What are these techniques really for?

[sopraisso]

Hello everyone.

Since when I joined MT I've been willing to talk (discuss and ask, mainly) about many things, most about some kind of deeper understanding of what is practised tkd classes in my dojang. It's been a little hard to start with a straight question, because many of my issues relate to general practice of the art, but well, I had to start somehow. So here I am, dropping things as they show up to my mind.

So I ask you: how much of traditional core taekwondo techniques are really to be used when thinking of a theoretical real fight (or to say, real and effective fight techniques)? Which techniques aren't really? I understand WTF sparring rules (under which I train) are very restrictive (what honestly irritates me) but sometimes I feel they're even closer to a real use of fight techniques than what I usually do when practicing forms and kibon dong jak (attack and defense with upper limbs).

For example: I like practicing the stances, but most of them seem to have very little utility when thinking about real fighting. They seem lacking fluidity, most of them have feet plain on the ground (instead of putting the weight on the ball of feet, what I have already read and been advised to do by some black belts in my dojang), etc. Note that I'm quite a beginner in the art, and I understand that maybe I just don't get the real fighting content in this. In other hand, I believe I've seen consistent criticism about those techniques. There's even in my dojang what we call "gyeorugi jumbi" (I don't know if it's a standard name), which is "fighting stance". It makes me think: "if there's a 'fighting stance', what are the other stances for?".
I don't mean, however, I can't imagine those techniques to be ever used in a fight. But it seems to me to have very little use. I would like to deepen this a little more saying that I usually see full contact sparring videos, and I never see some techniques being used, although they're not even exclusive of taekwondo, but shared by many other martial arts.

So:
1) maybe those techniques don't really fit a real fight, or
2) those techniques are only used to provide correct postures or general body movement control, or
3) they don't really work, and are there just because it's the heart of the martial art, a tradition aspect, or
4) they do work, but are just not very often used today, because they're not in fashion or are not viable for competition sparring for some reason, or
5) they work great, but today no-one normally uses for any other reason (for example, a powerful are maki/montong maki could, say, break someone's striking limb).
6, 7) ...

I believe the main techniques I'm questioning are stances and... blocking. I've read something like "a powerful block is a kind of attack", but honestly I don't see myself being fast enough to block a punch to the face (with a, say, olgul maki) and in the following not being hit by the following punch, with the other hand of my opponent (imagine those turrent of punches we see around). By the way, I never saw anyone block in any kind of taekwondo sparring!

I've already seen some karate sparring (not full contact) where the fighters only use "traditional" stances (even horse stance!). It's beautiful and even seems effective, but I can't assure.

Assuming some techniques aren't for real fighting, <<<why>>> do we really train them?

I love taekwondo, but honestly, I like the idea of thinking in the dojang I'm to some extend learning something fighting in the traditional training parts (kibon dong jak, poomsae), even if in a controlled ambient (single opponent, no weapons, etc). Notice I'm not strictly talking self-defense. I understand the differences and, by the way, even if self-defense means no-rules and uncontrolled ambient, I don't think we always need to be killing machines to be able to fight, for example, against some untrained person. Maybe the best ambient to what I'm talking about is nowadays MMA competitive sparring.

My main concern is I practice a lot of kibon dong jak and forms in the dojang, and it'd be very sad I find out that it has nothing to do with fighting.
This has also something to do with other post I'm bringing within a few minutes (I'm gonna start writing right after this).
By the way, I have to appologize I just haven't searched the forum before about this, but I believe it's so good to discuss here, and I'd enjoy so much having your opinions.

Regards,
Sérgio

P.S.: I'm so glad it's weekend!!!

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Well I can obviously only comment on how we train, but we really dont do anything that I would say 'wouldnt work in a real fight'. I think even things that sometimes seem to have little meaning do actually have some purpose. I remember when I first started training I was skeptical on the stances (horse stance, front stance etc). I would come home after training in a low horse stance for an hour or two and my upper legs would ache and I would wonder what these stances could possibly have to do with 'real' fighting. Now, years on, I can train for long periods in those stances and have no pain afterwards because years of doing them have strengthened my upper legs. While I wouldnt fight in those stances, the extra leg strength would be very beneficial in a 'real' fight. Horse stance is also used in many self defence moves against wrist grabs, punches, kicks etc, as is front stance. I do come across the odd move in form which may not be overly useable in a real fight, but generally most things we train are applicable to real fighting.

