Tae Kwon Do in MMA

[Shu2jack]

Interesting...but that doesn't qualify the art if they're not using the methods from it.

When you say "methods", what are you referring to exactly?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

When you say "methods", what are you referring to exactly?

I should have been more specific.

A particular technique alone, such as a back kick, does not qualify the art itself as having made an impact on MMA. Paulson has a zippy roundhouse kick, but that kick is also done in some of the other arts he's dabbled in.

If we see a person do something along the lines of a successful spin kick to the head, and that person studied TKD, we might be able to say that extensive training in TKD brought that kick out. It validates the kick (with proper conditions) and the person's past training towards developing that kick...but the art as a whole has yet to make its measure in the game. We aren't going to see MMA aspirants flocking to TKD schools in order to learn the art.

If you were to take a person who did nothing but TKD as their stand up game (and here I allow blending in of grappling skills), and they were to handle themselves well in the ring using TKD skills alone, then that would impress me.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Shu2jack]

If you were to take a person who did nothing but TKD as their stand up game (and here I allow blending in of grappling skills), and they were to handle themselves well in the ring using TKD skills alone, then that would impress me.

Well, when a TKD fighter decides to use the set curriculum and techniques (that are similar to many other striking arts) he learns and gears them for K-1, Pride, or UFC, then you will see a TKD fighter that can handle himself in the ring. Instead, most gear themselves for Olympic or point sparring and choose the techniques and methods that will work in those arenas.

I also don't think that TKD has recovered from the blow that MMA delivered to TMA and in the public's eye TKD sucks, so most of the young aspiring fighters will go to other arts that did well from the start. I think that if TKD is to get any respect in the MMA field, it needs to be within the next 5 years while many of the young TKD practioners who have focused only on TKD are still in fighting age. Otherwise those who want to go into the ring or just want to learn how to fight will go to other arts and long time TKD practioners will cross-train or move on to other arts instead of modifying how they train in TKD, destroying what effectiveness TKD can have.

 

[Marginal]

Well, when a TKD fighter decides to use the set curriculum and techniques (that are similar to many other striking arts) he learns and gears them for K-1, Pride, or UFC, then you will see a TKD fighter that can handle himself in the ring.

Losing proposition. When you do that, you produce a kickboxer.

 

[Shu2jack]

A kickboxer that focuses on respect, integrity, honor, self-control, humility, etc.

I didn't say that TKD had to have it's own unique style. I am just saying that a properly trainined person who has studied only TKD could hold his own. So what if it looks like kickboxing, or is. It is still TKD if they study the forms, one-steps, and other TKD material.

I guess an identity crisis is in order. But really, if you take all striking arts and gear them for a certain event for years, they will all look pretty much the same, as we will see as MMA becomes its own style.

 

[Marginal]

A kickboxer that focuses on respect, integrity, honor, self-control, humility, etc.

I haven't seen much evidence that practicing a do art generates this better than a boxing gym does. Call it sportsmanship and self-discipline, or what have you.

I didn't say that TKD had to have it's own unique style.

Neither did I. I said, it doesn't matter what you do to prove TKD ring effectiveness. If you do train a ring effective fighter, you generate a ring fighter. At best, you'd have a ring fighter that kicks with greater frequency.

So what if it looks like kickboxing, or is. It is still TKD if they study the forms, one-steps, and other TKD material.

It just won't convince anyone in the MMA set that TKD's an effective art 'cause they won't let you claim they're actually doing TKD.

They'll just say "You should've studied MT. Now you're just doing bad kickboxing."

 

[arnisador]

I have to agree. If it's successful, people'll claim it was MMA all the time. There's no winning.

 

[Shu2jack]

Maybe I will argue this at a later time, but right now I am tired and I think we are both on a totally different page. I think we are in disagreement of what TKD is and what needs to change in TKD to make it a ring effective art.

All I am saying is that if a TKD practioner;

-Conditions himself like he is going into the ring.
-Spars in TKD class with rules that allow him to punch to the head and kick below the belt and perhaps allowing grappling. Make sure it is at least "moderate" contact in the classroom.
-Makes sure to do his TKD drills with "aliveness"

then he should be able to hold his own in the striking game and in self-defense. You don't need to change TKD's focus, TKD's curriculum, or anything else.

