Self Defense in TKD class

[KGTKD]

We opened up a school about 7 months ago and have been very successful (about 70 students as of today). We don't do a potpourri of martial arts; we strictly teach Olympic Style TaeKwonDo (Kyroogi and Poomse) with some Traditional TaeKwonDo (chechumsugi). How necessary is teaching Self-Defense (such as small joint manipulation: choke holds, wrist locks, arm bars) to having a successful school (future black belts)? Our students come twice a week and it would be difficult to teach quality sparring, poomse, PLUS self defense in order to prepare our kids for their next rank. What do you all think? Also, we do teach few practical self defense skills (eye gouging, pressure points) briefly in order to give kids/adults tools in case they are in a bad situation. I just don't feel that teaching an 8 year old a wrist lock is going to get him out of a bad situation with an adult.

 

[Aikicomp]

We opened up a school about 7 months ago and have been very successful (about 70 students as of today). We don't do a potpourri of martial arts; we strictly teach Olympic Style TaeKwonDo (Kyroogi and Poomse) with some Traditional TaeKwonDo (chechumsugi). How necessary is teaching Self-Defense (such as small joint manipulation: choke holds, wrist locks, arm bars) to having a successful school (future black belts)? Our students come twice a week and it would be difficult to teach quality sparring, poomse, PLUS self defense in order to prepare our kids for their next rank. What do you all think? Also, we do teach few practical self defense skills (eye gouging, pressure points) briefly in order to give kids/adults tools in case they are in a bad situation. I just don't feel that teaching an 8 year old a wrist lock is going to get him out of a bad situation with an adult.

It all depends on how well you would like your students to be prepared for a life and death situation on the street. Kata, sparring and tournaments are fine but, IMO self-defense is more important.

It also depends on what you as a teacher are more concerned with... rank for your students or skills that will get them home to their loved ones.

Sparring and kata alone will not give them the tools they need to survive a confrontation on the street where there are no rules and no absolutes. I have seen this type of training and they are most of the time poorly prepared for the street.


Michael

 

[bluekey88]

I don't know how improtant it is to run a successful school (plenty of TKD schools only focus on the sparring), but I feel self-defense is really important for teh art as a whole and to leave it out is not a good thing. Besides, why do you think we do all those poomse? What are they for if not ofr cataloging self-defesne techniques?

I will go on to say that the school I am at is able to cover a bit of everything. The SD stuff is pretty good by and large. As is the sparring ans such. While we are not trying to crank out Olympic champs (none of our students have expressed that interest...and if they did, we'd send them to someone who could better train them for that level of competition), our competition team does pretty good at nationals. It's a delicate balancing act, but most of us are not going ot be Olympic champs....what with only a couple of slpots every four years....better to focus on what we need/can do.


Peace,
Erik

 

[StuartA]

If you state you are teaching a martial art, as opposed to a martial sport anywhere in your advertisng/literature, then you shoudl be teaching some SD related stuff.

People (new students/parents etc.) see martial arts as a way to protect themselves and thus by design, if we advertise that way or dont explain the difference to new students, then we should feel obligated to teach someone how to protect themselves properly. Doing that however doesnt neccesarily mean the things you listed, you have to decide for yourself if small joint manipulation, pressure points etc. are appropriate for SD, but I would suggest, if you are time limited, that you concentrate more on striking, vital points and release techniques! As well as some of the theory of Self Protection.

Stuart

 

[jks9199]

What are you teaching and how are you presenting it?

If you're presenting it as Olympic TKD, a sport derived from the martial art of TKD, minimal self defense is all you need. After all, you wouldn't expect a boxing gym, gymnastics club, or Olympic archery coach to teach people to teach real self defense skills.

But, if instead you advertise it as Tae Kwon Do -- then you have to teach the self defense side of it along with the Olympic sports elements.

