Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Tae Kwan Do in the Olympics....soooo crap

S

SleepingFist

New member
I am not a big TKD fan but I was realy looking forward to it being included in the Olympics. I remember seeing some of the contests before (about ten to fifteen years before) and people actually knew where there hands were, could defend themselves and showed impressive displays of good technique, beautiful expression and good aggressive fighting spirit....then I saw the Olympics.
Now, tell me, was this disgusting exhibition of play ground ineptitude what the TKD federations intended? Are the standards in this art now sooo low that you don't realy need any skill at all to do it? Do any of you (and in particular the TKD people out there) feel that this mess will evolve over the years into something worth watching or like me, feel that what was shown in the Olympics was clearly an embarrassment not just to TKD but all the martial arts to a generally ignorant public?

Oh, by the way, I have nothing against TKD, just what I saw on the Olympics...
 
A couple of things:

The only TKD federation that has IOC recognition is the WTF. The ITF, General Choi's organization and independent TKD federations do NOT have IOC recognition.

The WTF mainly achieved its recognition through the influence of Ung Yong Kim (spelling) who is still a very powerful man in the IOC. He is also a very corrupt man.

Sports style WTF TKD has very little if anything to do with self-defense or real fighting, it is a sport and should be treated as a sport, nothing more.

While I am not a supporter of the WTF, I did cheer for Lauren Burns and Daniel Trenton, Australia's TKD gold and silver medalists.

hardgainer (my $0.02)
 
Unlike other sports, the Olympics is not the holy grail in martial arts competition. I would say the International Full-Contact championships that are held in various countries throughout the year are a much greater test of skill than the Olympics.

I'm not as familiar with the politics of the WTF and the ITF being that I'm a Tang Soo Do practitioner under an independent Korean organization, but I do know that TKD (and I've discussed this endlessly on martial arts messageboards) has lost a great deal of its edge since its unification as Korea's national sport in the 1960s (in fact all Korean martial arts used to be under one name called Tae Kyon or Soo Bahk Ki). It has become very Americanized, and focuses far to much on competition strategy rather than technique, distance control, and power control.

In general, TKD martial artists are quick, but sloppy from what I've seen.
 
OK, so you guys are telling me the problem is politics? I admit, I do not keep up with Korean systems...and don't care too much for anybodys' body politic but it does concern me that this display should even be associated with the martial arts?
I am more than aware that the Olympics is not the holy grail for martial arts...I also agree that far more interesting compettiton can be enjoyed elsewhere (my bedroom if I'm lucky..Superbabe, are you listening), however, in a world where so many people are exposed to the Olympics....do you not feel it gives a poor representation of ALL martial art, I mean, who out of the uninitiated public knows the difference between say, Tae Kwan Do and Chow Gar for instance? It is this that is my point. If martial arts is to be represented, should it not seem to be a martial art as opposed to a West Country Shin Kicking competition?
Absolute Hardgainer and Leviathan, you clearly know vastly more about Korean arts than I do (as I am totally stupid on this one) but are you not concerned about the impression that this leaves? Can you just say "That is Olympic drivel and thats' that" or do you not feel a little resentful that what is seen of our great and noble arts should look so pants? Politics aside....not everybody knows what you know....
 
To be honest, tournament competition is not truly a test of one's skill as a martial artist. It is a test of one's skill at reading an opponent, and being the fastest one to respond in a given situation. However, every instructor will tell you that martial arts is 80% mind and 20% body. What happens when these prize-winning fighters hit 30 or 40 and are unable to win competitions? Why are there 60 year old Grandmasters that could still beat a 20 year old champion (I've seen it happen)? The reason is because too many of the recent martial artists of the past decade have not learned self-discipline and the mental-part of training. They have learned how to do 540 degree flip kicks, while the traditionalists have learned how to focus their energy through basic (and practical) techniques. Not only that, but a true martial artist should gain a sense of culture and history for his/her art. This will help them appreciate the path that others have followed so they will respect themselves, their instructor, and their martial art (and martial arts in general).