So now if a TKD practioner does these things and can hold his own, how is it not TKD? What I am getting from you is that unless a person is dropping his hands, throwing jumpy/spinny kicks, and bouncing then it is not TKD.

 

[Marginal]

So now if a TKD practioner does these things and can hold his own, how is it not TKD? What I am getting from you is that unless a person is dropping his hands, throwing jumpy/spinny kicks, and bouncing then it is not TKD.

That's basically it. I've had that particular conversation a few too many times with MMA proponents already to beleive that they'd actually credit the result as TKD.

They'd just toss out gems like, "Why aren't they thowing down blocks like in the patterns?"

 

[Shu2jack]

That's basically it. I've had that particular conversation a few too many times with MMA proponents already to beleive that they'd actually credit the result as TKD.

I see what you are getting at now. It's closed-minded and unfortunate.

They'd just toss out gems like, "Why aren't they thowing down blocks like in the patterns?"

"Why don't you run around aimlessly in the ring like you do when jogging?"

 

[tradrockrat]

Well, I was doing fine reading this thread until the middle of page three.

Here's my issue. I've seen guys from all different walks of life and martial arts backgrounds throw spinning kicks, roundhouses, two legged take downs, arm bars , etc. That's why they call it MIXED MARTIAL ARTS in these competitions. A spinning back kick does NOT belong to TKD, nor does a clinch belong to Muay Tai. An arm bar is NOT the exclusive domain of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. Many Martial arts share techniques. MMA is about taking techniques that work for the individual fighter and using them together to defeat your opponent. They don't pretend to do anything else.

I get so frustrated when people say things like, "He's a wrestler, so he'll do real good." or, "He's a kickboxer, if he lands a punch it's all over."

Baloney!

They are MMA's. They have all had to learn other techniques to augment their skill set. There is NO REASON that someone who studied TKD couldn't augment his skill set to include grappling and go out and be successful in MMA. After all, "It's not the art that makes the man, but the man who makes the art."

This entire question is moot. In the beginning it had real merit because it was style versus style (though really it was one really good Jiu-Jitsu guy against thugs with one boxing glove on...). now it is about the better fighter. they all kick, punch, grapple, wrestle, choke, and go for submissions. In short , they are all MMA's.

You want to win MMA? Train to fight MMA.
You want to win Olympic TKD? Train to fight Olympic TKD.
You want to win the Heavyweight Boxing championship of the world? Get to know Don King...

 

[NotQuiteDead]

They'd just toss out gems like, "Why aren't they thowing down blocks like in the patterns?"

Whether or not many would use those blocks, the fact that they are in the patterns is evidence that they were intended to be used. If you were going to found a style, why would you have someone practice fighting one way while doing a form, but then expect them to suddenly fight a completely different way for real?

If someone who trains in only TKD for striking does well in MMA using TKD techniques then I wouldn't argue that his TKD training helped, but my guess is that he wouldn't be fighting anything like Choi had in mind when he created TKD.

 

[Shu2jack]

Whether or not many would use those blocks, the fact that they are in the patterns is evidence that they were intended to be used. If you were going to found a style, why would you have someone practice fighting one way while doing a form, but then expect them to suddenly fight a completely different way for real?

1.) As it has been said in other areas recently, some things serve a purpose other than direct fighting application.

2.) As a sport, you need to use techniques that will be more sucessful in that arena. Why would I choose techniques that don't work well in the ruleset I am going to fight in? In a fight, I will use the TKD techniques that would hopefull work best in a situation. If I was to pick to fight in a certain sporting event, I will pick the TKD techniques that will work with their rules.

3.) FORMS ARE NOT PRACTICE FIGHTING.

4.) The UFC or Pride does not give situations where some techniques would be used. For example, I have used the Knife Hand High Block to help defend myself against a drunk with a knife who was trying to grab me. I took the technique from the yellow belt form and modified it to the situation.

I don't think too many Pride fighters are going to be in the ring squatting while unaware untill the last moments that their (drunk) opponent may be about to knife them. In these situations certain techniques become viable because shooting in for a take-down and other things that MMAists have to worry about are not really an option.

