Very, very discouraged - It seems Taekwondo is not for me

[Instructor]

OP, Tae Kwon Do is a good system but IMHO it favors lighter more agile fighters, particularly at the higher ranks, where the spinning and jump spinning techniques come in. If you have a more substantial body type, you should shop around, some systems favor stouter types who aren't so inclined to jump around.

 

[Dirty Dog]

OP, Tae Kwon Do is a good system but IMHO it favors lighter more agile fighters, particularly at the higher ranks, where the spinning and jump spinning techniques come in. If you have a more substantial body type, you should shop around, some systems favor stouter types who aren't so inclined to jump around.

I'm 60 years old, 6'1" and 220 pounds.
One of my first Dans is 6'6" and 310. He played lineman at his university.
What's that you were saying?

I think you will have a very difficult time finding a TKD school that doesn't teach the kicks and the variants at low levels. Something like a jump spinning back kick is really not difficult.

This fellow is a 1st Dan KKW. Not exactly what you'd call a higher rank.

No idea who this fellow is. But he doesn't seem to fit your profile either.

If you're talking about stuff like tornado kicks, then surely you know that those are more tricking than Martial Art. And that they're not a part of the curriculum required by any TKD organization I am familiar with.
It is a myth that TKD in any way requires students to perform those kicks. They're fun, practicing them can be good for balance and explosive power generation, and they look cool in demos. But you are rarely, of ever, going to see them used in anything serious.

 

[Instructor]

I'm 60 years old, 6'1" and 220 pounds.
One of my first Dans is 6'6" and 310. He played lineman at his university.
What's that you were saying?

I think you will have a very difficult time finding a TKD school that doesn't teach the kicks and the variants at low levels. Something like a jump spinning back kick is really not difficult.

This fellow is a 1st Dan KKW. Not exactly what you'd call a higher rank.

No idea who this fellow is. But he doesn't seem to fit your profile either.

If you're talking about stuff like tornado kicks, then surely you know that those are more tricking than Martial Art. And that they're not a part of the curriculum required by any TKD organization I am familiar with.
It is a myth that TKD in any way requires students to perform those kicks. They're fun, practicing them can be good for balance and explosive power generation, and they look cool in demos. But you are rarely, of ever, going to see them used in anything serious.

Go easy Dirty Dog, I'm not saying big folks can't kick and fly with the best of them it's just some of us prefer life on Earth. I'm roughly your size and have a 1st Dan in TKD but I don't fly like I used to.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Go easy Dirty Dog, I'm not saying big folks can't kick and fly with the best of them it's just some of us prefer life on Earth. I'm roughly your size and have a 1st Dan in TKD but I don't fly like I used to.

Right, but the problem is your assertion that it actually matters. It doesn't.

 

[Instructor]

Right, but the problem is your assertion that it actually matters. It doesn't.

I did not mean to assert anything it was just my opinion and it still is.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I did not mean to assert anything it was just my opinion and it still is.

OK, so can you provide examples (or even an example) of any TKD system that requires those techniques?

 

[Instructor]

OK, so can you provide examples (or even an example) of any TKD system that requires those techniques?

Nope

 

[Dirty Dog]

Nope

So an opinion devoid of any real world basis. Gotcha.

 

[TenHands]

I think doing a more hands-based martial art would be better for you. While Taekwondo requires a certain degree of athleticism, Karate is pretty versatile in terms of the physical ability requirement. Taekwondo is a hard, structured art while Karate tends to be quite fluid, with people sort of "choosing their own path" at the black belt level.
Other arts I'd recommend are boxing, Kung Fu (Southern style, again more hands less feet), Soo Bahk Do (more gentle version of Taekwondo), Tai Chi, etc...

 

[drop bear]

You are going to be better at physical activity if you are abit lighter and a bit fitter. And training will do that.

So if you are training to say be better at TKD then........

 

[Dirty Dog]

I think doing a more hands-based martial art would be better for you. While Taekwondo requires a certain degree of athleticism,

No it doesn't, any more than any other art.

Karate is pretty versatile in terms of the physical ability requirement.

So is TKD.

Taekwondo is a hard, structured art while Karate tends to be quite fluid, with people sort of "choosing their own path" at the black belt level.

Just flat out wrong. TKD practitioners do exactly the same thing. Excluding the Koryu arts, I suspect just about all arts do.

Other arts I'd recommend are boxing, Kung Fu (Southern style, again more hands less feet), Soo Bahk Do (more gentle version of Taekwondo), Tai Chi, etc...

Your characterization of Soo Bahk Do is 100% wrong. SBD - and Tang Soo Do, from which SBK evolved - are not in any way, shape, or form versions of TKD. TSD evolved from Shotokan, with a bit of northern Chinese influence. Because that is what the founder, GM Hwang Kee, studied. SBD evolved from TSD. TKD/TSD/SBD all share some common roots in Shotokan, but they're different arts.

 

[lklawson]

No, there really isn't. The training the founders received is pretty well known. Shotokan. Judo. Kendo. Northern Chinese. None of the claims to mysterious Taekkyeon instruction received from a Secret Master who lived on top of a mountain have any real credibility. It's been acknowledged that those claims were made in an attempt to differentiate TKD from the arts taught by the people who conquered Korea and suppressed the native culture.