 

[dortiz]

As to your point on an 8 year old and wrist locks. They may not have it down but how great to come out of 4 years of training with all the ground work in place. My eight year old may not throw me yet but he knows a circular wrist, arm bar etc. Thus the thought of this all coming together at 15 just scares the crap out of me... in a good way.
Thats my responsibility though. Why start from zero at the point he will be ready to use the tools I could have given him all along.
I also really like keeping the faith of the Martial Art. I like having to stress the reponsibility of what he is learning. To say it will be sport takes that burden and importance away a bit and really changes the game for me.

Dave O.

 

[Jphtkd]

I can only give an opinion on this matter, as this is an issue that each instructor that participates in competition or the sport of tkd must decide. I started my training doing Moo duk kwan with a very traditional korean instructor. He continues to be my instructor to this day. That being said, I spent many years competing in the USTU and I have a competition team at my school. I teach a mixture of Moo duk kwan, Hapkido, and Sport Taekwondo.

My personal opinion on the matter is that the sport has helped Taekwondo become one of the most popular styles in the world, and helps attract a demographic that the art does not. It also provides a meduim for students to receive the instant gratification that is so popular here in the US, in the form of medals and trophys.

If Taekwondo is to survive, it must adapt, and there is still a dire need for people to have the knowledge and power to defend themselves. Open up today's newspaper and you will see the reason why. To keep Taekwondo alive in the future, we must retain our roots, and to maintain a level of credibility, we must be teaching effective self defense tools. I can't speak for everyone, but about 90% of your student base will never compete on the national or international level.

I teach my students the history of Taekwondo, and as much of the philosophy behind the techniques as I am able to. I try to be non partisan and show them the benefits of both styles, and how competition can be a useful tool if it is done with the right attitude. I also heavily rely on the tenets of Taekwondo, and the principals of the Hwa Rang to ensure that I keep the right students in the school and weed out the people who are there just to fight.

Just my two cents, hope it is helpful in some way.

 

[astrobiologist]

It sounds like your focus is on a martial sport, competitive point fighting. As long as you let your students know at the door, before they start paying you, what your focus is, then you really don't have to worry so much.

I teach people how to hurt other people when it matters. That means I teach self-defense and lots of it. If you focus solely on point fighting, your students will still get a decent understanding of how to fight at long range, but they will lack the mid to close range knowledge. To each their own. If your students wish to get a better understanding of the mid to close range stuff, as well as ground work, you can then suggest that they seek that somewhere else. As long as you know what it is you teach and you do your best to convey good technique and critical thinking to your students, then your job is done.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

We opened up a school about 7 months ago and have been very successful (about 70 students as of today). We don't do a potpourri of martial arts; we strictly teach Olympic Style TaeKwonDo (Kyroogi and Poomse) with some Traditional TaeKwonDo (chechumsugi). How necessary is teaching Self-Defense (such as small joint manipulation: choke holds, wrist locks, arm bars) to having a successful school (future black belts)?

And what makes you think that those techniques are, in and of themselves, self defense?

What about the self defense techniques already present in taekwondo? If you are not sure what I am talking about and feel that wrist locks, arm bars and choke holds are self defense, then stick your olympic program and let your students know that they are essentially foot fencing.

Self defense is about more than just a technique set. Also, I seriously question the application of choke holds and arm bars in self defense. Nothing wrong with such techniques, but I find that schools such as yours throw them in and then like to claim that they now have a self defense curriculum. No offense, but that simply is not the case.

Submission moves do not equal self defense. Unless you are skilled with these techniques and can apply them in an SD scenario, then adding them will be a disservice to your students.

Our students come twice a week and it would be difficult to teach quality sparring, poomse, PLUS self defense in order to prepare our kids for their next rank. What do you all think? Also, we do teach few practical self defense skills (eye gouging, pressure points) briefly in order to give kids/adults tools in case they are in a bad situation. I just don't feel that teaching an 8 year old a wrist lock is going to get him out of a bad situation with an adult.