 

[Cyriacus]

Hello everyone.

Hi

Since when I joined MT I've been willing to talk (discuss and ask, mainly) about many things, most about some kind of deeper understanding of what is practised tkd classes in my dojang. It's been a little hard to start with a straight question, because many of my issues relate to general practice of the art, but well, I had to start somehow. So here I am, dropping things as they show up to my mind.

*Proceeds*

So I ask you: how much of traditional core taekwondo techniques are really to be used when thinking of a theoretical real fight (or to say, real and effective fight techniques)?

You contradict yourself up ahead. WTF Sparring is a Sport. It is also essentially a practice in Ranging, and Coordination. NOT Fighting.
Some KKW Formal Sparring is not - Otherwise, your Self Defense comes from Hoshinsul, or 1-Step Sparring. If your Dojang teaches neither, well, Congratulations. Youve joined the worst kind of Dojang.

Which techniques aren't really? I understand WTF sparring rules (under which I train) are very restrictive (what honestly irritates me) but sometimes I feel they're even closer to a real use of fight techniques than what I usually do when practicing forms and kibon dong jak (attack and defense with upper limbs).

There are no Restrictions in Combat.
If somebody attacks you, they will not be following any given set of Rules. Therefore, if you think Sparring under a ton of Rules is somehow closer to fighting, I apologise, but you are wrong. Forms are a different thing again. Forms are not the Oracle. They are Bases. For example, a Low Block can be followed up by a Lunging Punch. Thats what Chun-Ji teaches you. It also teaches you 180 Degree Turns.

For example: I like practicing the stances, but most of them seem to have very little utility when thinking about real fighting. They seem lacking fluidity, most of them have feet plain on the ground (instead of putting the weight on the ball of feet, what I have already read and been advised to do by some black belts in my dojang), etc.

There are many kinds of Stances to go around. I cannot really comment on this - It could either be just bad decisions, or it could be people being lazy, or it could be that they want to practice coordinated disadvantage. But hey - At least youre not bouncing around

Note that I'm quite a beginner in the art, and I understand that maybe I just don't get the real fighting content in this. In other hand, I believe I've seen consistent criticism about those techniques. There's even in my dojang what we call "gyeorugi jumbi" (I don't know if it's a standard name), which is "fighting stance". It makes me think: "if there's a 'fighting stance', what are the other stances for?".

Fun Fact: You can fight from Parallel Ready Stance. Or, Junbi. Rather. Then theres Backstance, Catstance, Sidestance, Fixedstance, Forwardstance, and so forth. ALL OF THEM were designed to be useable.

I don't mean, however, I can't imagine those techniques to be ever used in a fight. But it seems to me to have very little use. I would like to deepen this a little more saying that I usually see full contact sparring videos, and I never see some techniques being used, although they're not even exclusive of taekwondo, but shared by many other martial arts.

There are only so many ways you can move your Limbs around. It has nothing to do with being Exclusive.

So:
1) maybe those techniques don't really fit a real fight, or
If this is the case, youre at a baaad Dojang my good man
2) those techniques are only used to provide correct postures or general body movement control, or
No. That is a sad excuse.
3) they don't really work, and are there just because it's the heart of the martial art, a tradition aspect, or
Traditionally, TKD wasnt designed to be a Sport by the majority of its Founders. Inefficiency is not some kind of Tradition, that would be ridiculous.
4) they do work, but are just not very often used today, because they're not in fashion or are not viable for competition sparring for some reason, or
Not in Fashion? Haha! Ok, ill take that seriously. Competition Sparring = Score Points or Win. Not Fight. Hence the number of Round Kicks in the WTF, depite the fact that Round Kicks are the easiest to block in the universe.
5) they work great, but today no-one normally uses for any other reason (for example, a powerful are maki/montong maki could, say, break someone's striking limb).
That does not mean it cannot be practiced as such.
6, 7) ...
This is the part where I ask what Techniques youre questioning, here. Also, do you get taught Hand Use in Sparring?