In tournament competition, you merely have to hit your opponent in a designated target area to score. In other words, power is often sacrificed for speed. This is fine if you have learned the proper way to generate power from the waist and breathe correctly, but so many tournament fighters don't start with the basics and never get a good foundation.

Currently, I'm a 3rd Degree Black Belt in Tang Soo Do Moo Duk Kwan and will be testing for 4th Degree Black Belt (Master) within the next year. After 15 years of training, I've seen those people come and go who only want to fight in competition or learn the fancy techniques. Do you learn those techniques in a traditional atmosphere? Yes... and even some more advanced techniques that aren't demonstrated anymore, but they are used simply for conditioning and not for sparring.

I know people don't know how to fight if they are trying to throw 360 degree inside-outside crescents in a competition. If you've ever seen two Masters spar, they usually stand perfectly still for a while watching their opponent, looking for openings, and then only strike once. That one strike is all it takes to score... not 30 techniques to bash your opponent and hope to score.

In the end, martial arts is a lifestyle for myself and many others out there - the principles serve you in life as well as the dojang (school). It is very hard to have patience for those that disrespect the art, but I see martial arts as a very personal thing - let them do as they choose and don't get involved in the politics.
 
Leviathan, you make some very valid points and from a phylisophical stand point I would say for the most part I agree with you. I have studied for thirty years (I say this not for an egotistical point but your post did make me feel that you were talking to a bit of a novice and I think I can get away with saying...I'm not...though I now think I may be egotistical...oh lets not go there) and in that time I have seen some quite wonderful things and some crap and have only been involved in politics once....on the receiveing end...typical. I agree martial art...and I do mean 'art' is a very personal (perhaps subjective) thing and as that personal thing, I like to see it respected and the people who practice the arts respected.
I whole heartededly agree that over the last two decades in particular, the discipline has dropped off (in many cases vanished) and there are too many fat, can't move can't teach instructors out there and yes, Ip Shui is a great favourite of mine at 76 giving some Chinese provincial champions a good slap for the impudence of suggesting he was old.
That aside I was still horrifed at the Olympics. Your points have actually helped me see why....
I have seen some competitions in my time and lost a few while I was at it...there was good and there was bad but there were standards. The standards were much to do with the quality of what the competitors were trying to achieve, an extrenal expression of an internal desire to be excellent. I have seen other sports and I have on very few occasions considered the competitor not even worthy of turning up. I thought this during the Olympics.
You see, when I watch Olympic boxing (again, this can be deemed a personal journey for some) I do expect to see boxing not windsurfing, tiddlywinks or Olympic baking. I expect quality opponents, demonstrating solid foundations, physical conditioning, control, balance and good technique in their craft. If I turn on to watch Olympic wrestling, I do not expect to see two men competing in a melon seed spitting contest.
So help me out here; I realy know where you are coming from with competitors demonstrating impractical techniques (its so nice when they are done well), I know what you mean when you say there is a low quality of discipline and so on (I think from what I have seen the Korean arts are still pretty disciplined over here in England but I may be wrong) but what I saw was not Tae Kwan Do. It was no martial art I have ever seen and there was not much martial and there was no art and whilst in my journey I have no intention of studying Tae Kwan Do, I did expect the Olympics to honour some tradition of the arts, as they do in Judo, wrestling and fencing and so on and not turn it into a joke.
Knowledge that is not shared is storage and is thus not knowledge. I may be going too far...you will probably stop me if I do, but if the standards of the Olympics and the 'thing' that has been created is soooo appallingly dissimilar to the thing it is supposed to represent are we not as martial artists in danger of allowing factors other than excellence guide us and in doing so, do we not send out a message to those who do not know better, that 1) we have no standards and be 2) we are willing to condone the misrepresentation of our arts?
 
SleepingFist... I can respect your point-of-view and your experience in the martial arts (especially if you've studied consistently for 30 years). For only studying half that amount of time, I can only relate back to how things were done in 1986, but even then things were much more disciplined and respected. I attend a traditional school taught by a former Korean Osan Air Force Base Instructor (Grandmaster Tong In Chang), and it bothers me when I see the American attitude and lack of respect it embodies being brought into the dojang.

