Then, shouldn't the point of any article be to teach people how to tell the difference? Also, I'm not quite sure why drawing a conclusion (e.g. many if not most TKD schools suck) equals being subjective. I for one, think there's planty of objective evidence to support that claim.

There are, of course, many reasons why someone might study TKD. And any article would have to take that into account too. Not all of them are because someone wants to fight in K1 or be the baddest kid on the block. We all bag on WTF sparring, but if someone wants to compete in the Olympics, a WTF school with a heavy focus on competition sparring would be the way to go, for example, and would be a good school when judged by that criteria. Although, as an aside, such a competition focused school would probably do a better job of imparting all around fight skills than some so-called self defense oriented schools. But I digress...

Maybe I misunderstood your original point. I am all for a practical pro/con paper. However, you last post seemed to read that you should just start out by saying "a vast majority suck". As a reader I would not be too interested in TKD just from that alone. Why waste my time if most of them suck? That is what I mean by the article being to subjective.

By weighing pros and cons you want to keep the opening of any article totally objective so that the reader will not draw any preconceived ideas prior to reading both sides. You are absolutely right that everyone can have different reasons for joining a TKD school. One school that I worked at had a student in there simply because they enjoyed the positive atmosphere of the people. She enjoyed the workout and the cool "tricks" but it was the socializing that kept her. I had another student that left because he didn't like the format. Too much tournament ****, as he put it. Which, again, is fine, it is not the be all end all martial art. Anyway..now I digress. :)

Then, shouldn't the point of any article be to teach people how to tell the difference? Also, I'm not quite sure why drawing a conclusion (e.g. many if not most TKD schools suck) equals being subjective. I for one, think there's planty of objective evidence to support that claim.

There are, of course, many reasons why someone might study TKD. And any article would have to take that into account too. Not all of them are because someone wants to fight in K1 or be the baddest kid on the block. We all bag on WTF sparring, but if someone wants to compete in the Olympics, a WTF school with a heavy focus on competition sparring would be the way to go, for example, and would be a good school when judged by that criteria. Although, as an aside, such a competition focused school would probably do a better job of imparting all around fight skills than some so-called self defense oriented schools. But I digress...

Stop making sense Matt, you are giving me a headache.

'

ya! matt is totally right.after reading the article i do not want to learn TKD.Perhaps someone could teach newbies how to tell the differance between suckatacular and decent schools. Btw, whats the difference betweeen WTF and ITF?

The general answer is that it is two different governing organizations of TKD. WTF reflects the more "modern" TKD, where as ITF will reflect more "Korean Karate". Again, very broad answer to a question that will open up a huge ass debate.

WTF = World Tae Kwon Do Federation, associated with the Kukkiwon, this is the organization that deals with Olympics.

ITF = International Tae Kwon Do Federation, General Choi's organization. Traces back to the Oh Do Kwan.

ATA = American Tae Kwon Do Association. Crapfest.

Those are the big ones in the US.

As a reader I would not be too interested in TKD just from that alone. Why waste my time if most of them suck?

Sure, I can understand that. Any article would therefor have to answer the question, why would someone want to do TKD? And there are some good valid answers to that, as have already been pointed out in this thread. I think, that way, we can give an honest warning about the kind of school one is likely to find, and still show that a good school is worth looking for.

Of course, personally speaking, you [miguksaram] are probably recognizing a real ambivalence I hold toward the art in my postings. In my own thinking I sway back and forth between a view that TKD is still cool and has something to offer if trained properly and a view that, screw it, anyone interested in real fighting should just do MT and boxing for stand up. I am currently in a "tkd has something to offer" swing of the pendulum, but nevertheless both attitudes are probably recognizable when I talk about it.

Sure, I can understand that. Any article would therefor have to answer the question, why would someone want to do TKD? And there are some good valid answers to that, as have already been pointed out in this thread. I think, that way, we can give an honest warning about the kind of school one is likely to find, and still show that a good school is worth looking for.

Of course, personally speaking, you [miguksaram] are probably recognizing a real ambivalence I hold toward the art in my postings. In my own thinking I sway back and forth between a view that TKD is still cool and has something to offer if trained properly and a view that, screw it, anyone interested in real fighting should just do MT and boxing for stand up. I am currently in a "tkd has something to offer" swing of the pendulum, but nevertheless both attitudes are probably recognizable when I talk about it.

I was lucky enough to learn and see both sides of the coin. I learned Korean karate. I also learned some good KKW TKD and I saw the demise of both, as well as taught both. Trust when I say I could make you feel that TKD was the shiznit and you would be helpless without it. :)

Honestly I am the ipidomy of what was wrong with a lot of TKD that K-boy trys to point out. What I learned and what I was told to teach was two different things all together. Do I hate myself for it...hell yes, which is why I am on this sight. TKD is a great art, when taught correctly, just like anything else. I think K-boy has good intentions with his article, but as we all know the road to hell is paved in such intentions. He needs to find a way to present both sides in a more educational, logical matter. Doing the jump kicks in TKD will in now way garauntee you great jump shots in basket ball like his article says. Forms are not useless. Anyway..it is what it is. Now back to the namja pics Der.