I believe the main techniques I'm questioning are stances and... blocking. I've read something like "a powerful block is a kind of attack", but honestly I don't see myself being fast enough to block a punch to the face (with a, say, olgul maki)

This may actually be a bad syllabus of training, if youre not being taught faster blocks.

and in the following not being hit by the following punch, with the other hand of my opponent (imagine those turrent of punches we see around).

Actually, the Second Punch is usually how you condemn your Opponent. But im guessing youre not being taught that

By the way, I never saw anyone block in any kind of taekwondo sparring!

I assume you mean WTF Sport Sparring.

I've already seen some karate sparring (not full contact) where the fighters only use "traditional" stances (even horse stance!). It's beautiful and even seems effective, but I can't assure.

It *is* Effective. Traditional Stances werent designed to look pwitty. Video Supplement:

Assuming some techniques aren't for real fighting, <<<why>>> do we really train them?

All Traditional Techniques are for fighting. Either youre at a place thats taken the Sport Only Route, or there is a misunderstanding.

I love taekwondo, but honestly, I like the idea of thinking in the dojang I'm to some extend learning something fighting in the traditional training parts (kibon dong jak, poomsae), even if in a controlled ambient (single opponent, no weapons, etc). Notice I'm not strictly talking self-defense. I understand the differences and, by the way, even if self-defense means no-rules and uncontrolled ambient, I don't think we always need to be killing machines to be able to fight, for example, against some untrained person.

Yeah, and like they care about your Health. What if they do have a Weapon? What if theres Multiple People? If you cannot Incapacitate them quickly, whats the plan then, Run? Yeah, right. Because that always works out so well. It sometimes does, but you may as well Jog if your Mentality is "Run".

Maybe the best ambient to what I'm talking about is nowadays MMA competitive sparring.

Thatd be a matter of Personal Preference.

My main concern is I practice a lot of kibon dong jak and forms in the dojang, and it'd be very sad I find out that it has nothing to do with fighting.

They all have to do with Fighting.

This has also something to do with other post I'm bringing within a few minutes (I'm gonna start writing right after this).
By the way, I have to appologize I just haven't searched the forum before about this, but I believe it's so good to discuss here, and I'd enjoy so much having your opinions.

Regards,
Sérgio

P.S.: I'm so glad it's weekend!!!

Does this offer some Retrospective?
Ultimately, different Dojangs teach different Idealogies.
Theres as good a chance you just have no Interest in that interpritation of TKD.

So try another one.
Or something.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Kukkiwon, WTF, sport tkd, whatever you want to call it, is a fantastic 'sport' and great 'sport' for people of all ages and genders but if your focus is 'fighting' and you train in this form then you will be forever questioning such things. Everyone I have met who does this form of tkd gets to to about 1st or 2nd dan and has the revelation that, in real terms, they really are no better at 'fighting' than before they started. If you go into this style of tkd understanding and accepting that you are primarily learning a 'sport' then you never have to come to terms with such things because you know what you've signed up for. If you really enjoy tkd and your main goal is learning to fight, then personally I would steer clear of 'sport' tkd, because there are many other forms that focus on 'fighting'.

 

[sopraisso]

Thank you for your responses.

Cyriacus,
I kind of envy you for your experience in your dojang. Unfortunately, althought mine is said to be among the most traditional and non-sport in my city, still I feel it has some kind of personality crisis, so our practice is said to be like "real" fight, but all in all we train basically respecting WTF rules, particularly when sparring.

Anyway, I guess you went a little too much into WTF issue. Maybe I didn't express myself well. I don't refer specifically to WTF or KKW. Actually I'm refering exactly to beyond WTF, coz I'm asking about stances and other moves (like blocks) I've never seen in WTF sparrings. And never seen in any taekwondo sparring video, actually. As I said, I understand self-defense has no rules. It's not what I'm talking about, either.

I believe, for short, I'm saying is: "do those taekwondo techniques work or not?"

