T
TKDKid
Guest
My Dojang is affiliated with neither, so I'm wondering what the differences between the two are.
Largely depends on the school. Most fundimental difference is the variations in the sparring ruleset, and what patterns are performed. ITF uses one set, WTF schools vary from one to four or so. (Never really got that. Seems like loads of reduncancy from the outside.)
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2005
- Messages
- 4,981
- Reaction score
- 31
Also, ITF is supposed to be a little "more traditional" and WTF more competition orientated, but results may vary. Both have good programs as do MANY independents.
Well TKDkid it all about if you wany sport WTF if you like point fighting with the hands ITF. WTF is Olympic style only and ITF is point only and then the AAU is both wrap up in one.TKDKid said:
Terry
Yes. They both do. To what degree is, as you said, is dependant on the teacher. A more traditional school will put a fairly strong emphasis on hand techniques, such as mine, where as a school with it's main focus on sparring may not.mantis said:
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
For sparring my instructor makes us work inside. We do a lot of evasions that come inside to counter-punch. When sparring my instructor it' pretty common for us to get inside and throw series of punches, jabs, hooks, etc..usually seperating and kicking on the retreat.
For self defense we practice takedowns as a defense to various attacks as well as using SJM and pressure point/vital points to augment compliance. My kids, who are ahead of me, have gotten into some throws. No ground fighting/grappling yet but that comes later in our progression.
I wish MichiganTKD was here because he used to talk about the usefulness of strikes from the ground
For self defense we practice takedowns as a defense to various attacks as well as using SJM and pressure point/vital points to augment compliance. My kids, who are ahead of me, have gotten into some throws. No ground fighting/grappling yet but that comes later in our progression.
I wish MichiganTKD was here because he used to talk about the usefulness of strikes from the ground
Besides numerous strikes, both open and closed handed (just as importantly as how to strike is where to strike) and blocks, we use joint locks pretty extensively. With a successful joint lock, you can take your opponent down fast, slow, not at all, or combine with a sweep or kick. Grappling, no. We do however, use the same strikes on the ground as we do standing up. Though I learned grappling as a wrestler, I like this way better. Less energy. Still good to know, though.mantis said:
If you go by the sparring rules, ITF tends to encourage more handwork at the moment. That's just because they encourage more hand attacks to the head, and that gets broadly proliferated because of touranments etc.mantis said:
Hand techniques, knifehand strikes, punches with various modifications like longfist, middle knuckle extensions etc, palm strikes, elbow strikes from various angles, fingertip thrusts, crosscuts. Defensive applications like hooking blocks etc in addition to the more basic forearm blocks etc.
Throws and takedowns are part of color belt requirements, actual grappling doesn't get much attention. Mainly just the set piece drills like "get out of a static bear hug".
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
This may be off topic but it came to mind in some of the questioning here. I'm going to go a bit on a limb here and express an opinion that's still in it's formative stages but....the more I watch MMA competitions, the less impressed I am with the usefulness of ground grappling as a tool to have in the toolbox, so to speak. In seems in the more recent matches I've seen in UFC that a good takedown defense coupled with good standup striking seems to be more effective in the long run. There seems to be a balancing nature to technique in that someone will be successful with a technique and then it becomes popular and then as everyone works on it, the skill levels kinda equalize and it takes away the advantage of that technique and that seems to have happened with takedowns and grappling. The more recent matches I've seen, I've seen quite a few people shoot in and get blocked out and taken down themselves. One in particular I saw a few days ago was a Pride match where someone (named Gracie but I don't know which one) tried to shoot in and he got kneed in the head and went down and the other guy jumped him and started kneeing him to the head, about five or six shots, before the ref called the match in favor of the guy with the knees. (I looked it up and noticed that UFC does not allow knees to the head of a grounded opponent...) I also keep seeing people try to put holds on their opponents, but if they don't work, they end up tiring out the one holding faster than the hodler (and I think of street conditions without time clocks, without rules and the idea of trying to hold someone in a lock for that long and wearing yourself down in the process and how dangerous that would be)
Anyway, back to the subject at hand, it just seems to me that a good takedown defense can be developed from stand up and striking techniques and that if your art (TKD) is already very heavily favored toward striking anyway, *especially* powerful leg strikes, that adapting that to defend against takedowns, or to strike from the ground in a worse case scenario, would be a far more useful way to spend training time then to essentially have to learn a second art. Maybe naive but, if MMA matches are to be a proving ground for technique, I'll admit that what I've seen seems to be tipping the pendulum away from ground fighting (other then in knowing how to defend against going there, if you don't want to)
I will say though that some Hapkido influenced SJM and takedowns/throws I've learned usually end up with a more violent landing than most of the takedowns I see on such matches, and they are hard to 'soften' as you go, and then end up with the person doing the takedown still in an upright, balanced, controlled position as opposed to rolling on the ground with your opponent.
I once was in a discussion on another board about the positives/negatives of being one-sided versus both-side in your stance/setup/attack and some people made the point that they would rather train two hours to strike from one side then one hour each from two side because it made their stike that much more powerful. There's a kernal of wisdom in that. Superfoot Walce did quite well with only a few kicking techniques. I guess there is something to be said for the idea of learning your techniques very well and how to use them in many situations, versue learning a lot of different techniques.