Forms are not useless. Anyway..it is what it is. Now back to the namja pics Der. haha...namja pics...are you korean btw?

anyway, i wanted to point out to kintanon that forms are not useless but... i dont know much about TKD to explain it to him...But i figured since every single TKD place teach forms so i figured it must be pretty important... So could you explain to me the reason for learning forms?



Again, very broad answer to a question that will open up a huge ass debate.

i think you and rage gave enough explanation for me. >.> Which is better tho? ITF or WTF? and how do i know which dojo is part of which federation?

i think you and rage gave enough explanation for me. >.> Which is better tho? ITF or WTF? and how do i know which dojo is part of which federation? Most schools will declare there affiliation in there advertisement as to witch is better that depends on what your looking for

But i figured since every single TKD place teach forms so i figured it must be pretty important... So could you explain to me the reason for learning forms?
Forms used to be a training tool to simulate a multi-opponent attack. They are supposed to be patterns designed as a theoretical application of basic techniques. Currently, I believe the forms in Korean martial arts (in general) are becoming more and more obselete, because firstly most schools don't even teach forms correctly. Most Korean forms are derived from karate-like movements or even Karate forms themselves, and unlike their Japanese counterparts, your average Korean stylist does not know the applications or "bunkai".

That being said, the applications are theoretical and optimistic at best. You're never going to respond to a real attack with a hadan mahk kee in a deep chun gul jase, so why even bother with it, in terms of fighting? For me, the benefits of forms are simply strengthening of the body, getting used to good hip movement and body working as one unit, breathing exercise, and for study of an art. Aside from the latter, there are drills and training methods more efficient in training any benefits that forms may provide.

So I don't mind doing forms, sometimes it is very enjoyable when I don't have practice partners, and I like the art aspect of it. But I also realize in terms of fighting skills, they don't provide very much.


i think you and rage gave enough explanation for me. >.> Which is better tho? ITF or WTF? and how do i know which dojo is part of which federation?
Hard to say which organization is better. It really depends on what you are looking for. If you want a collegiate sport with Olympic ambitions, well obviously WTF will be better for you. If you want a more traditional approach to TKD, then ITF will be better.

Keep in mind both organizations has it's fair share of crappy schools, so if you are just looking for a decent TKD school, then organization isn't really a factor.

I think I come to be a fan of training forms the most. I like the idea of doing moves that require me to perform at the edge of my envelope. When I hit a movement, transition or technique that does not come easily, I immediately know what to work-on. Right now there is a rather challenging combination of a turning Outside Crescent followed by a Jumping Inside Crescent. Is it "fight material?? Probably not, but it does give me a special "brass ring" to reach for, if this makes sense. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Now back to the namja pics Der.

Uh.

No.

Who do you think I am?

Feedback?!?

I keep trying to figure out what the hell all the different arts out there are. So far I can easily see what Boxing, MT, Judo, and BJJ are. It's easy for me to tell these arts apart. But when it comes to CMA, and things descending from Okinawan arts I get confused as hell. Apparently first there were Okinawan arts. And then a whole bunch of people disagreed on how to do things so they made up their own styles. But these styles weren't really styles in the sense that MT, or BJJ is a style. They were just variations on what the Okinawans were already doing. And then eventually instead of inventing new styles people decided to invent new substyles, or organizations. Am I right?

What I'm trying to say is... Aren't all these arts that throw punches and kicks while wearing a Gi essentially the same thing? And if it's all the same thing why don't we do an article that treats these different "styles" as a whole? And then just try to steer the reader towards a good school? I do Tang Soo Do right now, but I would consider a hardcore ITF guy more of a brother in Martial Arts than some strip mall TSD place that only teaches point sparring. Didn't Der say something along the lines of "forget the styles just focus on punching and kicking people in the face"?

Anyway that's my 2 cents worth for the day. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, because I very well may be.

What I'm trying to say is... Aren't all these arts that throw punches and kicks while wearing a Gi essentially the same thing? And if it's all the same thing why don't we do an article that treats these different "styles" as a whole?
Not neccessarily the same thing. After all, BJJ is developed from Japanese Jujitsu, so just because something is an offshoot of the other, doesn't mean it is the same thing. Arts that have a common ancestor can evolve into radically differing systems. For example, Olympic TKD is different than Kyokushin.

Ah, so they are the same thing. Just with different levels of suckage, and pwnzors.

Ah, so they are the same thing. Just with different levels of suckage, and pwnzors.
How can someone who practices tang soo do talk so much ****? I like tang soo do, my sabaumnim has a bb in tang soo do, but it's no different from tkd or karate. You punch, you kick, you do some joint locks and stuff. Seriously, get over yourself.

How can someone who practices tang soo do talk so much ****? I like tang soo do, my sabaumnim has a bb in tang soo do, but it's no different from tkd or karate. You punch, you kick, you do some joint locks and stuff. Seriously, get over yourself.



How can someone who practices TKD not see that this thread has been dead for a month and you added nothing to it? You read, you look at the date tag, you think to yourself "Is this going to add to the thread" before you hit the submit button.

Get over yourself.