I have never seen anybody doing "are makki", "montong makki", "olgul makki"!
I have never seen anybody using "dwit kubi". There are more unlikely stances. Not in WTF sparrings. Not in ITF sparrings (in YouTube, I mean ). Not in any kind of sparring or fight I've ever watched in my life!
I'm asking exactly about techniques that seem to be meant to fight (or self-defense, if you preffer). But I've just never seen such techniques been used in any kind of sparring and I honestly feel they'd be even more unlikely in a no-rules self-defense situation!
But maybe it's just because I've been not teached well yet, but why doesn't anyone do that?
As I said, I think MMA sparrings can give some good examples for my issue for now. Not because I'm specifically talking about MMA sparring, but just because it seems a good example of people using techniques that would need to be effective. I believe most kinds of "makki" are allowed in MMA sparrings. Why doesn't anyone use it? If there were various armed opponents in a no-rule situation such techniques would be more effective than in a MMA sparring? I hardly believe there could be such a difference. Moreover, I don't usually see fighters of any kind using most stances I practice. It can happen? I believe so, but it's unlikely.

Your video is great, and I thank you for the reference, but it seems to confirm what I said: basically everyone when fighting is using the same stances. Ok, sometimes they get of them and use... uh... no stance at all! Maybe I didn't notice some or other event, but in general that's it. More: there's certainly no kind of "blockin" in the video.
But here there is maybe some linguistic barrier. For "blocking" I mean "are makki", "montong makki", "olgul makki" and variations. I don't know yet how they call them in Enlish, but it's the same kind of blocks used in poomsae. Your video doesn't show any. Instead, it shows people assuming "in guard" positions, just like, for exemple, boxing. Just like I seem to see in any kind of fight where people hold guards (haha, not WTF, off course). That doesn't mean such blocks don't work, but sadly I just don't see them happening. =/


ralphmacpherson,

If I got what you mean, it's so sad in my city -- and in most of my country -- there's only WTF/KKW taekwondo. I've found some ITF/traditional schools, but they're in other states, far away. Sadly, that means I have no choice here. It has been already some months since I started thinking I'll have to practice by myself if I want a fighting approach. Anyway, I think even in this case the techniques they teach me at my dojang are part of most schools curriculum. I talk about the same stances, same blocks and other even more strange and doubtful movements, such as some we see in many poomsae forms.

I think maybe I should start an individual thread for each of such movements -- as long as I feel you all don't get tired of this!

Thank you again for sharing your experience.

 

[jks9199]

Your video is great, and I thank you for the reference, but it seems to confirm what I said: basically everyone when fighting is using the same stances. Ok, sometimes they get of them and use... uh... no stance at all! Maybe I didn't notice some or other event, but in general that's it. More: there's certainly no kind of "blockin" in the video.
But here there is maybe some linguistic barrier. For "blocking" I mean "are makki", "montong makki", "olgul makki" and variations. I don't know yet how they call them in Enlish, but it's the same kind of blocks used in poomsae. Your video doesn't show any. Instead, it shows people assuming "in guard" positions, just like, for exemple, boxing. Just like I seem to see in any kind of fight where people hold guards (haha, not WTF, off course). That doesn't mean such blocks don't work, but sadly I just don't see them happening. =/

You're not necessarily going to see textbook stances, blocks and techniques when applied outside of textbook scenarios, like one-step sparring exercises where the "attack" is simply a feed to do the "defense" against. But -- and this is a major issue I have with most training today -- if your fighting doesn't bear a reasonable resemblance to your training and practice, something is off. Again -- it may not be perfect, but you should be able to find elements done. I only watched a bit of Cyriacus's video -- but watch it again. Look for stances. Look at the structure supporting their techniques. I even saw some blocks... (look at 0:48 to 0:55 or so) And realize that the rules shape some of what they do and how they do it.

 

[sopraisso]

You're not necessarily going to see textbook stances, blocks and techniques when applied outside of textbook scenarios, like one-step sparring exercises where the "attack" is simply a feed to do the "defense" against. But -- and this is a major issue I have with most training today -- if your fighting doesn't bear a reasonable resemblance to your training and practice, something is off. Again -- it may not be perfect, but you should be able to find elements done. I only watched a bit of Cyriacus's video -- but watch it again. Look for stances. Look at the structure supporting their techniques. I even saw some blocks... (look at 0:48 to 0:55 or so) And realize that the rules shape some of what they do and how they do it.

