In my best Major Payne voice: Lost your weapon? That's why God gave you an enemy so that you can take his weapon and use it on him.
Taekwondo Doesn't work on someone skilled
- Thread starter martialartstutor
- Start date
Most of our troops can either already fight with fists etc or learn pretty quickly after going out 'down town'. There is very little hand to hand or unarmed combat taught.
SahBumNimRush
Master of Arts
Even if we were to exclude the fact that different schools train in different manners, which could produce different calibers of martial artists, there are other factors to consider when looking at an art such as Taekwondo.
One of which, being that the art is young and has evolved in many different ways over the past ~80 years. Why bother teaching it to the ROK army, national police, or the U.S. military stationed in South Korea during the Vietnam War if were not effective? During the Korean War, many of the pioneers and their senior black belts served in the military, many of which helped to develop Taekwondo's reputation as "a Killing Art."
For instance Nam Tae Hi, an early member of the Chung Do Kwan, co-founder of the Oh Do Kwan, was well known during the Korean War for his use of Taekwondo in battle. The battle of Yongmun Mountain comes to mind.
I'm not going to sit here and belittle the different "styles" of Taekwondo. It has evolved and fragmented along the way emphasizing Japanese martial arts kata and techniques, Korean martial traditions, Korean nationalism, sport competition, innovating techniques to better serve the sport, etc. Depending on which iteration of Taekwondo you pull lineage, your particular school may emphasize different aspects of the art. Much like the late night NASKA competitions televised on ESPN look dramatically different than a traditional Karate dojo that emphasizes traditional kata and bunkai training over the flash of rhythmic dance and gymnastic feats. I think you can extrapolate which one of the two would be more effective on the street from strictly a technique perspective.
My KJN has mixed feelings about the evolution of TKD. It is one of the most popular martial arts in the world, but with its popularity, the primary focus of the art has shifted to fit the goals of the masses, and that goal is different than it was in the 1950's and 1960's.
I have learned TKD from someone that has effectively used the art in war, self-defense, and sport competition. I know that it has its place in all three situations.
One of which, being that the art is young and has evolved in many different ways over the past ~80 years. Why bother teaching it to the ROK army, national police, or the U.S. military stationed in South Korea during the Vietnam War if were not effective? During the Korean War, many of the pioneers and their senior black belts served in the military, many of which helped to develop Taekwondo's reputation as "a Killing Art."
For instance Nam Tae Hi, an early member of the Chung Do Kwan, co-founder of the Oh Do Kwan, was well known during the Korean War for his use of Taekwondo in battle. The battle of Yongmun Mountain comes to mind.
I'm not going to sit here and belittle the different "styles" of Taekwondo. It has evolved and fragmented along the way emphasizing Japanese martial arts kata and techniques, Korean martial traditions, Korean nationalism, sport competition, innovating techniques to better serve the sport, etc. Depending on which iteration of Taekwondo you pull lineage, your particular school may emphasize different aspects of the art. Much like the late night NASKA competitions televised on ESPN look dramatically different than a traditional Karate dojo that emphasizes traditional kata and bunkai training over the flash of rhythmic dance and gymnastic feats. I think you can extrapolate which one of the two would be more effective on the street from strictly a technique perspective.
My KJN has mixed feelings about the evolution of TKD. It is one of the most popular martial arts in the world, but with its popularity, the primary focus of the art has shifted to fit the goals of the masses, and that goal is different than it was in the 1950's and 1960's.
I have learned TKD from someone that has effectively used the art in war, self-defense, and sport competition. I know that it has its place in all three situations.
I'm curious what your Military background is.
Doesn't really matter, since it's really easy for anyone interested to check wiki and see that a 1st Degree BB in the Marine Corps combatives program is awarded after 40 hours of training. 40. Hours.
40.
The military spends very little time on unarmed combat. And there's no reason why that should change.
I think it does matter. You don't know what you are talking about. What is you're marine corp background? I'll ask again.
Still curious what your military background is.
Last edited:
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
OK so if I can pull the source off the internet.
Marine Corps Martial Arts Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Then that is kind of a done deal. If a marine wants to say that is wrong. You need either a really good reason why it is wrong or a better source that contradicts it.
If you are going down the path that only marines could understand mc map. Or that it is super different to any other system out there and so trains elite fighters in 40 hours then you may need more than being a marine to back that up.
Wikipedia. Really???
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
LOLVs what?
I grew up an Air Force brat. When I graduated HS I tried to enlist and was told that I could not because with one eye I wouldn't be able to fight or shoot.
Still doesn't matter. There's no Super Secret Squirrel Eyes Only training involved here. We're talking about generic military unarmed combat training.
Are you seriously about to claim that the average recruit gets more than a few hours of training in unarmed combat?
This appears to be the current requirements for MCMAP training, straight from the horses mouth.
All Marines must achieve at least tan belt, which requires 27.5 hours of supervised instruction. To reach black belt would require a minimum of 104.65 hours of supervised instruction. (I say minimum, because each rank above tan also requires "sustainment hours", which I presume is time spent periodically reviewing the material for that rank. I suspect that most folks who get to black belt will have had to put in some sustainment hours for their previous ranks.)
The MCMAP does include armed as well as unarmed material. If we have any current Marines on the board, perhaps they can tell us what percentage of those hours are spent doing unarmed work.
Anyway, the total time spent training unarmed combat does not appear to be very high.
Note - from my own experience in the National Guard 30 years ago, we had exactly zero unarmed combat training (at least for my MOS). We did have 6 hours of bayonet training mandated for basic training. As I recall, we spent most of the time learning how to get into formation for training and then performing a few basic strikes on command.
Air force brat? i knew you didnt have military experience. But you talk a good game. LOL
Considering the facts that:
TKD's effectiveness is spoken for
*: The whole "Well they still have to take in other stuff" argument is irrelevant. Even Muay Thai fighters have to take more boxing and change how they fight for international kickboxing compared to standard Muay Thai rules. Every style on the planet has to adapt to a new environment when taken out of its usual one
- There are records of Korean soldiers using traditional TKD back in the day successfully against other trained soldiers
- Scores of fighters in various settings using various styles TKD as their base in the ring(and many, many more using various parts of tkd)*
- TKD is listed as one of the arts MCMAP draws its technique from in both wikipedia and the flipping handbook
TKD's effectiveness is spoken for
*: The whole "Well they still have to take in other stuff" argument is irrelevant. Even Muay Thai fighters have to take more boxing and change how they fight for international kickboxing compared to standard Muay Thai rules. Every style on the planet has to adapt to a new environment when taken out of its usual one
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
40 hours isnt really counted as experience.
See, now you're just being silly. Have fun.
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
Some MA teachers only teach form without application?- Latest: Kung Fu Wang
-
