Source of TKD today

[rupertmja]

Where, I wonder, is the source of TKD today? Anyone visiting almost any dojang in South Korea will immediately realise that TKD in Korea is 100% for kids. The only adults learning are in a couple of universities, and basically, they are training to be kid's teachers.

With that in mind, who should reperesent TKD worldwide? The WTF based in Seoul seems to take the mantle, but is more well known in the Korean media for corruption scandals than for producing people of talent. In light of this, does the ITF have more legitimacy? And anyone know of how TKD fares in North Korea? Do they have links with the ITF?

[Gae-Bek]

Anyone visiting almost any dojang in South Korea will immediately realise that TKD in Korea is 100% for kids

Yeah, I've heard that, too. Kind of makes sense when you think about it...look at how many instructors in America run programs that cater to children (McDojos).


And anyone know of how TKD fares in North Korea? Do they have links with the ITF?

To my knowledge, "yes". In fact, I believe that Gen. Choi's trip to North Korea (in the early 70s...I think) is what made the South Korean government turn on him, and ultimately led to his emmigration to Canada.


With that in mind, who should reperesent TKD worldwide?

Who cares? The representation that the WTF does is solely about the sport aspect. Those few instructors out there who are actually teaching Taekwondo as a Martial Art (the only ones doing Taekwondo any good, in my opinion) tend to distance themselves from the WTF, or any large organization for that matter.


Where, I wonder, is the source of TKD today?

That's a complicated, interesting, and dangerous question. Dangerous, because many people out there believe whole-heartedly things about Taekwondo that simply are not true, and they cling to those beliefs with the utmost intensity.

It's probably going to be easier to define what Taekwondo is not...

Taekwondo is NOT:
-2000 years old
-In any way related to the Hwarang (who were not even warriors)
-100% from Korea
-100% created by General Choi

Early Taekwondo drew mainly from Shotokan Karate. General Choi even has admitted this...not like it's a recent news-flash. Yes, since its inception, there have been several innovations in kicking and body mechanics that can now be labeled as distinctly Taekwondo, but Taekwondo by itself wasn't anything new at the time.

Many people claim that Taekwondo evolved from the ancient arts of Taekyon and Subakdo. Now this could be, as I don't know for sure (never having studied either one separately). However, I was under the impression that Taekyon was a lost art...that nobody really does it or knows anything about it anymore.

Now while Subakdo (which I have heard was mainly hand techniques) may still be practiced (I think), if you look at competition Taekwondo today, I would say that any trace of Subakdo has completely evolved-away. Nobody punches in competition Taekwondo. PERIOD. Sure, they still have hand techniques in the Taegeuk and Palgue forms that are done, but for the most part, it's all backfists and reverse punches. However, the Chung-Do Kwan forms still use a variety of hand techniques (it's the Shotokan roots coming through, here). In any case, I believe that Subakdo's lasting effects on modern Taekwondo are minimal at best.

All-in-all modern Taekwondo (like all martial arts) is a product of the constant evolution of techniques by it's Master Instructors, based upon the needs of the art. Since competition has been that need since the 80's, that is what the art (for the most-part) has become.

Now, that's just my opinion. Time to sit back and roast our s'mores while all of the other fuming-mad Taekwondoists out there (who I've just offended) chime-in. :wink2:

[SRK85]

Yea I know TKD sucks thats why my school has changed to Tang Soo Do. And that is true all the people that take TKD in Korea are little kids sadly.

[John Bennett]

Now, that's just my opinion. Time to sit back and roast our s'mores

Sounds to me like a pretty accurate assessment of the TKD situation.

[Gae-Bek]

Yea I know TKD sucks

Well, I didn't say that Taekwondo "sucks".

The problem with TKD is that [for the most part] it's not being properly taught. If instructors would use it to teach legitimate self-defense, things would be significantly better (silly things like "one-steps", holding techniques, or ANY pre-arranged self-defense pattern doesn't count). But many lose sight of the self-defense goal when they start looking for state champions to train...