You've really brought me some light here on this.
From back to beginning:
I even believe there can be some variety of stances in the video, but I must confess its very hard for me to distinguish them from just circumstancial variation of a single stance (what in my dojang we call "gyeorugi jumbi" -- fight stance). I would say the same for blockings. Blockings, actually, feel much more complicated, because of complexity of the motions. I imagine someone making "olgul makki" or anything resembling it. I have to live to see that. Actually, I even think it's something possible and I'm just not searching in the proper place: imagine a single high attack out of a sparring session. Maybe a high block could be efficient in that case, for example.

To be honest, I even believe my fighting could already have a better resemblance with what I train. But unfortunate -- and I know this is a particular case -- in my dojang I'm frequently stimulated to use typical WTF sparring "techniques", and this, I know for sure, distorts the fighting that's teached in classes.

Maybe I should look start a thread about how WTF drives me mad, haha. Honestly: I understand many people want sport tkd, but damn, in some places the popularity of sport tkd just leaves no space for "traditional" "fighting" tkd. I even wonder why such a popularity, once WTF "fights" are so boring! So sad!

Anyway, I apprectiate any others can give me some more opinions on this thread's issue.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

In short, the vast majority of what is taught should be applicable to a 'real fight'. The roundhouse kick, front kick, side kick, axe kick, hook kick, turning side kick, reverse punch, jab, upper cut, throat strikes, knife hands, elbows, low block, upper cover, x block, outide block, inside block etc, and all variations of these could all be used in 'real' fights. All these are also a large part of tkd curriculum at good schools. So basically, yes, what you are taught can certainly be used for 'real'. I would say where I train that 90% of our training would encompass moves (and variations of the moves) from the list I just mentioned.

 

[sopraisso]

In short, the vast majority of what is taught should be applicable to a 'real fight'. The roundhouse kick, front kick, side kick, axe kick, hook kick, turning side kick, reverse punch, jab, upper cut, throat strikes, knife hands, elbows, low block, upper cover, x block, outide block, inside block etc, and all variations of these could all be used in 'real' fights. All these are also a large part of tkd curriculum at good schools. So basically, yes, what you are taught can certainly be used for 'real'. I would say where I train that 90% of our training would encompass moves (and variations of the moves) from the list I just mentioned.

That's interesting. Maybe I've just haven't seen enough applications of techniques yet. I still find it hard to believe some of them can even be really used, but there'll be time for that. I'm still thinking of maybe later ask for some advice in particular uses of techniques. Thank you again.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Just so Im on the right track, which of the moves/techs in the list I mentioned do you feel may not be useful in a 'real' fight? I tried to only name moves Ive actually seen used with some degree of success in real fights.

 

[sopraisso]

Thanks.
Once you seem ok to give it such good attention, I appreciate it.
I'll look for the English names, and if you really don't get annoyed, I'll start asking individually about each technique.
Actually, the whole text-book thing helped me think about it, and maybe I just haven't really seen enough. I also think WTF sparrings don't help anyway, coz what they show in it is really awful to someone interested in real fighting aspects of the martial art.
You know what? I'm thinking about sharing these thoughts with my sabumnim. You'd probably wonder why I haven't yet. Uh... I just haven't felt comfortable with doing that yet! But I have to. Maybe he could even appreciate it, because I think it seems to have been a long time since he must've seen a student wishing to learn that way.

 

[dancingalone]

Blockings, actually, feel much more complicated, because of complexity of the motions. I imagine someone making "olgul makki" or anything resembling it. I have to live to see that.

Many of the classical movements DON'T make sense in a modern sparring context. It is not surprising that you are confused and skeptical if all the training you've been exposed to previous is all long range and competition-oriented at that.

It seems like 'olgul makki' is the high x-block. Don't think of it as a x-block. One of the more violent applications to the motion is a simultaneous trap and clinch of the neck with a forearm strike to the throat. Of course if you want this to work for you, you have to practice it as such. I like using a wing chun dummy for this or even a Wavemaster if that's all you've got. We can train the method in tandem with another person (and eventually should to ramp up resistance with the trapping motion) - just work at half-speed and be very careful.