We (the school I attend which...well we use Taeguek forms and olympic-sparring but I don't think we are WTF per-se) also requires self-defense techniques for gup belt tests (at least). Those include takedowns/throws. I'm thinking though that once you get away from forms and sparring rules, schools very quite a bit in how they approach self-defense, especially in relaltionship to takedowns and grappling and such
Anyway, back to the subject at hand, it just seems to me that a good takedown defense can be developed from stand up and striking techniques and that if your art (TKD) is already very heavily favored toward striking anyway, *especially* powerful leg strikes, that adapting that to defend against takedowns, or to strike from the ground in a worse case scenario, would be a far more useful way to spend training time then to essentially have to learn a second art. Maybe naive but, if MMA matches are to be a proving ground for technique, I'll admit that what I've seen seems to be tipping the pendulum away from ground fighting (other then in knowing how to defend against going there, if you don't want to)
I will say though that some Hapkido influenced SJM and takedowns/throws I've learned usually end up with a more violent landing than most of the takedowns I see on such matches, and they are hard to 'soften' as you go, and then end up with the person doing the takedown still in an upright, balanced, controlled position as opposed to rolling on the ground with your opponent.
I once was in a discussion on another board about the positives/negatives of being one-sided versus both-side in your stance/setup/attack and some people made the point that they would rather train two hours to strike from one side then one hour each from two side because it made their stike that much more powerful. There's a kernal of wisdom in that. Superfoot Walce did quite well with only a few kicking techniques. I guess there is something to be said for the idea of learning your techniques very well and how to use them in many situations, versue learning a lot of different techniques.
We (the school I attend which...well we use Taeguek forms and olympic-sparring but I don't think we are WTF per-se) also requires self-defense techniques for gup belt tests (at least). Those include takedowns/throws. I'm thinking though that once you get away from forms and sparring rules, schools very quite a bit in how they approach self-defense, especially in relaltionship to takedowns and grappling and such
OP
TKDKid
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #13
The problem with grappling is that in self defense in leaves you dangerously open. When you're rolling around on the ground with another person you can't defend against your opponent's buddies who can stab you, shoot you, kick you, etc...FearlessFreep said:
I do think ground work makes for good cross training, however its usefulness in self defense situations is severly limited, imo. I agree, good take down defense (and it does exist) coupled with a strong striking game makes for excellent self defense. Speaking in terms of MMA, every time I've ever seen a karateka or Tae Kwon Do practitioner fight, they've won. One instance comes to mind, it was a Heavy Weight Championship in KotC. It was a TKD guy vs a grappeler. The fight lasted almost two complete rounds where about a quarter to a half of each round was spent on the ground. Near the end of the second round the grappeler attempted to shoot in on the TKD guy who promptly knocked him out with a flying knee to the head. In my training I've learned a good deal of effective defenses against throws and takedowns which have convinced me that TKD is more than practicle for the street and very competitive in MMA competition.
Miles
Senior Master
Yes, and as Marginal alludes to, the WTF is looking at changing the rules so that there will be more hand techniques in Olympic-style matches.Marginal said:
I am curious-it seems to me that we spend more time doing kicking drills than we do working our hand techniques (by this I mean actually striking targets rather than just practicing in the air). Is this the experience of most TKD-in on MT?Marginal said:
This too is my experience-we don't "grapple" per se. We do joint locks, throws, take-downs and sweeps, but once the opponent is on the ground, we look to the next opponent.Marginal said:
Miles
OP
Andy Cap
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #16
This is a hotly debated topic that you will see all over the internet as well as this site. I would sum it up this way.TKDKid said:
A WTF stylist calls themself a "Player" and they where "Costumes" (As written on teh WTF website - don't shot the messenger)
An ITF stylist would cal themself a martial artist and call their garb a Dobok or in some confusing cases, a gi.
As I wrote, don't shoot the messenger - the WTF website uses that terminology. There are plenty of WTF schools that probably balk at that terminology, but that is the focus of that organization as a organizational body. WTF is a sport. The rank and such is a result of Kukkiwon and from what I have been told, has nothing to do with WTF. (I was told this buy a 7th dan WTF "grandmaster")
Andy you are right WTF is all sport, they do use the termonology as players, ITF focuses more on the Art, Kukkiwon is the organization put together to bring all kwons together so much for that anyhow they are what some say as if you are not kukkiwon certified forget the Olympics or some international events.Andy Cap said:
Just my two cents worth and yea I know this for a fact.
Terry Lee Stoker
OP
TKDKid
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #19
LOL Loki...WTF=World TKD Federation...ITF=International TKD Federation.
Miles
Senior Master
And please remember that individuals or schools can not be WTF members. Only "Member National Associations" can be WTF members. The MNA for the United States is USA Taekwondo (formerly United States Taekwondo Union-USTU).
Individuals can be members of the ITF (or could at one time-I think I had a life-time membership from 1975). ITFers-Is this still true?
Miles
Individuals can be members of the ITF (or could at one time-I think I had a life-time membership from 1975). ITFers-Is this still true?
Miles