Another positive step would be to make testing criteria more-difficult. One of the reasons that 10-year-olds are getting Black Belts is because it's too easy. In all the testings that I've watched (at schools that will remain nameless...and I'm not talking about the one in my sig), I've seen many people who SHOULD have failed, but only one person who ever did.

Another issue (related to the one above) is that too many instructors are focused on making money. Why don't instructors make it harder to get a Black Belt? Because then they wouldn't be able to charge for as many of them. Why do most TKD schools have 10 belts? Because when you charge $50 per testing, you make more money in the long run than when you have 5 belts (that's how the high/half belts were invented).

All of the good schools that I have seen have these three things in common. They focus on self-defense, don't bend their standards for anyone, and they're more interested in teaching to help people learn, than in teaching for money.


thats why my school has changed to Tang Soo Do.

Sorry, but the Tang Soo Do that I've seen isn't much different. Our school used to go down to a bi-annual Tang Soo Do tournament in Dubuque, Iowa, and it is [without a doubt] the worst tournament that I've ever been to (no hands to the face allowed, untrained judges, and excessive contact warnings for so much as breathing on your opponent).

I'm sure that there's good Tang Soo Do out there (just like good Taekwondo exists), but I haven't seen it.

[rupertmja]

Here is a link to an ITF TKD seminar in Korea. Is this a new trend, I wonder.

http://www.mooto.com/kor/webzine/news_view.asp?news_no=3139

[SRK85]

Well, I didn't say that Taekwondo "sucks".

The problem with TKD is that [for the most part] it's not being properly taught. If instructors would use it to teach legitimate self-defense, things would be significantly better (silly things like "one-steps", holding techniques, or ANY pre-arranged self-defense pattern doesn't count). But many lose sight of the self-defense goal when they start looking for state champions to train...

Another positive step would be to make testing criteria more-difficult. One of the reasons that 10-year-olds are getting Black Belts is because it's too easy. In all the testings that I've watched (at schools that will remain nameless...and I'm not talking about the one in my sig), I've seen many people who SHOULD have failed, but only one person who ever did.

Another issue (related to the one above) is that too many instructors are focused on making money. Why don't instructors make it harder to get a Black Belt? Because then they wouldn't be able to charge for as many of them. Why do most TKD schools have 10 belts? Because when you charge $50 per testing, you make more money in the long run than when you have 5 belts (that's how the high/half belts were invented).

All of the good schools that I have seen have these three things in common. They focus on self-defense, don't bend their standards for anyone, and they're more interested in teaching to help people learn, than in teaching for money.



Sorry, but the Tang Soo Do that I've seen isn't much different. Our school used to go down to a bi-annual Tang Soo Do tournament in Dubuque, Iowa, and it is [without a doubt] the worst tournament that I've ever been to (no hands to the face allowed, untrained judges, and excessive contact warnings for so much as breathing on your opponent).

I'm sure that there's good Tang Soo Do out there (just like good Taekwondo exists), but I haven't seen it.
Excatly TKD is ok depending on what assoication it is. WTF is pretty bad.

[Akuma]

I don't know about the WTF, but as a student in the ITF, I have to say that although kids do=$$, the majority of our students are serious adults. The kids come and go, but our core group of students are 20+years olds who take their training pretty seriously. Although TKD definitely has some sport aspects, in our school, it is about 50/50 with self defense training. Like all arts, I think it's really about what appeals to you. Peace :)

[nythius]

I haven't visited that many other ITF tkd schools, but I consider mine to be a quality academy. We have had a lot of students who came from other arts and said they liked our style a lot more than ______(whatever style the student did). We teach an ITF style, but we are independent and do not use the "sine wave" (the bouncy motion you see in most tkd hyungs). Oh and if it makes any dif, our instructor is only second generation (his master was a true-blue korean). However like most schools we have a cross section of students. Some serious ones, who are there to be their very best, and you have some less serious students who just got tired of going to soccer practice on thursday night or w/e. We also include some aikido/aikijujitsu techniques into our curriculum(our master is also a 1st Dan in aikido) as well as some brazillian jiujitsu for our core of grappling enthusiasts. Just last week we hosted a Royce Gracie Seminar :D

[Summit Dude]

Yea I know TKD sucks thats why my school has changed to Tang Soo Do.