To be honest, I even believe my fighting could already have a better resemblance with what I train. But unfortunate -- and I know this is a particular case -- in my dojang I'm frequently stimulated to use typical WTF sparring "techniques", and this, I know for sure, distorts the fighting that's teached in classes.

Maybe I should look start a thread about how WTF drives me mad, haha. Honestly: I understand many people want sport tkd, but damn, in some places the popularity of sport tkd just leaves no space for "traditional" "fighting" tkd. I even wonder why such a popularity, once WTF "fights" are so boring! So sad!

Anyway, I apprectiate any others can give me some more opinions on this thread's issue.

Nothing wrong with sport training. It's fun and good exercise in of itself. It's not exactly the same as training for violent altercations however, as you can see.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Many of the classical movements DON'T make sense in a modern sparring context. It is not surprising that you are confused and skeptical if all the training you've been exposed to previous is all long range and competition-oriented at that.

It seems like 'olgul makki' is the high x-block. Don't think of it as a x-block. One of the more violent applications to the motion is a simultaneous trap and clinch of the neck with a forearm strike to the throat. Of course if you want this to work for you, you have to practice it as such. I like using a wing chun dummy for this or even a Wavemaster if that's all you've got. We can train the method in tandem with another person (and eventually should to ramp up resistance with the trapping motion) - just work at half-speed and be very careful.



Nothing wrong with sport training. It's fun and good exercise in of itself. It's not exactly the same as training for violent altercations however, as you can see.

Good point about the high x block. It can also be used as it is in palgwe 7 where the high x block can be used to block a blow to the head from either a weapon or arm, then the left arm grabs the opponents arm or weapon while the right follows through with a punch to the head. I used this in a self defence demo against a pool cue to show the application.

 

[oftheherd1]

That's interesting. Maybe I've just haven't seen enough applications of techniques yet. I still find it hard to believe some of them can even be really used, but there'll be time for that. I'm still thinking of maybe later ask for some advice in particular uses of techniques. Thank you again.

In general, I am not a fan of sport TKD for self defense, but ralphmcpherson is correct. From what I have observed if sport TKD, due to the rules, certain punches and kicks are preferred for scoring. That doesn't mean they wouldn't be useful in a real fight. Since there aren't many rules in a real fight, if you want to stay with sport TKD, but be able to use it in a real fight, you need to teach yourself a mind set that disregards sport rules.

We tend to do what we train. You can however, teach/train yourself a separation from sport to real world. Seeing fights or encounters on TV/movies, or in real life, and deciding how you would better react in non-sport ways can help. But you must really work on it to get that separation so you don't try real world and break sport rules, or stay with sport rules when you need to be thinking real world. It can be done.

I don't know if that was anything close to what ralphmcpherson was talking about. I will let him agree or disagree on his own.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

In general, I am not a fan of sport TKD for self defense, but ralphmcpherson is correct. From what I have observed if sport TKD, due to the rules, certain punches and kicks are preferred for scoring. That doesn't mean they wouldn't be useful in a real fight. Since there aren't many rules in a real fight, if you want to stay with sport TKD, but be able to use it in a real fight, you need to teach yourself a mind set that disregards sport rules.

We tend to do what we train. You can however, teach/train yourself a separation from sport to real world. Seeing fights or encounters on TV/movies, or in real life, and deciding how you would better react in non-sport ways can help. But you must really work on it to get that separation so you don't try real world and break sport rules, or stay with sport rules when you need to be thinking real world. It can be done.

I don't know if that was anything close to what ralphmcpherson was talking about. I will let him agree or disagree on his own.

Yeah, I totally agree, it is a mindset thing. I do know of 'sport' guys I wouldnt want to mess with, but Im sure if defending themselves there would be a big distinction in mindset when applying what they know to a 'real' situation. The trap some people fall into is learning 'sport' tkd but not making the distinction in their own head and thinking what they are learning is automatically applicable to the street. Sport guys are really fast with good footwork and those sort of attributes can certainly translate to a real altercation. It is probably the limited amount of techs they use that seems a disadvantage. It seems that, like all sports, they have worked out what works and what doesnt in the sport side and they obviously stick with what works. To watch olympic sparring it seems every second tech is roundhouse kick and there is just so much more to tkd then the roundhouse kick.