To be fair, maybe it's not as well known as might be assumed. When I studied Tang Soo Do in the early 80's, the handbook specifically told me that the art was basically thousands of years old and GM Hwang Kee took the Soo Bak Do he learned as a youth and combined it with Chinese methods which he learned when he fled the Japanese to China during WWII.

Pretty much all of it was either a lie or, um... "stretching the truth." But there it was my handbook and, being a teenager, I just took it at face value. It wasn't until much later that I learned the truth.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Instructor]

To be fair, maybe it's not as well known as might be assumed. When I studied Tang Soo Do in the early 80's, the handbook specifically told me that the art was basically thousands of years old and GM Hwang Kee took the Soo Bak Do he learned as a youth and combined it with Chinese methods which he learned when he fled the Japanese to China during WWII.

Pretty much all of it was either a lie or, um... "stretching the truth." But there it was my handbook and, being a teenager, I just took it at face value. It wasn't until much later that I learned the truth.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

A lot of stuff we were taught in the 80's was misleading. History is a dodgy subject and martial arts history is dodgier than most.

 

[dvcochran]

To be fair, maybe it's not as well known as might be assumed. When I studied Tang Soo Do in the early 80's, the handbook specifically told me that the art was basically thousands of years old and GM Hwang Kee took the Soo Bak Do he learned as a youth and combined it with Chinese methods which he learned when he fled the Japanese to China during WWII.

Pretty much all of it was either a lie or, um... "stretching the truth." But there it was my handbook and, being a teenager, I just took it at face value. It wasn't until much later that I learned the truth.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

More to the point with any and all martial arts history, the claim is argumentative. Each and every style of fighting can draw some sort of line to the methods of fighting used thousands of years ago. In this respect, there is no differentiation. I have never read any definitive proof that the pictures seen carved cave walls have anything to do with modern TKD.

In my case, it was drilled into me that TKD originated when ancient serfs were taught how to kick someone off their horse and/or knock down the horse with a kick to level the field of play. This was taught by monks to overthrow the rulers and/or kings of the time. Truth or fiction? I have no idea, but I suspect it lies somewhere in the middle. Regardless, the monks had to learn from someone or for some reason.

Our schools, while deeply seated in MKD/TKD, have a cool connection to Kung Fu (through our GM's training). I do like the methodology of applying animal movements. Just by observation, a person could have learned techniques to catch the day's food.

Makes sense to me but really depends on how far back you want to go.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

To be fair, maybe it's not as well known as might be assumed. When I studied Tang Soo Do in the early 80's, the handbook specifically told me that the art was basically thousands of years old and GM Hwang Kee took the Soo Bak Do he learned as a youth and combined it with Chinese methods which he learned when he fled the Japanese to China during WWII.

Pretty much all of it was either a lie or, um... "stretching the truth." But there it was my handbook and, being a teenager, I just took it at face value. It wasn't until much later that I learned the truth.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I remember a similar tale about my first art in the late 90s. Without going into specifics, the art was an amalgamation kempo style, meaning it was actually formed in the mid 1960s. The tale I heard though, along with what the handbook explicitly states, is that the art goes back a thousand years and I think even had that "mystical travelling hermit/warrior" piece to it.

 

[lklawson]

Yup, all true. I guess my point was that, unless you have some reason to doubt the "official" history, you might never be exposed to the fact that TKD/TSD/etc. are heavily Shotokan derivatives.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Flying Crane]

I remember a similar tale about my first art in the late 90s. Without going into specifics, the art was an amalgamation kempo style, meaning it was actually formed in the mid 1960s. The tale I heard though, along with what the handbook explicitly states, is that the art goes back a thousand years and I think even had that "mystical travelling hermit/warrior" piece to it.

I guess it depends on how you choose to interpret these things. To be fair, they do go back a long time. Just how long is often hard to nail down, but they were all built on something that came before, and so on back into time. So their roots are quite old. But the art as it is practiced today, not so old. Perspective and context are important.

Often there is an attempt to link the origin with someone or something famous or of an implied power or strength. In the Chinese arts it is often a famous general or a mysterious monk. But these claims are difficult, if not impossible, to support in most cases. So that is what is misleading. Trying to claim that specific link to the past, or that these things have been handed down unchanged and in an unbroken lineage from ancient times, cannot be supported.

 

[Dirty Dog]

To be fair, maybe it's not as well known as might be assumed. When I studied Tang Soo Do in the early 80's, the handbook specifically told me that the art was basically thousands of years old and GM Hwang Kee took the Soo Bak Do he learned as a youth and combined it with Chinese methods which he learned when he fled the Japanese to China during WWII.

Pretty much all of it was either a lie or, um... "stretching the truth." But there it was my handbook and, being a teenager, I just took it at face value. It wasn't until much later that I learned the truth.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Sure, 30-40 years ago the silly claims were being made. But by now, I think it unlikely that anyone associated with these arts still believes it.

 

[lklawson]

Sure, 30-40 years ago the silly claims were being made. But by now, I think it unlikely that anyone associated with these arts still believes it.

Well...

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Sure, 30-40 years ago the silly claims were being made. But by now, I think it unlikely that anyone associated with these arts still believes it.

You would think so, given that accurate information is much easier to find these days. Unfortunately (as we've seen for all sorts of non-martial arts info) misinformation is also easier to disseminate as well. This was the first result I found when I did a search for taekwondo history.