You shouldn't say any martial arts sucks. You cant conpare to different arts. The only problem in Tae Kwon Do is the politics. Forget the politics and study Tae Kwon Do for what its ment for. Self Defense and a good source of recreation.

[sidekick]

(silly things like "one-steps", holding techniques, or ANY pre-arranged self-defense pattern doesn't count).

Interesting, just what would you do for self defense training?


Mike Dunn

[Gae-Bek]

(silly things like "one-steps", holding techniques, or ANY pre-arranged self-defense pattern doesn't count).

Interesting, just what would you do for self defense training?

Well, I eliminate as much rigidness and structure as I can. I hit the basics, like defense against a haymaker (because nobody is going to throw a TKD punch at you in the street), ways to get out of a headlock, ways to escape from bottom-mount (on the ground), ways to defend against a one-hand or two-handed push. If I run out of ideas, I ask my students if they have any questions or situations that they'd like to see [my thoughts on] how to get out of.

Then I have them go back-and-forth with it. I tell them (the attackers) to start-out fairly compliant, but once the defender is getting the hang of it, to speed it up, and make it as real as they can.

Many times, if I notice one of them going too soft, I'll call the offending student out to be my next Uke. I then say "throw a punch, and I'll defend". And then I just stand there. If they don't hit me, I say "There you have it folks, the 'no touch block' strikes again! Thank you, Thank you, I'm here 'til Thursday...Ok, this time, throw a punch that will hit me if I don't do anything about it."

Gutsy, yes. But, I'm trying to teach my students to have intent and purpose when they attack their partners, to make the drill as live as possible. And so far, I've only been hit once... :D

One-step sparring and pre-arranged self-defense patterns accomplish nothing, but condition the student to work with a pilable and willing subject, whose sole purpose is to stand in one place while holding his fist out.

Holding techniques, by design, are not terrible. But, they do not encourage liveness. Anyone grabbing your wrist is going to pull you. Anyone grabbing your lapel with one hand is going to punch you (sooner than later). Anyone grabbing your lapels with both hands is either pushing or pulling, and apparantly doesn't fear you. These live aspects need to be added into the drills, or there's no point in doing them.

[sidekick]

Aaron, thanks for the reply. We may only be dealing with semantics here, so bear with me on the following. :wink2:

a TKD punch........... I'm assuming that's the standard "Karate" type reverse punch. Which could be played out as a good jab from a boxer. Only difference would be the set up. Personally I think training against that type of "Boxer" type delivery is worth while.

One-step sparring and pre-arranged self-defense patterns accomplish nothing.

Your entitled to your opinion, but every style that I have ever watched uses them. You have to get people used to something coming at their face and this is accomplished with controlled drills. Even boxers have/use similar drills. You may not be aware, but you yourself are doing a form of these drills.
"Many times, if I notice one of them going too soft, I'll call the offending student out to be my next Uke. I then say "throw a punch, and I'll defend". Is that not the value of one step sparring drills?

Holding techniques, by design, are not terrible..............

True, but they are the precursor to something more violent. Would it not be prudent to eliminate that next more violent attack by training to do something against the hold. Aren't headlocks considered a hold? More sever in nature, but still a hold. Lapel grab with a punch. There's your hold with the next step up. You teach against a one hand or two handed push. "Anyone grabbing your lapels with both hands is either pushing or pulling, and apparantly doesn't fear you". There's your push for you and your in a much worse position, because the attacker has control/forced (attached)movement of your body. Many techniques that are done against the push can be done against the grab. "Dosen't fear you" is a given if your involved in a physical confrontation, otherwise there wouldn't be the confrontation in the first place.

