TKD and myth

[terryl965]

What is the biggest myth people have with TKD and if you could change the Myth into a positive how and why would you do it?
Terry

 

[Marginal]

"TKD people cannot use their arms."

That's a really annoying one.

The jumpkick was invented to knock people off horses myth ranks up there with the palm strike to the nose driving bone into the brain too though. Stuff that has no basis in fact should be discouraged.

 

[terryl965]

"TKD people cannot use their arms."

That's a really annoying one.

The jumpkick was invented to knock people off horses myth ranks up there with the palm strike to the nose driving bone into the brain too though. Stuff that has no basis in fact should be discouraged.

Ok what would you do today to change those myths.
Terry

 

[Marginal]

For the first, work to change the tournament sparring rules so that punching would have more exposure on higher levels of exposure. It seems that global tournament requirements are the most effective ways in shifting ends and means in regular practice. Perhaps add in a hoshin sul round (not prearranged stuff, that'd be pointless) to further encourage refinement of hand techniques etc.

For the second, point out how at odds those myths are with fact and historical precedent. Shorter horses doesn't really explain why the Spartans etc never bothered trying jumpkicking people off hroses rather than adopting the more boring, use of tools like spears to do that job. (How did the Chinese develop the spear with the Koreans managing never to come across the concept?)

 

[evenflow1121]

"TKD people cannot use their arms."

That's a really annoying one.

The jumpkick was invented

Hah, I know an instructor in south florida Rouben, that could prove a lot of those people wrong. Actually TKD from what I have seen is quite practical, you could use it as a self defense art like any other, it just like any other style depends on who is teaching it. I ve seen some really good TKD instructors teach very good self defense techniques, and even incorporate stuff like ground fighting into their curriculum.

 

[Marginal]

Hah, I know an instructor in south florida Rouben, that could prove a lot of those people wrong. Actually TKD from what I have seen is quite practical, you could use it as a self defense art like any other.

Yeah, but that plays back into the myth since an "informed" expert would sagely then point out that "He's not doing TKD anymore. Classical TKD doesn't have those attacks or techniques".

Wasn't aware that TKD was a dead art.

 

[evenflow1121]

Dude, who cares what people say about it, are you learning self defense, are you getting quality training, are you becoming a better person and growing as a result of TKD? If so that is all that should matter.

 

[Marginal]

Isn't character building just another myth? Any group activity tends to build similar amounts of character. Boy scouts, summer camp, kumbiayah club...

 

[Kacey]

The myth that annoys me most is probably the one many junior martial artists have - that a black belt makes the wearer invincible. Also, many non-MA people seem to think that martial arts in general are effective against weapons - many people have said things like "Really? A black belt? So if someone comes at you with a gun, you can beat the crap out of them, right?" They seem quite distressed when I disagree with them. A belt is a piece of cloth - the knowledge and skill it represents vary by the wearing and the integrity of the system and association - but black belts don't come with batteries, force fields, or anything else that would make the wearer untouchable. This particular misconception really annoys me.

 

[Shu2jack]

The myth that TKDers only kick, followed by accusations that you were not really doing TKD if you show any skill in anything other than kicking.

In other words, TKD=incompetence when it comes to fighting. So if you are competent you are not TKD.

In my mind, TKD is a way of life. In life one should always be growing. With growth comes change. Growing and changing doesn't make me not "me".

I agree with Marginal, the tournament rules need to change. It will be the quickest and most effective method of improving the art and changing people's view of TKD.

 

[cali_tkdbruin]

"You take karate?" or "You're a karate black belt? Wow, I don't want to mess with you since you're an expert, master karate guy!"

Uhhhh, NO, I'm not a karate guy thank you. And just because I've reached black belt, I'm a universe away from thinking that I'm a master, or actually being one.

How would I change this? Just try and educate those that are uninformed about the martial arts. Not all martial artists are karate guys ya know...

 

[tkd_jen]

"You take TKD? Are you a Black Belt?"

It seems that is the only color people know. The don't understand the progression through the color belt ranks and the symbolizm each holds. Black belt is so different from art to art and school to school. I always try to educate them what an honor and how much committment and dedication it takes to train in TKD. I will be honored when I earn my Black Belt and I continue to try to educate others and spread the love of the art.

 

[cali_tkdbruin]

"You take TKD? Are you a Black Belt?"

It seems that is the only color people know. The don't understand the progression through the color belt ranks and the symbolizm each holds. Black belt is so different from art to art and school to school. I always try to educate them what an honor and how much committment and dedication it takes to train in TKD. I will be honored when I earn my Black Belt and I continue to try to educate others and spread the love of the art.

Nice joon be stance BTW, and it seems from your comment that you're close to stepping up to the BB level because you understand all of the work that's involved in getting there, like all the hours, sweat, pain, bruises and martial knowledge you pick up along the way.

 

[Last Fearner]

My list:

Myth
#1. "Taekwondo is a new Art."
#2. "Taekwondo was created by General Choi Hong Hi."
#3. "Taekwondo comes from Shotokan Karate."
#4. "Taekwondo is only sport, and won't work in real life self defense."
#5. "Taekwondo only uses high, flashy kicks, and few hand techniques."
#6. "Taekwondo is useless at close range, and weak on the ground."
#7. "Taekwondo is more for fitness, and is becoming watered down."
#8. "The WTF is a style of Taekwondo." (< this one cracks me up) :lol:
#9. "The WTF is an organization like the ITF." (who are members of WTF?)
#10. "I studied Twi Kahn Dew for a year or two (I'm camouflage belt with three stripes), and I understand the art enough to tell everyone what's wrong with it, where it came from, and why the Masters don't know what they are talking about. I have personally visited a dozen or so Twi Kahn Dew schools in my small part of the world, yet I can tell you what the majority of the schools, and instructors are like."