I think you are too specific in some of your comments about Tae Kwon Do in the Olympics. In fact, I know many Judo practitioners that are against Judo's representation in the Olympics. I don't really fear that the misrepresentation of these arts in competition will have any long-lasting effect as long as there are instructors out there who are willing to teach the "old way". Sure, the public may get the wrong idea about the purpose of martial arts, but what they are watching is martial sport. If someone would make the distinction, I don't think as many martial artists would feel the way you and I feel.
 
Mmmm, yep I concede the Martial sport aspect. I think my problem is I have a 'martial artist head' which gets in the way of my 'its just TV head' or my 'damn that's stupid head' and then I go to Elite fitness for some light relief and BAMM Kapoooy, I go off on one.
My Judo freinds are very competition orientated and have no idea about good Japanese Judo, so I don't really get too far in conversation with most of them...apart from one who studied in Japan for 23 years and calls British Judo 'Shoulder Jutsu' which unfortunately takes some people a little by surpirse and not being a big thrower (as in knowledgeable thrower) I can't say from my experience how true that is.
I have one question for you though; in an earlier post you said the international full contact competitions were more representative of the grail of martial art as opposed to the Olympics....but in your latest post (I'm grateful for it 'cuz you have kept me on my toes and made some good informative points) you say people are watching martial sport. I don't want to labor the point but the fact that it is a sport is not a valid point... the point is, despite everything we have said....we are agreeing on one thing....it's crap.
Oh, one more thing...I have trained consistently for 30 years and .....I'd swap it all to be 5 again.
 
Well, I should say that international full-contact championships are the holy grail of martial sport. The reason I say this is because the only way to win is through good technique and control of power. These small "tap" kicks that you see in Tae Kwon Do don't cut it in full-contact matches. I do agree, however, that competition is the least important aspect of martial art training, and some great martial artists in the past have avoided competition because they believe it is an egotistical endeavour.
 
I had to do it so that I had done it...my problem came from going from full contact to semi and then back to full contact again. If I was not getting disqualified I was getting beaten...so I never realy got round to having an ego, more bruises realy.
I found that as I became more mature in my art (I reckon I am still pretty daft as it goes) I left the whole idea of competition behind...does not suite system anyway. Do you continue to compete now that you are well ranked...?
 
I'm in my twenties, so I still compete regularly in invitationals and international events. I stay away from some of the bigger national events because (and I don't know if you are aware of this) there are a lot of politics and cheating going on because of the competitive nature of people at that level. It is more about getting the win, than earning the win. Furthermore, most national competitors seem to lack self-discipline and respect. I rarely even see a black belt bow to me as their senior member. Whenever I see someone of higher rank I make sure to bow and show respect.

Normally, it is alright to compete until you are a 4th Dan (I'm a 3rd Dan now). Once you are a Master you take more of a non-competitive role, although some Masters do compete and many compete by performing demonstrations.
 
I do know exactly what you mean. When I first started training it was with Shihan Steve Oneil in Kyokushinkai and this was very traditional, very respectful and competition, which was all bare fisted knockdown was without any politics. There was only Kyokushinkai that was allowed to compete so only the best Karateka won. The judges could only rule that a technique was legal or not...there was no such thing as a hit that was 'too hard' and under those cicumstances I spent a lot of time bowing.
I am not up with competition these days but I took part in a 'semi contact' international in Ealing in London UK back in er, I was ....21 I think so back in 1985 and that was good but I had my first encounter with Kevin 'The Jedi' Brewerton. Now he is an awesome semi contact fighter, he has superb speed and timing but, he is rude, disdainful, arrogant and dismissive and he set a bad example to many of the competitors and he was one of the guests of honour!
I think that whilst politics was not such a big factor back then, at least from what I remember, the stars of semi contact set a trend that never realy changed in the free style world. We now have people such as James Winspur and his borther who are good fighters over here but they continue to run down fellow competitors, slate their rivals and show disrespect even to arts themselves (I would, were I not such a nice guy, feed him his own face if I ever met him for some of the things he has said).
I feel sometimes that I am the only one who still bows to an instructors mon, who still kneels properly when instructed and believes meditation and chi gung are not ancient mystic hokum. So, whatever you do, I think you have done something right; you come over as a veery forthright dude with a good solid attitude to his pursuits and that can be bit of a relief in this age of glory hunting turds. Good on ya.
 