You have already established the wrong premise. You never teach self defense to prepare a student for a rank. You teach it to them to prepare them to defend themselves. Who cares about the next rank??

The eight year old is being prepared for self defense for life, not just as a child. If he or she is not ready for such techniques, teach them techniques that they can apply against an adult.

Good self defense means more than one steps and a handful of techniques. Self defense training involves realistic scenarios and noncompliant partners. It is amazing how much your perspective changes when your partner will not simply let you wristlock them and take them down. It is also amazing how different your perspective becomes when knives and guns are accounted for. Once you put either of those into the mix, the idea of going in for a choke or an armbar is a lot less appealing.

If you are teaching pressure points, are you qualified to do so? If your students are sparring with the air, then you aren't teaching pressure points. If you were never personally taught the curriculum, but picked it up out of a book or from a video, then you are not qualified to teach it.

Since your concern seems to be running a financially successful school,
you can run a financially successful business with just sport TKD. If that is all that you know, teach it and teach it well. Make them good little athletes and be sure to tell them that they are good little athletes, not martial arts practitioners.

If you're sport only be the best sport only school that you can be and set up your school accordingly. Honestly, you could ditch ranks altogether; they're meaningless in sports. Students good enough to compete at a brown or black belt level should be the only ones concerned with rank. Otherwise, its all about weight class.

Of course ditching rank means missing out on all those testing fees.

I do apologize if I come off as being a bit harsh. But reread your own post and think about what you are asking.

Take your focus off of preparing students for a rank. Rank should be a consequence of receiving it when they have earned it. The focus of your teaching should be on teaching the skills. Do that, and your students will all be better regardless of their rank.

Daniel

 

[astrobiologist]

And what makes you think that those techniques are, in and of themselves, self defense?

What about the self defense techniques already present in taekwondo? If you are not sure what I am talking about and feel that wrist locks, arm bars and choke holds are self defense, then stick your olympic program and let your students know that they are essentially foot fencing.

Self defense is about more than just a technique set. Also, I seriously question the application of choke holds and arm bars in self defense. Nothing wrong with such techniques, but I find that schools such as yours throw them in and then like to claim that they now have a self defense curriculum. No offense, but that simply is not the case.

Submission moves do not equal self defense. Unless you are skilled with these techniques and can apply them in an SD scenario, then adding them will be a disservice to your students.


You have already established the wrong premise. You never teach self defense to prepare a student for a rank. You teach it to them to prepare them to defend themselves. Who cares about the next rank??

The eight year old is being prepared for self defense for life, not just as a child. If he or she is not ready for such techniques, teach them techniques that they can apply against an adult.

Good self defense means more than one steps and a handful of techniques. Self defense training involves realistic scenarios and noncompliant partners. It is amazing how much your perspective changes when your partner will not simply let you wristlock them and take them down. It is also amazing how different your perspective becomes when knives and guns are accounted for. Once you put either of those into the mix, the idea of going in for a choke or an armbar is a lot less appealing.

If you are teaching pressure points, are you qualified to do so? If your students are sparring with the air, then you aren't teaching pressure points. If you were never personally taught the curriculum, but picked it up out of a book or from a video, then you are not qualified to teach it.

Since your concern seems to be running a financially successful school,
you can run a financially successful business with just sport TKD. If that is all that you know, teach it and teach it well. Make them good little athletes and be sure to tell them that they are good little athletes, not martial arts practitioners.

If you're sport only be the best sport only school that you can be and set up your school accordingly. Honestly, you could ditch ranks altogether; they're meaningless in sports. Students good enough to compete at a brown or black belt level should be the only ones concerned with rank. Otherwise, its all about weight class.

Of course ditching rank means missing out on all those testing fees.

I do apologize if I come off as being a bit harsh. But reread your own post and think about what you are asking.

