As stated previously in this thread, Traditional TKD can be a bit hard to define.. . It is a common term used to delineate from Sport TKD, but there were many fragmentations and permutations long before TKD became an olympic sport. When we look at the original gyms that opened up after the Japanese occupation of Korea, all of them were teaching some form of Karate. I do not know, and I doubt anyone that wasn't there does either, what other things were added into the amalgamation that became Kong Soo Do and Tang Soo Do. My Kwan Jang Nim was a member of the Moo Duk Kwan and was an instructor in the ROK. When he came the the U.S. in the late 1960's he immediately had to change how he taught MDK TKD. He was losing students left and right. When he asked a fellow MDK master who was also in the U.S. at the time, GM Kyong Won Ahn replied that "you cannot teach Americans the same way you taught in Korea, they are too soft."
So from that perspective, no one in America was actually taught "Traditional" anything. The watering down process had begun as soon as it set foot in the U.S.
That being said, I started under Kwan Jang Sok Ho Kang in 1985. We were taught traditional Shotokan form sets: Kicho Hyungs, Pyung Ahn Hyungs, Naihanchi Hyungs, Bassai Hyung, Ship Soo Hyung, Rohai Hyung, Chinto Hyung, Kang Song Kun Hyung.. . We did a lot of sparring (only protective gear was a cup) and breaking.. . Self defense and forms as well.
Things were not easy, but from what all of my instructors have told me it was even much watered down from the late 1960's when Kwan Jang Nim first started teaching over here. But that is a discussion for another thread.
I suppose my point is, what defines TRADITIONAL TKD? TKD under General Choi? TKD before the unification of the styles? KTA TKD? KKW TKD? ITF? WTF? It all fragmented so quickly while it was still in it's infancy.
My personal lineage is one from Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do, which is basically the bastard child of the unification process. Hwang Kee didn't want to unify under Choi, some of Hwang Kee's instructor's did though. When his instructors left, they kept the name Moo Duk Kwan, but left Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do and adopted the name Tae Kwon Do. I personally don't care what name you use. The only purpose the name serves is a road map of where you came from (which has its merit).
As for technique difference, many of the "traditional" schools adopted sport aspects over the course of time. We did not, although my Kwan Jang Nim was on the U.S. Olympic Committee in 1988 and in 1992.. . He had hoped that the Olympics would bring TKD into a new age, but when it did, he didn't like what it had become. "Chicken Fighting" is what he called it.
Again, I don't care what you call it. Sport TKD is a great SPORT. The issue comes in when, like many schools, it isn't strictly a SPORT school. There are elements of an art mixed in with the sport. Then it becomes murky as to how effective is the "art" because so much emphasis is being put on the "sport."
I am sure there are schools out there that blend the sport aspect and the art aspect well. But, IMHO, that is a difficult task.
Point in case, I competed in the Junior Olympics as a teen. Nearly every match I lost points due to "excessive contact." This was my first and only experience in the "sport," and I sparred just as I always sparred in class and in traditional tournaments. My limited experience with the sport left me with the feeling that the art and the sport were truly two different animals.