Well, looks like we have a discussion on this thread after all, albeit between only 3 people.

Leviathan: I no longer practice TKD, but your statements that TKD practitioners are quick but sloppy is a generalization that is simply not true for all TKD practitioners, I know personally of quite a few who are anything but sloppy with their techniques. Remember it is the man that makes the art, not the art that makes the man.

As for your ranking, is your sandan with BKK? Also, if you enjoy full contact Karate competition, have you tried kickboxing or Muay Thai?

hardgainer (pump)
 
I don't know if you were addressing me with regard to the Kickboxing and Muay Thai but I have found them very complementary...to any art.
The Thai has really assisted with regard removing my opponents mobility and often, the opponent out right. I have great respect for the fitness and conditioning of the Thai boxers and despite being pretty damn fit myself (sometimes outrageously but its hard to maintain) I still wind up a complete wreck after a Thai session. I have to admit though, I have not cross trained in Thai for four years but maintain aspects in my personal regimen. As for kickboxing, I have tried this. In the UK there are so many different rules it is way too easy to fall foul of the ref if you do not train specifically for a certain rule system. For instance some associations allow kicking below the waist to the thigh area, others demand a minimum of 8 kicks per round (crowd pleasing of course), duration varies and so on. Whilst I love Thai, though it is not my chosen art, and whilst I respect boxing I do find that there are too few good clubs over here as I have in the past been on the receiving end of some very poor quality instruction and not been able to find anything reeeaaarrrly good whithout travelling a considerable distance. Besides which, I think that Thai fighters are better conditioned and more powerful than most 'kickboxing' clubs but do have a tendancy to kick and grapple well but box quite poorly, generally that is.
I have only fought five times in kickboxing and whilst I would not say I am any good (loath gum shields, hate breathing the way i'm told, can't stand rules etc) I did find it a good experience and for the most part enjoyable especially as it teaches you to persue a goal, set traqining deadlines for peak fitness and so on which I would say are invaluable to a competitive body builder...which I'm not.
Hardgainer...have you done any other systems to complement your training? Is it Thai or TKD...I seem to remember a post by you somewhere.....
 
SleepingFist: I have trained in Tae Kwon Do (WTF style) and Karate for several years up to shodan. I have cross trained in many other styles during and since, in Australia I would dare to claim that I have trained with almost everybody who is anybody. At the moment I am teaching my own self-defence classes, and at the same time I train in Muay Thai and BJJ, Machado lineage.

If you are looking for a solid grouding in Martial Arts I would say the most important thing is to find a good instructor/school and stick with that for about 4 or 5 years before expanding your training. As to what style is best, don't believe in any hype, this style is better than that one, it is all bs.

The most important thing is that you have a good instructor, regardless what style, and that you train with total commitment and perseverance.

hardgainer (train to gain)
 