 

[Earl Weiss]

If the only goal of training is comvbat self defense, you don't need a martial art. Most of your time and energy would be wasted. If your only goal of training is MMA sparring, you don't need a martial art. Again, most of your time will be wasted. If your only goal of training is a specific type of sparring, training in anything other than sparring techniques , strategies and conditioning is a waste of time.

 

[Earl Weiss]

>>Cyriacus

• . For example, a Low Block can be followed up by a Lunging Punch. Thats what Chun-Ji teaches you.<<<

This is for Cyriaus. Apologies for going slightly OT and for those non Chng Hon People but the relvance will be shown later.

Is the application for ( example) moves #1 & 2 in Chon Ji for the same opponent or two different opponents?

 

[dancingalone]

If the only goal of training is comvbat self defense, you don't need a martial art. Most of your time and energy would be wasted. If your only goal of training is MMA sparring, you don't need a martial art. Again, most of your time will be wasted. If your only goal of training is a specific type of sparring, training in anything other than sparring techniques , strategies and conditioning is a waste of time.

Depends on the specific drills practiced within your martial art and in particular your school. The right teacher can take the exact same material (basics, forms, partner drills, sparring) and focus them towards combat self-defense to a high degree. At the same time, another teacher can teach the same curriculum as a martial 'art' and another as a martial 'sport'.

I'm a firm believer that TKD can be as much of a fighting system as we want it to be, regardless of the 'do' written within the name. And if we want it to be more of a self-improvement vehicle that's more than possible too.

 

[dancingalone]

>>Cyriacus

• . For example, a Low Block can be followed up by a Lunging Punch. Thats what Chun-Ji teaches you.<<<

This is for Cyriaus. Apologies for going slightly OT and for those non Chng Hon People but the relvance will be shown later.

Is the application for ( example) moves #1 & 2 in Chon Ji for the same opponent or two different opponents?

I hope you don't mind me playing and putting in my two cents worth: If we take the idea of pattern applications seriously, the two movements are for dealing with a specific threat, most likely from a single attacker, though both the down block and lunge punch need not ultimately be interpreted as a down block and lunge punch. At the surface level of interpretation, blocking off one attacker without adding a counterattack, as the lunge punch is saved for a second foe, would seem to be a poor tactical decision, as one has not changed the 2 vs. 1 initial dynamic in the scenario. From my perspective, to be tactically sound, any motion made by the defender must change the terms of the encounter even if it is only to run away.

 

[Cyriacus]

I hope you don't mind me playing and putting in my two cents worth: If we take the idea of pattern applications seriously, the two movements are for dealing with a specific threat, most likely from a single attacker, though both the down block and lunge punch need not ultimately be interpreted as a down block and lunge punch. At the surface level of interpretation, blocking off one attacker without adding a counterattack, as the lunge punch is saved for a second foe, would seem to be a poor tactical decision, as one has not changed the 2 vs. 1 initial dynamic in the scenario. From my perspective, to be tactically sound, any motion made by the defender must change the terms of the encounter even if it is only to run away.

My Interpritation, is that since Chun-Ji, if Drawn to form its Shape, is Calligraphic for "The Scholar", if im not mistaken;
At its core, its really a Beginners Methodology. A Low Block could optionally be a Preperatory Stance, as oppose to being used as a Block unto itself. Whether or not it deals with a 2VS1 Mechanic is subject to Debate, much like other aspects of various Forms.

>>Cyriacus

• . For example, a Low Block can be followed up by a Lunging Punch. Thats what Chun-Ji teaches you.<<<

This is for Cyriaus. Apologies for going slightly OT and for those non Chng Hon People but the relvance will be shown later.

Is the application for ( example) moves #1 & 2 in Chon Ji for the same opponent or two different opponents?

Subjective to Interpritation. When I trained ITF, they claimed it was for Two People, so ill answer with that for Chang Hon.

Low Block to Prepare > Punch Attacker > Spin Around Blocking Attacker > Punch Attacker.

A bit weird, but im just repeating. Personally id never attempt that