232725 Bullies, 3386 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 111 to 118 of 118
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 289101112
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. EternalRage is offline
    EternalRage's Avatar

    WARNING: BJJ may cause airway obstruction.

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    3,360

    Posted On:
    3/02/2007 3:30am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Bajillion Joo Jizzu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Taekwondo is a martial art comprised of kicking and punching.

    What people have done with it and done to it is something else. For me, I experienced TKD as a sport, as a money making venture, and also as a traditional form of art and combat. The latter was obviously the most fun for me, but really there's no set way to defining TKD with the human element involved - theres just too many variations on the theme.
  2. shintek is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8

    Posted On:
    3/15/2007 11:14am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    On the subject of tae kwon do as a sport in the olympics, I would like to point out that the very same thing happened to judo. 90% of judo schools now concentrate on teaching whatever works well in competition, with much emphasis on cardio-vascular training. No self-defense is taught. Nor are kicks, blocks, or punches. A look a the very first publications on judo shows that judo was much more than it is today. In fact, I believe that in the early days of judo under Kano, young japanese men from different schools of jj would street-fight, and the judoka's (for the most part students already very much experienced in traditionnal jj) won on a regular basis. It WAS (supposedly) very street-efficient. Nowadays, judo is completely different. But Kano brought this on himself. Kano was actually very much interested with judo as a 'sport' and/or physical education program. He wanted for judo to be something that could be practiced safely by everyone. WTF TKD seems, in way, to have a similar 'problem'. Where instructors eventually assume students are indeed coming to learn flying kicks and such. I judo, when I used to ask if we could see some SD stuff once in a while, instructors told me nobody was really interested in that. Judo has always been popular, but I'd like to remind people that up until mma's came into light with the UFC and such, people were deriding judo. I quite clearly remember reading articles in BB magazine that blasted judo. And then came the Gracies with bjj in the UFC. Now, since everybody figured that bjj IS judo, things are different, and people seem to have a renewed respect for it. I've seen some pretty kick-ass footage of a TKD guy fighting full-contact against a kick-boxer. The TKD guy won. Big deal, of course. The fight could've gone the other way. But my point is this: the man makes the fighter, not the art. Also, judo in competition and judo in the streets is 2 different things. Throws can be applied differently when fighting for real. Or falls can be made to throw your opponent much harder. I'm thinking that any good TKD artist would know that showing off his perfect side-kick to the face might not be the best thing in a fight, but then again, I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of the same kick aimed at my knee, groin, or ribs. Judo and WTF TKD have one thing in common though: sparring can be done full force, with full intent, with minimal risks of injuries. And unless you're a professional fighter, a 'real' boxer or kick-boxer, or a (hat off to you guys) kyoshukin karate dude, you probably can't say the same about your MA. Just some thoughts.
  3. glad2bhere is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    288

    Posted On:
    3/15/2007 12:35pm


     Style: Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I'm quite sure someone else has probably mentioned this but I thought it would be worthwhile to repeat it at this juncture.

    In my life, I don't know any pursuit in which standing and rank are handed out in such arbitrary and varied ways as in the KMA. Quite frankly it simply makes no sense to me that a 16 y/o and a 60 y/o can both have, say, a second degree black belt and it is suppose to mean the same thing in both cases. I will also add that every time I raise this point someone is always quick toadd that such ranks mean different things to different styles, school and practitioners. To ME this just supports my original thought. IF the ranks and their practice are different THEN the ranks are not actually the same, are they? I will go a step farther (and this is probably where I will get into trouble) and say that I don't think that rank in KMA sport ought to be designated in the same way since the goals of the respective activities are very different. Even in my own art (Hapkido) I have very strong feelings that folks who use large circular movements and throws are doing something very different from the small, tight techniques done in the kwan I belong to.