I was not looking for advice, I am more interested in what you have discovered along the way of your journey...my thing is talking to experienced martial artists and looking for commonality.
I do seem to remember there being some realy good people in Oz, especially along the Wing Cheung and philipino lines...does WC still teach out there?
Me, i've stuck with a particular combination of skills for about 29-30 years now and have found some notions have occured to me along the way. I was just wondering what people such as yourself feel about things and what works best for them and I am not realy talking about fighting. Leviathan comes over, for instance, as a very solid, dedicated and sincere guy who is persuing excellence, like some bodybuilders who don't train just or even to look good but to attain something for their characters. You come over as persuing the combat effectiveness of you, as a fighter and self defense instructor (if that's not true I am sure you will put me straght) I am looking to strip away parts that identify me (ego, vanity, aggression) so as to find a more primal freedom and a higher consciousness as I find no point to life otherwise. When I speak of martial art I have to generalise as people vary so much. For instance, as I have become more profoundly aware of my capabilities, the need to demonstrate them has become less and less, the concept of violence has become more remote and I am greatly less self obsessed than when I was a little 18 year old shit. I have also found that hard work and dedication is ok if you want to be a disciple or average but a degree of intelligence in our approach to our expression of an art (not necesserily system) and ourselves is an important factor.
Let me pose an example using your good self; you are a self defense instructor and you have cross trained in various systems and have created the martial product (although never finished) which is you. The questions then are 1) Have you developed your own JKD? 2) Do you tailor what you teach for each student or do you have a way that you put across your ideas or system for everybody? 3) Do you work solely with by the numbers situations including awarenes and avoidance of situations and fencing techniques or do you teach specific techniques? 4) Do you explore the psychology of your student or students? All these things and probably a lot more fascinate me please advise if they are none of my business, I would understand.
Heres to a good chat mate.
 
Sleeping Fist:

Wow, long post - ok I'll try to answer you as best as I can:

Wing Cheung? You mean Wing Chun instructor William Cheung, don't you? Yes, William Cheung still teaches (as far as I know) in his school in Melbourne. He is known for having made quite exuberant claims about his own martial ability and constantly claiming that 'he' was Bruce Lee's lifetime friend and mentor. There are some very good Wing Chun instructors in Oz, I have only trained with William Cheung once at a seminar, quite a few years back, and I am not in particular awe of him.

I see that you already have quite some experience in training, 29-30 years wow. I didn't mean to be condesacending when offering my advice. I am only 26 years old, so next time I'll be asking 'you' for advice. :) Anyhow, regarding your questions:
1) Have I developed my own JeetKuneDo? Hmm, I am not sure what exactly you mean by that. I certainly wouldn't compare my skills to Bruce Lee's. JKD was his interpretation of his own martial arts training. If you mean have I developed my own system, well sort of. I am instructing a self-defence course for women and children which at the moment is going quite well. I started in November last year after breaking away from a very large and very commercial Karate organization. I had been there top instructor in my area for the past 4 years and I felt that it was time for me to move on as my organizations financial goals didn't sit too well with my desire to have the best interests of my students at heart. I know have about 120 students of my own, which after about 10 months is not bad at all.
To be continued...
 
...continued, sorry had to log off there.

2) The syllabus and requirements in my school are the same for everybody. BUT, that does not mean that my students have to conform to the syllabus - in fact it is the other way around, the syllabus conforms to them and their strengths and weaknesses.
3) I am not sure of your question here. Yes, we teach awareness. First and foremost we emphasize giving our students a psychological edge to overcome a bigger, stronger more aggressive assailant. NO, we do not teach fencing - there is a part of our syllabus that deals with using objects (pens, keys, chairs, etc) for self-defence purposes.
4) I would not say that I 'explore' the psychology of my student. I am not a shrink - and I don't think it would be appropriate for me either. Psyching for combat and self-defence scenarios is a key-component, if not THE key-component to effectively defend yourself. It is in my opinion the most neglected part of most self-defence training. A lot of our psyching techniques can be found in books such as 'Performe with Confidence' and others dealing with sports and/or combat psychology.

You are most welcome for a chat, I been chatting to people on the net about Martial Arts, Self-defence and related topics for the last 8 years or so... sometimes it gets tiring when you get a 'my MA is the best' line of argument, which I don't even bother with these days.

hardgainer (pump)
 
bro's tournament TKD is not a fighting system, it is a sport, if you want real fighting systems try shotokan, muay thai, kenpo...etc. if you want real combat scenarios go NHB/MMA
 
NinjaX said:
if you want real fighting systems try shotokan, muay thai, kenpo...etc. if you want real combat scenarios go NHB/MMA
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call shotokan a real fighting system. I would call it a martial art. The stances in shotokan are very deep, and the movements are very rigid and hard. It doesn't lend itself to competition very well from what I've seen.