Any of the above are equally offensive, and ridiculous myths in my opinion. What would I do to change them? Basically, not much. I don't mind correcting misinformation about the history, culture, philosophy, terminology, and general topics by posting on the internet, maybe writing a book, and continuing to teach genuine Taekwondo. However, I like the fact that so many people underestimate the abilities of a properly trained Taekwondoist - - makes it easier to surprise the heck out of them if they try anything stupid!
:btg:

CM D. J. Eisenhart

 

[Marginal]

#3. "Taekwondo comes from Shotokan Karate."

So, it came from Taekyon exclusively? Kung Fu?

 

[Miles]

My favorite myth:

"It won't hurt."

Miles

 

[MSUTKD]

Taekwondo was heavily influenced by Shotokan. The whole modern martial arts world was modeled after Japanese budo arts. Taekwondo is a new art but the lineages are not. Did it evolve from others? Yes, and it still evolves, right now. Talk to a Korean who lived through the Japanese occupation and does not “Koreanize” the history before Taekwondo. Tang Soo Do = Karatedo. Kong Soo Do = Karatedo. What makes Taekwondo unique is the study of these arts through sport. The lessons learned have given Taekwondo what it has today. Taekwondo books from 25 years ago do not have a problem addressing this issue, even the ones written in Korean. They admit the link to Karate and we should too. It does not devalue our art at all. In fact, it strengthens our lineages.

ron

 

[Marginal]

"Taekwon do was created thousands of years ago."

 

[Last Fearner]

Taekwondo was heavily influenced by Shotokan. The whole modern martial arts world was modeled after Japanese budo arts. Taekwondo is a new art but the lineages are not.

I respectfully disagree with you, sir, and it is not because I believe you are wrong. It is because I know that we are talking about two different things, even though you might not realize it. If you make the connection between "Taekwondo" and Shotokan, then I know that you are using the definition of the modern practice of General Choi's "Taekwon-do." By that definition, you are correct. His Oh Do Kwan, and his later ITF organization, along with each of the recent kwans were "heavily influenced by Shotokan, and other Japanese methods.

On the other hand, what I am specifically talking about is the Korean National Art, now called "Taekwondo," which is a "new" label expressly intended to refer to the ancient ways prior to any Japanese influence or involvement. Are there still some lingering effects of Japanese occupation on the practice, and methodology of teaching Korean Martial Art? Yes, and there probably will be for some time. However, the biggest confusion comes from the non-Korean practitioners, and general public who accept the written version given by General Choi, and many other "Tae Kwon Do" masters about what they believe Taekwondo is, and from where it originates.

The truth is, the original Korean methods of self defense, and Martial Art education are more than 2,000 years old, and whether it was called Subak, Taekyon, or by any other name before written history, the Korean government has chosen to call their ancient methods one new name - - "Taekwondo." Thus, we are not talking about the same "Kwan," the same lineage, or the same history. Your description of recent history is accurate (as I have studied that as well), but I am talking about an old thing, picked up, dusted off, and re-named.

Consider, if you will, this analogy. Twenty years ago, "Terry" finds three rocks that are estimated at being a million years old. They are unique rocks, and only found the area where Terry lives. One of Terry's rocks is very rare, and he calls it a "thing-a-ma-bob." He keeps the three rocks in his personal rock collection for about fifteen years. Then, his entire rock collection is stolen. The thief throws Terry's three unique rocks in with his own collection and calls them "widgets."

Five years later, Terry's rock collection is returned to him, but the rocks have been painted and are difficult to recognize. Terry's neighbor friends have rock collections of their own which they started collecting in the past two years. Chuck has a rock that looks similar to Terry's unique rock which Chuck calls "my rock." Chuck says, let's all combine our rocks and call them "Thingama-jigs" since it sounds like Terry's "Thing-a-ma-bob." So most of Terry's friends agree. Chuck travels alot, so they all agree to let chuck be in charge of the collection, and showing the rocks to people around the world.

Later, Terry realizes that Chuck is showing everyone his own rock called "my rock," and telling them that this is what a "Thingama-jig" is, and claims that he made this rock about two years ago by glueing two older rocks together. So, Terry decides to display his own rock collection, and let the world know that he has chosen the name "Thingamajig" to describe his unique rock collection.

Someone asks Terry, "how old is a Thingamajig?" Terry replies, the name is new, but I first found it 20 years ago, and it is estimated at a million years old. Everyone asks, "how can this be, since Chuck says he made it 2 years ago." Terry replies, "No, Chuck is talking about his Thingama-jig. I am talking about the Thingamabob that I discovered 20 years ago, and have re-named a Thingamajig. I'm still working on getting the recent paint off from the thieves, but this is my rock, and it is very old!"


My analogy is meant to clarify that the same word can be used to mean different things. If I study purely "Subak," or "Taekyon," or "Hwarangdo," most people would not disagree with the fact that they are very old. However, if I were to study all of these together and call this "Taekwondo" then the name might be new, but the art is still old. This is what the Korean Government has chosen to do. So we are simply not talking about the same definition of Taekwondo. In this sense, Taekwondo didn't "evolve" from anything. It is the ancient art renamed. IMHO, it is Korea's history, Korea's National Martial Art, and Korea's choice to call it what they want.

Thank you,
CM D. J. Eisenhart

 

[tkd_jen]

Interesting analogy Last Fearner.

This is from the WTF on the history of TKD:

http://www.wtf.org/site/about_taekwondo/history/ancient.htm