Take your focus off of preparing students for a rank. Rank should be a consequence of receiving it when they have earned it. The focus of your teaching should be on teaching the skills. Do that, and your students will all be better regardless of their rank.

Daniel

Once again another great post from Daniel Sullivan! Very thoughtful.

 

[irishwolf08]

I don't know the dynamics of running a school, but I do know that self-defense is a very important part of my schools, and many other schools, curriculum. Usually we work on SD for a week every month, switching out to review week, forms week and sparring. Also, we've had people in our school attacked including the now sabumnim, so SD is taken seriously.
However, I as a student of a TKD school love the SD week, it makes me feel much better and safer. In order for us to get our next belt we need to show a mix of understanding our poomse, sparring (kicking combinations), and self-defense. I like to think I go to a well-balanced school.
I understand what you mean about teaching an 8 year old wrist locks and being in a bad situation with an adult, but, like everyone else said. Imagine that same 8 year old in 6 years or so. That kid will be pretty well off.
I believe in schools having some sort of SD as a just in case. If someone jumps one of your future black belts with a knife, what are they going to do?

 

[Balrog]

We opened up a school about 7 months ago and have been very successful (about 70 students as of today). We don't do a potpourri of martial arts; we strictly teach Olympic Style TaeKwonDo (Kyroogi and Poomse) with some Traditional TaeKwonDo (chechumsugi). How necessary is teaching Self-Defense (such as small joint manipulation: choke holds, wrist locks, arm bars) to having a successful school (future black belts)? Our students come twice a week and it would be difficult to teach quality sparring, poomse, PLUS self defense in order to prepare our kids for their next rank. What do you all think? Also, we do teach few practical self defense skills (eye gouging, pressure points) briefly in order to give kids/adults tools in case they are in a bad situation. I just don't feel that teaching an 8 year old a wrist lock is going to get him out of a bad situation with an adult.

Actually, it will - element of surprise and all that.

But to answer your question, your curriculum should include self-defense because that is the foundation of martial arts training. It doesn't have to be a "If he does this, you do this" sort of thing. It can be as simple as pointing out that a side kick to the head looks neat in sparring class, but a side kick to the knee is much more practical with a real attacker. Do stress training with your students to teach them what it will be like when they are attacked. Teach the concepts of "Distract, Release, Stun, Run".
Etc.

 

[astrobiologist]

It can be as simple as pointing out that a side kick to the head looks neat in sparring class, but a side kick to the knee is much more practical with a real attacker.

During a test once, we asked one of our students to think of a certain situation and asked what they would do. They said they would kick the attacker in the head. Not likely. We then explained and showed why this is one of the least optimal defense techniques. Point fighting is fun, but the only reason I have to kick an attacker in the head on the street is if their head is below my standing waist level.

 

[KGTKD]

Thank you all for your responses. Most of you all were helpful, others jumped on the attack, but I expected a little of that. We do not do point sparring, we only do olympic style sparring. At this point we devote about 2 days a month (which is a week for our kids) to self defense. Nothing fancy, nothing that will be added to their test, but basic pointers. I have been practicing TKD for a long time and had a pretty tough sd aspect to my black belt test. However, in this day and age, to me is much more important for a child to be sure of themselves (99% of the time, this takes care of bullies) and to be able to get out of a situation if one arises the quickest way possible with the least amount of harm. Again, basics: areas of the body that need the least amount of pressure to do the most damage etc. The 8 year old might be able to do a wrist lock when he is 15, but then again, the chances of him having a one on one attacker and come out okay is pretty slim. I would rather him get out of there fast. Someone mentioned teaching for rank, and how bad that was. We test our kids on our curriculum. If your test is your standard for a belt rank, then that is what you strive for. It is reinforcement for learning. If they do well on the test, that means that we are teaching it right. If most of them don't that means we need to modify our teaching strategy. We have many requirements for testing, including knowledge, protocol, vocabulary, kicks, poomse, breaking as well as olympic style sparring. I feel that its pretty comprehensive (as they take about 2.5 hours). I felt that many of you got on the defensive very quickly and it must of been for my wording. I especially want to thank one of the last people that commented saying how their school structures their month (one week sparring, etc). That is more of what I was looking for. BTW, we profit about 10 dollars from every belt test, because we do not consider ourselves a belt factory.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I agree with Mr. Sullivan. Unless you are a LEO you do not want to respond to a serious threat with something like a joint manipulation or arm bar. Some exceptioons apply. One exception might be that the principles used in those types of techniques come into play for some weapons defense, but now you are addressing an area of advanced training. Another exception is to know the principles of those techniques and chokes so that you can practice defenses in case the moron who attacks you tries one.
Still yet another example is a response to a non serious threat.