 

[Marginal]

Whether or not many would use those blocks, the fact that they are in the patterns is evidence that they were intended to be used. If you were going to found a style, why would you have someone practice fighting one way while doing a form, but then expect them to suddenly fight a completely different way for real?

The basic motions can be applied more than one way.

If someone who trains in only TKD for striking does well in MMA using TKD techniques then I wouldn't argue that his TKD training helped, but my guess is that he wouldn't be fighting anything like Choi had in mind when he created TKD.

Going by Choi's memoirs, he tangled with Judo players more than once. I think he took more than just striking into consideration during TKD's formative process. The TKD encyclopedia does demonstrate ground fighting applications etc. They're not super advanced, but they are there. The question largely hangs upon which techniques are practiced, and why? Sweeps, takedowns etc in sparring? Gone for insurance purposes. Low kicks? Same. Does adding them back in really create "not TKD"?

 

[FearlessFreep]

The basic motions can be applied more than one way.

In our class on Monday, we worked with the very first motion in Taegeuk Il-Jang, with some minor modifications, into a self defense against a mid level punch. The "chamber" before the block became a deflection and trap, the downblock itself, with some modified hand motions became pulling the wirst down and in, and the foreward punch was re-targetted to the bicep. Just a small example but with some thought it's not hard to find practical application in the basic movements of forms

 

[NotQuiteDead]

Shu2jack,

1) If forms aren't for fighting they wouldn't contain punches and kicks. If you practice them for fitness etc. fine, but you'd be better off doing something that won't develop bad habits for fighting imo. But I'm sure that topic has been done to death.

2) Under what rule set are low forearm blocks useful? If you're fighting with certain rules or without rules, it doesn't matter. Blocking like that exposes your head.

3) See my response to number 1.

4) I wasn't talking about blocking an arm-height attack with your arm, I was talking about blocking an attack to your legs or groin with your arm. Reaching that low leaves your face open.

The basic motions can be applied more than one way.

When Choi made TKD, do you think he came up with a pre-arranged set of movements and then thought, "Hey, each of these movements can be applied more than one way!"? I think it was more likely that forms were designed as a way to practice techniques without hurting your partner, and that the movements originally had one application. I could go take a dancing class and make up fighting applications for the movements, but that's not what they were designed for.

Going by Choi's memoirs, he tangled with Judo players more than once. I think he took more than just striking into consideration during TKD's formative process. The TKD encyclopedia does demonstrate ground fighting applications etc. They're not super advanced, but they are there. The question largely hangs upon which techniques are practiced, and why? Sweeps, takedowns etc in sparring? Gone for insurance purposes. Low kicks? Same. Does adding them back in really create "not TKD"?

When Choi created TKD, do you think he designed the stances, footwork, etc. with the threat of low kicks and takedowns in mind?

Why can't you use takedowns and sweeps while sparring? Getting taken down is less dangerous than getting punched or kicked in the head.

In our class on Monday, we worked with the very first motion in Taegeuk Il-Jang, with some minor modifications, into a self defense against a mid level punch. The "chamber" before the block became a deflection and trap, the downblock itself, with some modified hand motions became pulling the wirst down and in, and the foreward punch was re-targetted to the bicep. Just a small example but with some thought it's not hard to find practical application in the basic movements of forms

Again, when the forms were made, do you think the makers picked movements that could be applied to any situation and then put them together, or do you think they picked techniques that they practiced and put them in order?

If I was going to develop a style and train someone in it, I would teach them techniques they could use, not a dance they have to find "hidden" techniques in.

 

[Marginal]

When Choi made TKD, do you think he came up with a pre-arranged set of movements and then thought, "Hey, each of these movements can be applied more than one way!"? I think it was more likely that forms were designed as a way to practice techniques without hurting your partner, and that the movements originally had one application.

Weird how more than one aplpication is frequently listed in that case. He envisioned one thing, then designed it on paper completely differently?

When Choi created TKD, do you think he designed the stances, footwork, etc. with the threat of low kicks and takedowns in mind?

As there are multiple low kick counters present as primary applications in the patterns, I have no reason to doubt that he took low line kicks into consideration.

Why can't you use takedowns and sweeps while sparring? Getting taken down is less dangerous than getting punched or kicked in the head.