I agree that Muay Thai kickboxing is a good fighting system, but you must remember that Muay Thai is nothing without the proper training and stringent workout schedule. The reason why Muay Thai has the reputation that it does, is because it's practitioners are constantly and consistently training.
 
Sorry people, moved house, got drunk, forgot I existed, lost my favourite strips of lean tissue, met loads of people from the TAGB and argued until I fell over.

Hardgainer..I meant fencing as in the use of certain techniques to put a likely opponent in a worse situation... like the following exchange..

"You gonna git ya head kicked in!"
"Is you mother called Emily?"
"Wha..?" Smack.......

Or

"I don't like you face..."
"I'm sorry" apologises putting hands forward covering half distance...

or whatever, the methods of standing in possible situations that reduce an opponents options and make you choices less so enabling more control of the situation should an altercation occur...that sort of thing.

The psychologyof the student as well as the aggressive opponent is often less understood by shrinks than people who have persued this sort of thing, and it sounds like you have a cool approach anyhow.

By awareness, I just meant standard street savy, staying in well lit areas, keeping with people, not going down alleys, just not putting yourself in a vulnerable position...

...and yeah, I did mean William Cheung, I laughed out loud when I read my post again...daft bugger I am. I have not seem Bill in action so won't comment but I have found some of his articles a bit disturbing...and some of his books...well, not as bad as Austin Gohs anyway. If you want a book to avoid try The Braking Power of Wing Chun...realy realy bad.

Right, now that I have fallen off the band wagon I am gonna go have another beer, loose some more precious weight and maybe, just maybe, look at the wooden man...see if he wants a conversation about the Olympics...
 
i will agree leviathan X about muay thai, but shotokan in its sparring form uses short stances over long ones, the long stances are used to build formal technique, combat implements short quick techniques
 
Back to the begining

Just coming in at the end but here are some of my views. I was involved with the BTC when they were making the Olympic team selections. Been doing TKD for 20 years. I would say the problems are the rules, point - stop start competitions always look like a game of playground "your it" to me. Fighters get so worried about giving a way the one point that loses the match, nothing happens at all.
Add to that, your not getting the best fighters in the country because of the politcs envolved and this is what you get.

You have to remember this is a competition not a martial arts display, its about who can score the most points using legal techniques and staying with in the rules. Its the rules that make it a TKD competition. I am ITF but still competed in and won WTF comps.

I have also done the same with kick boxing, it doesn't matter on your style as long as you keep to the rules. See Prince Nasem and Lenox Lewis, two different styles but both called boxers cos they are the rules they compete under.

If you want to see a different type of fighting, change the rules. Or let anyone try out for a place on the team, any style. In the 100 meters who cares how you run, the fastest runner gets the place in the team.

For me it is all a load of political crap, WTF (BTCB) have Olympic mandate, ITF (BTC) are recognised by sports council. And it just goes on from there.
 
Gegl, you now illustrate the issue perfectly. Whilst many of us have considerable experience in the Martial Arts, what we see in the Olympics is so Alien that we cannot believe it would get a title like Tae Kwan Do....maybe 'Tae Kwan Do Rules' would soften the sense of disgrace.

Ninjax and Leviathan, long stances build considerable strength and force specific mechanics in the early stages of technique...unfortunately many Karate instructors have not taken their formal training far enough to tell the difference between what you use to enhane technique and what the technique is itself. I will agree that by comparison to many arts Shotokan can seem slow and structurally innefficient, yet we must not forget that the strength of Karate is not in its fine lines and structured science but in its discipline and strength. The same way that a Thai fighter has his advanatage in fitness, conditioning and attitude.

I have a love for certain Gung Fu systems yet, when I see them practiced in the West their is a definate lack of umph, and whilst they have technical ability, efficiency of line and so on, they have not the discipline or strength, fitness mentally or physically for a straight out altercation with a well conditioned fighting animal. So all arts, can learn a great deal from each other even if they think they are superior in technique...which a hell of a lot of them think they do.

I would just like to say I have learned a lot about Tae Kwan Do and the Olympics and I am glad that many of you can explain why I am horrified and give me hope in so much as this is not TKD that I am watching but the bollocks I thought it was....I was concerned I was missing some deeper meaning....
 