For most serious threat response stick with the striking curriculum.

 

[Flying Crane]

Unless you are a LEO you do not want to respond to a serious threat with something like a joint manipulation or arm bar.

hmmm... not a TKD guy myself, but at face value I completely disagree with this. Would you care to elaborate on your position? My disagreement might stem from simply not fully understanding your message...

 

[clfsean]

hmmm... not a TKD guy myself, but at face value I completely disagree with this. Would you care to elaborate on your position? My disagreement might stem from simply not fully understanding your message...

Ditto...

 

[Aikicomp]

I agree with Mr. Sullivan. Unless you are a LEO you do not want to respond to a serious threat with something like a joint manipulation or arm bar. Some exceptioons apply. One exception might be that the principles used in those types of techniques come into play for some weapons defense, but now you are addressing an area of advanced training. Another exception is to know the principles of those techniques and chokes so that you can practice defenses in case the moron who attacks you tries one.
Still yet another example is a response to a non serious threat.

For most serious threat response stick with the striking curriculum.

How did you come to these conclusions? I'm quite puzzled by this whole statement. Please elaborate.

Michael

 

[Earl Weiss]

How did you come to these conclusions? I'm quite puzzled by this whole statement. Please elaborate.

Michael

Every Ju Jitsu guy I ever met from several Gracies to my own instructor has told me that for a serious threat you need to finish the confrontation as quickly as possible. This is done with a strike (hand , foot, elbow, etc.) You can't be focusing on controlling someone while their friend(s) may be kicking the spit out of you.

Check out videos of assaults on the web. See how many were succesfuly countered with joint locks and chokes.

See how prison guards go in for cell extractions . See how they control people with joint locks or restraining holds -NOT.

Yes, MMA uses Joint locks and holds. But there are two important factors at play. 1. These guys are used to absorbing a lot of punishment during the few seconds it takes to apply it. 2. Rules prevent techniques that will neutralize many holds. How many people are going to maintain a joint lock if you stick your fingers in their eyes?

LEO's need to exercise some restraint due to potential consequences of their action. For the private citizen the only consequence of concern is survival.

 

[clfsean]

Every Ju Jitsu guy I ever met from several Gracies to my own instructor has told me that for a serious threat you need to finish the confrontation as quickly as possible. This is done with a strike (hand , foot, elbow, etc.) You can't be focusing on controlling someone while their friend(s) may be kicking the spit out of you.

Check out videos of assaults on the web. See how many were succesfuly countered with joint locks and chokes.

See how prison guards go in for cell extractions . See how they control people with joint locks or restraining holds -NOT.

Yes, MMA uses Joint locks and holds. But there are two important factors at play. 1. These guys are used to absorbing a lot of punishment during the few seconds it takes to apply it. 2. Rules prevent techniques that will neutralize many holds. How many people are going to maintain a joint lock if you stick your fingers in their eyes?

LEO's need to exercise some restraint due to potential consequences of their action. For the private citizen the only consequence of concern is survival.

Ok... that makes more sense to me now & I do agree with that idea.

The only cavaet to that is situations depend & sometimes a lock or control is the best solution, sometimes it's not.