"I hit the basics, like defense against a haymaker".....................
Again, a basic one step sparring drill.

Headlocks and ground training, no problem there.

I just think you may be overlooking the true value of some of the traditional training techniques. :bow:

[UrbanWarrior]

so who here actually went to korea and checked out 1000+ tae kwon do dojangs? if not why are you all saying tae kwon do in korea is mostly for kids or decide what tae kwon do is just by the negativety of tae kwon do. what about tae kwon do being the world's one of the most or the most popular martial art, all those flying spinning kicks that amazes people, olympic sparring, etc

and tae kwon do is more for a sports than a self-defence now, I think we should all just accept that fact and stop blaming tae kwon do for lack of self defence. if the tae kwon do dojang teaches self-defence like it should then good, but if it doesn't well you can't blame them. it's what tae kwon do is now not like 50 years ago.

Finally mcdojo is rather japanese term seeing how dojo is japanese, so mcdojo doesn't only exist in tae kwon do but more in japan

[Summit Dude]

very good point. I liked that answer. ANd if Tae Kwon Do is targeted at kids that isn't considered a bad thing. half of them will stick w/ it untill their an adult.

And tell me if I'm wrong but isn't a McDojo where the instructor raises the student really fast in the ranks so they receive more money.

if thats true McDojo r in all arts and not only in Tae Kwon Do. I have a friend who lives on a US Naval Base in Korea and is a member of a Hapkido McDojo he received his BlackBelt in under a year. I'm doing Hapkido as a second art and its been almost a year and I'm only a yellow belt. I guess it also depends on the schools testing requirements and dates

[Gae-Bek]

a TKD punch........... I'm assuming that's the standard "Karate" type reverse punch.

That's correct.


Personally I think training against that type of "Boxer" type delivery is worth while.

Agreed. But "normal" people torque their shoulders (something that we're taught not to do) and step into their punches with all of their weight. Something VERY different from what Martial Artists or trained Boxers do.


but every style that I have ever watched uses them

Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu does not. I've learned more about how to apply Taekwondo over the last 6 months that I did in the previous 6 years...by taking BJJ. When your partner isn't so willing, you learn quickly what doesn't work.


You have to get people used to something coming at their face...

Yes, and that's what sparring is for. We allow red belts and up to punch to the face. Makes sparring a completely different different world.


...and this is accomplished with controlled drills.

This is where I disagree. People have to learn that a punch (or anything, for that matter) is going to hurt and do damage if it hits your face. Having someone "control" a technique to your face (self-defense, sparring, or otherwise), while it may be safe, it conditions you to expect not to get hit.

My problem with holding techniques, is the lack of resistance, and thus, reality. Nobody is going to come-up to stand a foot away from you, facing you straight-on, grab your wrist, and stand there.


I just think you may be overlooking the true value of some of the traditional training techniques.

My main problem with traditional self-defense training, is that by its very nature, it inhibits the learning process. It's so heaped-down with ritual and routine, that it gets in the way of itself...

---------------
SCENARIO A:

Two taekwondoists stand in ready-stance, facing each other. they bow, and each slide back into a front stance. The defender kihaps, indicating that he's ready, and the attacker steps-forward (keeping his perfect front stance) and punch. He intentionally misses (as the purpose of the drill is for the defender to be creative in his defense) and stands there with his arm out while the defender manipulates him into oblivion. The defender finishes with a kihap, and holds his last motion for a second or two. They return to ready stance, bow to each other, and call it self-defense.

---------------
SCENARIO B:

A guy who’s a trained Black Belt gets into a scuffle with some local at a bar. They agree to take it outside. The Black Belt guy exits the bar first, turns to face his aggressor, and POW…he’s already hit with a punch to the face. He reels back, not expecting to be sucker-punched, quickly trying to get his bearings. This is several times tougher than when he normally takes a hit in class (since they don’t allow punches to the face in his Taekwondo school), as now he’s got to ignore the blood and tears secreting from various areas his face.