SleepingFist:

You raise a very valid on the naming of the Olympic sport of Tae Kwon Do and whether this sport should be named after the martial art known as Tae Kwon Do.

In my honest opinion, the TKD sport of the Olympics could be more accurately described as kick-fighting or point-kicking or kick-point-fighting. Because that is really all that the competitors do. Also - this sport should be open to anyone who wants to compete in it, not just WTF Kukkiwon recognized black belts.

hardgainer (my two cents)
 
Maybe not girlie stuff

Although the competion does look a bit girlie I will say one thing in its favour, it is full contact i.e. you can knock your apponent out.

I have suffered a smashed elbow and dislocated shoulder in WTF comps.

But as I said because scord points are so few, no one will comit incase they give away the one vital point.
 
as far as knowing where your hands are, TKD is a kickng oriented sport, I competed for 10yrs and busted my ass and was in incredible shape (5%bf) and mucho indurance. i guess what i'm tring to say is I dont think you can understand what it takes to compete at an international level by watching it on TV. I it takes a lot of hard work, sacrifice, and skill. the judgmental attitude is not justified.:alien:
 
Skeeter, no one is saying that these people did not bust their backsides...and I dissagreww, Tae Kwan Do is something that has become a sport. You may have competed for many years and been in good shape but Tae Kwan Do does have hand techniquesand none were demonstrated in the Olympics...which I seem to have discovered is my real point of contention. When can it be said that you have removed so much from something that it ceases to be that thing?

Oh, almost toally agree on the boxing thing...but one thing at a time or we'll have to look at every farcical corruption in the Olympics and I'm not that well read.
 
Superbabe, Ive been training since i was 5yrs old and i'm 42 now and i know that Taekwondo is a martial art. I was referring to the context of the post where Taewondo is practiced and was referred to as a sport, as such kicking is much more effective in both getting points from the refs and/or getting a knockout. My point was that many of us (on this board) are athletes and should be the last to judge another style or sport, as it takes hard work and dedication to excell at the olympic level. Also, I watched the telivised matches and they were very dissapointing as they did not represent TKD well at all. BTW it is spelled Tae kwon do.:)
 
With regards to TKD being a martial art or a sport. I think we should remember that Olympic TKD is most definitely practiced as a sport. But at the same time there are still many serious TKD practitioners inside and outside the WTF who practice their TKD as a martial art.

hardgainer (2cents again)
 
I'm pretty sure the lack of hand technique in competitive TKD is due to TKD wanting to differentiate itself from boring point scoring Karate. I just wish TKD was shown on T.V. more. The best KO's I've ever seen were on tapes of The World Games my former roommate (3rd Dan) had. I'm not formally trained (no official belt), but can hold my own after a couple years of his tutoring. He gave up his school due to the BS politics of the WTF. Too bad because TKD lost a gem.

X
 
xplode, what is your roomates name ? WTF TKD is way different that point Karate in that in point, if you clock someone with a spinning hook(or whatever)and knock them out you get disquailified, in TKD you win:) amen though on the politics.
 
Well let me jump in and flap my gums for a minute...

To start out, let me say that I've been practicing TKD for about 20 years (started young). I've competed on and off for the entire time and I'm getting into Kickboxing.

Now it's a bold statement to say that TKD has lost it's dicipline for the sole reason that every school is different (in some cases - drastically). Also, how do you judge the dicipline by watching some televised point-fighting competition? Now I will definitely agree that the Olympic TKD should have used another name and I also believe that the fighters were not necessarily the best out there. My problem is with the rules of the competition (not that they'll ever change). Whenever you're playing tag, it doesn't matter if you go off balance and leave yourself open, as long as you can get a cheesy grazing shot in. To me, that takes the entire strategy out of it. People are so afraid to get touched that they'll run away and you'll never have a good exchange. Some of the best fighters I know don't do well in this style of competition.

