make a point far beyond personas)

 

[Adept]

Well. In my oppinion no your not doing taekwondo as it should be done.

And now we get down to it.

Frankly, I don't think you get to decide what can, with any amount of legitimacy, be called TKD. So long as a school or style is similar to the style that originated in Korea after world war II, then, to me, it is TKD or something similar. To be honest, I've never really concerned myself with names of arts and styles. It's why I list my style in my profile as MMA.

 

[JanneM]

And now we get down to it.

Frankly, I don't think you get to decide what can, with any amount of legitimacy, be called TKD. So long as a school or style is similar to the style that originated in Korea after world war II, then, to me, it is TKD or something similar. To be honest, I've never really concerned myself with names of arts and styles. It's why I list my style in my profile as MMA.

You indentify your art as MMA. I see you have high respect for Bruce Lee and wish to practise like him. That is all fine. I also practise MMA and have high respect for the late great movie star.
Do you have some art that you practise or do you X-train or do you practise in some sort of lee/Inosanto based academy...?

I don't try decide what and who can call them selfs taekwondo but the deal with taekwondo is that it was made to bring all Kwans together. As from the very begining taekwondo has had it goal in unity. I consider ITF to be taekwon-do because Choi Hong-He was the inventor of the name taekwondo and that he departed in so early of the begining. He too had an indea of pure Korean MA like all the other masters who was involved with the unification.
To call some ripoff a taekwondo would just be wrong in my opinion.
In bignicks case I some what understund why they call the art they are practising taekwondo but what I don't understund is why they don't do taeguks if they want to realy be taekwondo and to do taekwondo as it is suposed to do these days.

 

[Mithios]

Well. In my oppinion no your not doing taekwondo as it should be done.
If you want to practise taekwondo as it is and call your selfs taekwondoin why not do the way Kukkiwon has planed taekwondo to be done?
Palgwe is a fine set of poomsaes but it has been replaced with taeguks by Kukkiwon years and years ago. (Yudanjas I believe you make as they are suposed to be made)
Do you think that you can really represent kukkiwon if you don't follow their guidelines?

(Now remembers. I'm not judging you or your teacher. I'm trying to make a point far beyond personas)

yes, the Taeguk poomse replaced the Palgue, but the Palgue's were brought back a few years ago( middle to late 90's) They are legal for rank advancement and in W.T.F./U.S.T.U.(USA T.K.D.) poomse competitions etc.