POW…he takes another hit. Same spot, from the same hand. This time, he intentionally reels back further, to create some space between himself and his attacker. This time he’s ready for him, and he brings-up a side-kick off of his front leg, before the third punch makes contact. He catches his attacker on the hip, which stops him for a second. But he pushes past the kick, almost knocking Black Belt Guy down.

POW…another hit. This time, he backs into the wall of a building…nowhere to run. His attacker closes the distance and grabs him. With all his might, he throws Black Belt Guy on the ground, and gets on top of him.

Now Black Belt Guy is in a world of trouble. His Taekwondo Instructor never showed him how to do anything on the ground, let alone with some pissed-off guy sitting on his chest pounding away. Hopefully by this point, someone has called the cops, but they won’t get there in time to save Black Belt Guy, as he’s become just another Black Belt who got stomped by some average thug with no training.

--------------

These scenarios (however hypothetical) are not separate. Scenario B is a result of Scenario A. Scenario A didn't give the Martial Artist the tools that he needed to survive Scenario B. The tools weren't developed, because the conditions were not at all similar. That's why he got stomped.

Again, we're each entitled to our opinions, this one just happens to be mine.

[Akuma]

Excellent points made by all...but I almost think this is an apple vs oranges kind of post. Being able to survive in a street fight...imho...is more about the individual and less about the art. A capable individual is one who can take what he learns in the dojang and then know how to modify it for the street. Unless you are training in the alley behind the bar with no holds bar...then you really are never going to get the full effect of that combat situation. If that is your goal...then stop doing TKD and start hanging out in bars picking fights...you will learn how to street fight correctly in a quick amount of time (or die trying lol). I was able to successfully defend myself in a street fight before I started TKD and can still do so...more effectively now, I believe, due to my training. What TKD has given me, in terms of actual confrontation is not fancy technique and head kicks, but better timing, distance, reaction speed and how to deliver a more powerful hit. I think it's really about applying some common sense to your training...learning from your traditional training (which I love) and then thinking...ok, how would this work elsewhere? and then use that! Just my two cents :) peace

[sidekick]

Len, I concur with the apples to oranges concept. Gae-Bek, I understand where your coming from and you are correct in some aspects of what you have stated. The problem with the prior training that you have received and you don't care for, was lacking to say the least. But within that training you gained a foundation and were able to think and decide for yourself. So all was not in vein. I also agree with your statement of a willing partner. This is why my students train with the mindset of delivering a softening up strike prior to any technique from a grab/hold. New age TKD is lacking in general, but this is derived from the Instructor and the mindset of winning sports contests. Bottom line to all this is the way people are taught. The old traditional ways do work, but I also agree that telling people "here comes the punch" - KiHap, is not advisable, but does have purpose for beginning students. We also have to take into consideration that so called "Reality" training can only be taken so far. I'm sure that within your training in BJJ, you understand that past a certain point in the technique, serious harm can be inflicted. The same can be said for any art, so as instructors and students, we can't go past those levels.

As for your second scenario.......Not really a good one. The Black Belt guy was stupid enough to turn his back on his adversary. There is no way to train for a sucker punch, unless one is aware that there is a hostile enviorment. In your reference, he was aware, disregarded and deserved what he got.