Now there will always be a jackass out there to say "TKD isn't practical try a real martial art like..(insert obscure art that nobody's heard of here)." I've gotten used to just blowing it off but when you see a crappy televised TKD event or even a Van Damme movie (Shotokan? Karate) where he gets the crap beat out of him then comes back with some fancy 360 you can't help but think it's all gone to sh!t.

However, if you take a good look, at almost every shool of any style you'll find one or two people that are extraordinary. As was said in an earlier post, it's not the art, it's the person. It's just too bad that crappy point competitions and cheesy movies is all most people see before making their judgement.
:(
 
Skeeter, I don't use my real name here so I don't think I'll mention my buddy's either.

Superfoot, question about the tag thing. I hardly saw more than 2 minutes of TKD from Sydney, but I thought (maybe things have changed in the last few years) that in order for a point to count it had to move (hard), do some damage to or KO an opponent. Is that not the case anymore?

X
 
First of all, AH, I am a fan of Bill Wallace. Every year (for about 8yrs) I go to a training/convention-type-thing and take his class. He's a smart fighter and a cool guy.

X, I'm not sure about the rules in Sydney, but that wasn't the case in most of the tournaments I've been to. Many of those wouldn't allow punching to the head and with the nature of the point system, speed was the name of the game.

You saw a few hard shots but when one of our black belts knocked someone out he got disqualified. It wasn't malicious or anything, the other guy was trying to duck and weave and headbutted a foot on its ways up.

I call it tag because it has an entirely different strategy than fighting nonstop. It's a sport and it's fine if that's what you think of it as. It certainly requires a great deal of skill and speed but personally I prefer fighting "running time". When you do this, if somebody clips you on the cheek and you get in a great combo, it's a lot more obvious who won the match (though politics are inescapable). I just love the type of strategy that goes into that type of fighting.
 
and because your location is "inside your head" I wouldnt know where either. I just know some competitors out there, and thought maybe i knew him.I guess anonymity is is important because of the secret kumite thats coming up, huh :rolleyes:

to score a ligit point in WTF compitition you must deliver a "shocking tremer" to your Opponent, another reason kicks are favord since there is no face contact with the hands.
 
Last edited:
Not if you were a good politician....

Actually, the first and last ones should be fine but that middle one might get a warning. What makes the biggest difference is if the other guy gets back up right away or rolls and moans for a while.

Plus if you whack someone hard and they're down recovering, you have to kneel in the opposite corner.:bawling:
 
Hey X-Plode I think the guy with the ponytail is me
:) tell me your from so Fl as that looks like one of my fights in the 95 states. nice videos anyhow...better than what they showed in the televised Olympics.
 
Last edited:
superfoot, I dont think the middle one would get a warning, but someone should have warned the other guy about walking into the foot:D It looks to me like all three a ligit.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter, I think it depends on the tournament you go to. When I was younger, I used to go to a lot of tournaments where the students of the school who was holding the match could pretty much go as hard as they wanted and if you got a hard (but legal) shot in they would warn you to "watch the control".

Once at one of those tournaments, I was sparring and I got a clear punch in and they said "not enough contact". The next time I hit him I knocked the wind out of him and it was "too much contact". Situations like that were why I got sick of the whole tournament scene. That's also why I'm looking to go full contact now. You can never escape the politics but if you out-class a guy enough to knock his a$$ out, there's not much they can do.

Another factor could be that a lot of my competing was done as a minor. They're a lot more protective of the under 18 crowd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Richardbrown
Napsgear : 5 Exercises That Have Stood the Test of Time
Replies
15
Views
3K
Tazz
Tazz
V
Hey all! Forum newb here, with a redundant question re: TRT (maybe)
Replies
16
Views
4K
zmyj88
zmyj88
P
Any MMA guys and/or Olympic Lifters?
Replies
19
Views
4K
Power36
P
ceo
NCAAF 9/14 - (25) Ole Miss v Texas
Replies
7
Views
1K
Jack steel
Jack steel
L
Two USVI residents to fight Saturday at MMA in Paradise II
Replies
0
Views
2K
lloydwinter
L
Top Bottom