    I think there is a lot of confusion when people represent that a BB is a BB is a BB, yes? Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
  4. kwoww is offline
    kwoww's Avatar

    poser

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley / Rochester
    Posts
    1,986

    Posted On:
    3/15/2007 1:30pm


     Style: punching bag / crew jitsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    A black belt, at least according to my instructors, signifies that you have come far enough in your training that you are ready to move beyond the basic techniques and "deepen" your understanding of the art. Of course, not everyone understands this (which is why most people get their BBs and quit), and a "deep" understanding of TKD can mean a bazillion different things. So I don't see any problem with a 16 year old and a 60 year old having a black belt, provided they have a healthy understanding of what it signifies.
  5. glad2bhere is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    288

    Posted On:
    3/15/2007 2:32pm


     Style: Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Yes, and I would agree up to the point that someone is only involved in MA as a hobby or pass-time. However, when an ativity moves to a place where one begins to discriminate regarding what one does and how they do it, I think its time to revisit the idea of exactly what it is that rank is suppose to mean. The definition is a very nice general overview which esentially says that "you get one of these when you start taking this seriously." The problem is that one person's "seriously" is not another person's "seriously". Don't you think its about time that we start making it clear just what sort of "seriously" we have in mind when a person gets his BB? personally I have a problem when a kid is told that his BB means the same thing as an adults as well as a sport person's BB means the same as someone steeped in hoshinsul. As far as I can tell the only people who tend to fight this clarification are the folks who want their flock to think they are training in authentic KMA when what they are actually getting is some tepid substitute.

    Here is an idea.

    How about if we are going to have ranking in Sport TKD that all promotions will be a function of a person's competition record instead of simple testing? Sound record and you get the promotion. Lousy record and you don't get promoted? Whats wrong with this? Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
  6. EternalRage is offline
    EternalRage's Avatar

    WARNING: BJJ may cause airway obstruction.

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    3,360

    Posted On:
    3/16/2007 12:07am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Bajillion Joo Jizzu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by shintek
    On the subject of tae kwon do as a sport in the olympics, I would like to point out that the very same thing happened to judo. 90% of judo schools now concentrate on teaching whatever works well in competition, with much emphasis on cardio-vascular training. No self-defense is taught. Nor are kicks, blocks, or punches. A look a the very first publications on judo shows that judo was much more than it is today. In fact, I believe that in the early days of judo under Kano, young japanese men from different schools of jj would street-fight, and the judoka's (for the most part students already very much experienced in traditionnal jj) won on a regular basis. It WAS (supposedly) very street-efficient. Nowadays, judo is completely different. But Kano brought this on himself. Kano was actually very much interested with judo as a 'sport' and/or physical education program. He wanted for judo to be something that could be practiced safely by everyone. WTF TKD seems, in way, to have a similar 'problem'. Where instructors eventually assume students are indeed coming to learn flying kicks and such. I judo, when I used to ask if we could see some SD stuff once in a while, instructors told me nobody was really interested in that. Judo has always been popular, but I'd like to remind people that up until mma's came into light with the UFC and such, people were deriding judo. I quite clearly remember reading articles in BB magazine that blasted judo. And then came the Gracies with bjj in the UFC. Now, since everybody figured that bjj IS judo, things are different, and people seem to have a renewed respect for it. I've seen some pretty kick-ass footage of a TKD guy fighting full-contact against a kick-boxer. The TKD guy won. Big deal, of course. The fight could've gone the other way. But my point is this: the man makes the fighter, not the art. Also, judo in competition and judo in the streets is 2 different things. Throws can be applied differently when fighting for real. Or falls can be made to throw your opponent much harder. I'm thinking that any good TKD artist would know that showing off his perfect side-kick to the face might not be the best thing in a fight, but then again, I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of the same kick aimed at my knee, groin, or ribs.
    From a broad perspective, I would more or less agree. However, there still is a slight difference. You can take competition Judo and still use it in things like MMA, plenty of people have done this already. But you can't take the Olympic TKD and use it in the same fashion - rules changed the techniques too much. Of course that isn't to say that you couldn't take TKD out of those rules and make it work, not by any means, plenty of people have. But if you are talking strictly about Olympic TKD, as you opened your post with, you can't use those techniques, unlike Judo, you can still do those throws.

    But I see your point about sport, what you are trying to say.