[UrbanWarrior]

gae bek I am fine with all your negativity against tae kwon do but as a moderator of tae kwon do archive I think you should rather say the positive sides of tae kwon do

my scenario B is different

since a lot of people say tae kwon do isn't for self-defence and mostly about olympic sparring Im going to include sparring in this scenario

After the first punch(read gae bek's post) average thug goes for the second punch, seeing the punch coming the black belt counters with back kick or spinning hook kick, the thug with only one hand to cover his head from the kick is not familiar with this position and just turns his head to avoid the back kick/spinning hook kick, seeing how the thug's head is turned away the black belt kicks the thug in the groin, End of the fight.
if average thug manages to punch the black belt 3 times in the face and take him to the ground, there is better chance of my scenario happening

also I think people don't understand this. Just because it's not grapple it doesn't mean its not self defence, I see a lot of people talk about bjj, hapkido etc as a self defence art but Im 99.99% sure kicking, punching, counter kicks punches we learn in tae kwon do can also be used in self-defence. Kick to the groin, ankle, knee we learn in tae kwon do will be super effective in self-defence for sure

[tkdcanada]

Sidekick, a friendly reminder about your name.......

[BUDO BULLDOG]

Scenario B is all to true.

Some TKD artists have trouble with the street fighter because:

[1] He had only a few techniques – but he knew what work and he work what he knew.
[2] He took advantage of everything because he fought to win. Losing hurts or gets you killed.
[3] He understood that there is no definition of a fair fight. Anything and everything goes.

Some TKD artist trains for:

[1] Sport – to win a trophy by playing a game with set rules of engagement. Their training is focused only on the sporting aspect. How you train is how you fight / how you fight is how you train.

[2] When they practice self-defense it is in a sterile environment. Their attacker does such an injustice by being to easy, that they should be sued for negligence.

[3] They practice with weapons that are either illegal or not practical for today.

For some TKD artist – notice that I am not saying martial artist, because they are not martial artist:

[1] They have let the soccer moms take over the Dojangs.

[2] They run a school that is a glorified kiddy day care –or- aerobic center.

[3] They should be sued for slander when they tell the public that they teach self-defense.
Some TKD MARTIAL artist still teaches that TKD is a strong, ethical and practical martial art. It teaches not only charter building principals but it empowers the student with realistic exceptions of how they can quickly avoid or retaliate proficiently in a self-defense situation.

Some TKD MARTIAL artists have found the balance between martial and sport. They have not lost their arts identity or their integrity.

Let’s imagine scenario Z. This is where TKD has gained back the respect that it once had by the collaboration of its brothers and sisters who refuse to let the real TKD die.

Hell, what do I know; I am still working on my reverse punch after all these years.

Ed Barton
An Old American TKD MDK

[DanielS]

silly things like "one-steps"

I completely disagree with that.

I dont know what kind of one steps you're doing, but most of ours will work on the street and against a haymaker. And the ones that arent good for the street help with form and technique.

[Spookey]

Dear Sir,

I commend you for your memory of what Taekwon-do is, as opposed to what others are perceiving it to be because of the water soluable rendition which is so appealing to the average, instant gratification desiring, not wishing to dedicate blood, sweat, and tears, mass market, citizen.

Taekwon-Do is alive and well...thanks to men like yourself...keeping the traditional art of fighting Taekwon-Do!

We train to fight, yet wish not to...most of the time...

To you and those like you,

Taekwon!
Michael "Spookey" Bateman
Bateman Taekwon-Do Oh Do Kwan

[rupertmja]

so who here actually went to korea and checked out 1000+ tae kwon do dojangs? if not why are you all saying tae kwon do in korea is mostly for kids

Errr - Me? I haven't bothered to check out 1000 dojangs but I have been in Korea for ten years and have yet to see a TKD dojang that is not 99% kids. Also, a majority of the teachers are in their 20s. Other than that, you have to go to a university to find clubs with adults in. Went to a couple of competitions in the past - the vast majority of adults I saw there were univeristy students. Hence the title of my original post ...

[Eliz]

"Silly things like One Steps."

I have definately seen some silly one-steps but overall, I believe they are intended to improve reaction time. Good instructors DRILL these one-steps at lightning speed, mixing up attacks, until their students can do these defenses in their sleep. Hard contact is expected.

I also like when instructors offer a blanket attack and let the students workout and practice their own defenses.

Both approaches are good, sound approaches. Once again, it comes down to the instructor and how the defenses are presented and practiced.