Choi's idea of sparring was no to light contact. Can't really do a light contact sweep/takedown.

Again, when the forms were made, do you think the makers picked movements that could be applied to any situation and then put them together, or do you think they picked techniques that they practiced and put them in order?

No reason it has to be an either/or proposition.

If I was going to develop a style and train someone in it, I would teach them techniques they could use, not a dance they have to find "hidden" techniques in.

The techiques aren't exactly hidden.

 

[NotQuiteDead]

Marginal,
Why do you think Choi invented the patterns? My guess is that he invented it so that people had a way to practice their techniques on their own, like shadowboxing but with pre-arranged techniques. Techniques, not generic movements. I.e. to practice your punches, kicks, blocks, some grappling, etc. I don't think he picked a movement, looked for random applications, and then threw it in 'just in case'.

I just get sick of people saying their style can deal with any situation because "x" movement from "y" form could be used to do "z". The bottom line is if you don't practice those movements in those situations with a partner then you're probably not going to use it.

When doing patterns, do you think about the movements as punches, kicks, blocks, etc. or do you think of them as generic movements that you simply repeat and then later when attacked you will magically apply those movements in situations you've never trained for?

I asked about sweeps and takedowns because you said you can't do them for insurance reasons. Obviously injuries from takedowns that require treatment aren't that common. They are used without holding back all the time when training in various martial arts and sports.

 

[FearlessFreep]

I just get sick of people saying their style can deal with any situation because "x" movement from "y" form could be used to do "z". The bottom line is if you don't practice those movements in those situations with a partner then you're probably not going to use it.

Why do you assume people don't?

When doing patterns, do you think about the movements as punches, kicks, blocks, etc. or do you think of them as generic movements that you simply repeat and then later when attacked you will magically apply those movements in situations you've never trained for?

Both. Sometimes when doing a form I think "this is a punch", sometimes I alter my hands a bit and think "this is a trap" and practice it as such. There are a *lot* of form movements that are basically 'block-strike', where the blocking hand comes back into you as the strike goes forward and to me, I'm contantly thinking of the block as a trap and the pull back and strike as pulling the attacker into me as I strike forward. I mentally and physically work a lot of SJM into how I practice forms

I don't know about other schools but we treat forms both formally as part of the art, as well as practice in motions; and we explore and practice how to use those motions practically. My biceps are sore from the last two classes of having a partner trap my punch and counter strike me, all based on movements from simple forms

But *shrug* this is an overdone conversation. Those who don't like forms don't find value in them (or maybe the other way around). Those who (can) find value in them do so, and use them.

 

[Marginal]

Marginal,
Why do you think Choi invented the patterns?

Well, he didn't create them. He largely just approved them. Most were developed by various instructors. There was also intertia from the fact Shotokan had patterns, and so on.

My guess is that he invented it so that people had a way to practice their techniques on their own, like shadowboxing but with pre-arranged techniques.

I can only go by what he said his intent was. Generating new patterns was one way to differientiate TKD from its Japanese roots. The fact he bothered to list alternate applications would still indicate that he wasn't thinking that a technique had only one use.

Techniques, not generic movements.

To a point, you're right. A palm pushing block is presented as a palm pushing block. However, it still doubles as a palm heel strike in a pinch for example. Same motion, different application.

I don't think he picked a movement, looked for random applications, and then threw it in 'just in case'.

I think you're overthinking it. Choi presented the techniques with a primary application (the one you routinely practice in the form) and then secondary applications, which are incorperated into self defense and step sparring applications. So they're all trained, just not at the same time, as some things work better in two person drilling etc.

I just get sick of people saying their style can deal with any situation because "x" movement from "y" form could be used to do "z". The bottom line is if you don't practice those movements in those situations with a partner then you're probably not going to use it.

I've already said that if something's not trained, it's not going to be useful. But to say that they weren't intended to be there just because they've fallen into disuse... That's not accurate.

I asked about sweeps and takedowns because you said you can't do them for insurance reasons. Obviously injuries from takedowns that require treatment aren't that common. They are used without holding back all the time when training in various martial arts and sports.

Nonetheless, that's why they aren't routinely used in sparring. We break them out in self defense drills etc when we actually have mats down.