    Judo and WTF TKD have one thing in common though: sparring can be done full force, with full intent, with minimal risks of injuries. And unless you're a professional fighter, a 'real' boxer or kick-boxer, or a (hat off to you guys) kyoshukin karate dude, you probably can't say the same about your MA. Just some thoughts.
    Disagree. Plenty of schools in KMA and outside of KMA have full contact sparring or open mat sessions without the gear and under less restrictive rules. At JHU we host an open mat sparring session where the default rules are MMA and the default gear is mouthpiece, cup, helmet, and gloves. However, your point about injuries is taken. I'm sitting here with an MCL tear, I'm out for weeks, some might think its not worth the risk, but hey that's the price of solid training...
  7. EternalRage is offline
    EternalRage's Avatar

    WARNING: BJJ may cause airway obstruction.

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    3,360

    Posted On:
    3/16/2007 12:14am

    Join us... or die
     Style: Bajillion Joo Jizzu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by glad2bhere
    I'm quite sure someone else has probably mentioned this but I thought it would be worthwhile to repeat it at this juncture.

    In my life, I don't know any pursuit in which standing and rank are handed out in such arbitrary and varied ways as in the KMA. Quite frankly it simply makes no sense to me that a 16 y/o and a 60 y/o can both have, say, a second degree black belt and it is suppose to mean the same thing in both cases. I will also add that every time I raise this point someone is always quick toadd that such ranks mean different things to different styles, school and practitioners. To ME this just supports my original thought. IF the ranks and their practice are different THEN the ranks are not actually the same, are they? I will go a step farther (and this is probably where I will get into trouble) and say that I don't think that rank in KMA sport ought to be designated in the same way since the goals of the respective activities are very different. Even in my own art (Hapkido) I have very strong feelings that folks who use large circular movements and throws are doing something very different from the small, tight techniques done in the kwan I belong to.

    I think there is a lot of confusion when people represent that a BB is a BB is a BB, yes? Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Oh gosh. There was a long thread discussion about this on warrior-scholar, between MDK masters from different organizations with experience numbering in the decades. They ran around in circles with the same points, basically one side saying it was an organizational tool, or saying they gave out belts confident in the knowledge that the student demonstrated, or saying that belt systems have to be the way it is today to be fair to all (ie old, kids, etc). The other side was basically talking about how a belt should represent fighting ability period. and since that would be subjective and unfair to certain people, we should abolish it altogether.

    Neither side came up with any interesting solutions or compromises.

    Endless argument. Next.
  8. glad2bhere is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    288

    Posted On:
    3/16/2007 8:29am


     Style: Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by EternalRage
    Oh gosh. There was a long thread discussion about this on warrior-scholar, between MDK masters from different organizations with experience numbering in the decades. They ran around in circles with the same points, basically one side saying it was an organizational tool, or saying they gave out belts confident in the knowledge that the student demonstrated, or saying that belt systems have to be the way it is today to be fair to all (ie old, kids, etc). The other side was basically talking about how a belt should represent fighting ability period. and since that would be subjective and unfair to certain people, we should abolish it altogether.

    Neither side came up with any interesting solutions or compromises.
    Thanks for the information. I didn't know about that discussion. However, the only reason I made was comment was to say that folks who want to use a ranking system need to use it consistently. Where I see the ranking system becoming problematic is when a person is awarded a belt for one reason and represents it as meaning something else. For instance, 7th, 8th and 9th dan ranks are universally administrative rather than technical ranks. However, there are damn few I know who start their own "styles" or "arts" and make themselves "9th Dans" or "10th dans" who openly disclose that their rank reflects only an administrative position and not that their 10th dan is "five times more expert than a second dan."

    Suppose we have a full-contact school along the lines of Kyokushinkai that gets a reputation for awarding belts based on competition results. Perhaps one of the instructors decides to give out one or two "feel-good" belts to practitioners who are not doing so well in an effort to bolster their self-esteem. Are these practitioners going to tell everyone that they got "feel-good" belts, or will they simply allow folks to think that the belts are a reflection of their skills in competition? Isn't this where we went wrong? My question is not "should we be honestly running our MA schools like the Special Olympics where everyone "wins" and nobody "loses"?" My question is "shouldn't we be consistently practicing what we say we are practicing?" To me the trouble seems to come in when we say one thing and do another. Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 289101112

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.