TKD calls out MMA

[Naszir]

In light of that, the writer has no perspective and his assessment would be akin to me saying his art "is an art started by and propagated by a people who have committed mass murder at universities and is the official martial art of an Axis of Evil nation, and no one wants their child to be exposed to evildoers and mentally unstable mass murderers, do they?".

See? It just doesn't hold up. I hope he opens his eyes up to the truth of the matter instead of making ridiculous statements. TUF is a show creatively edited for ratings that appeals to an 18-35 year old male demographic. Also, for the most part, a shaved head is an indicator of male pattern baldness rather than a statement about beliefs.

Or, it may just be a smokescreen to protect his livelihood. I hope not.

[Kempoist]

In light of that, the writer has no perspective and his assessment would be akin to me saying his art "is an art started by and propagated by a people who have committed mass murder at universities and is the official martial art of an Axis of Evil nation, and no one wants their child to be exposed to evildoers and mentally unstable mass murderers, do they?".

See? It just doesn't hold up. I hope he opens his eyes up to the truth of the matter instead of making ridiculous statements. TUF is a show creatively edited for ratings that appeals to an 18-35 year old male demographic. Also, for the most part, a shaved head is an indicator of male pattern baldness rather than a statement about beliefs.

Or, it may just be a smokescreen to protect his livelihood. I hope not.

Or we could just send him every artivcle we could find about every TKD instructor who gets cought diddling little kids. Talk about bad role models.

But that would be in poor taste and I'm better than that.


















No I'm not

[kohadril]

In light of that, the writer has no perspective and his assessment would be akin to me saying his art "is an art started by and propagated by a people who have committed mass murder at universities and is the official martial art of an Axis of Evil nation, and no one wants their child to be exposed to evildoers and mentally unstable mass murderers, do they?".

MMA should totally respond to **** like this with negative ads of its own:

Frame 1: "Taekwondo, Tang Soo Do, Hapkido" superimposed over and slowly fading into images of Kim Jong Il, NK military parades and missiles.

Frame 2: "Karate, Judo" superimposed over / fading into images of Tojo, the rape of Nanking (if any exist), Pearl Harbor, etc.

Frame 3: "Kung Fu, Tai Chi Chuan, _ing _un" superimposed / fading into images of Mao, the "great leap forward," the "cultural revolution," and the massacre at Tiananmen Square.

It doesn't matter that none of the people who created these things are related to those atrocities, and it doesn't matter that some practitioners of these arts were even persecuted by the very governments being indicted. Just like it doesn't matter that Bas Rutten, Rich Franklin, Georges St. Pierre, Randy Couture, Sean Sherk, CroCop, Fedor, Gomi, and indeed most of the highest profile names in MMA are great human beings.

Going negative is a bad strategy for TMA apologists. Asia isn't the unsullied font of all honor and morality, and if these TMA folks (most of whom, I'd bet, are white) keep saying it is, at some point we'll have to point out the flaws in that assessment.

[Ke?poFist]

Personally I find comparing TKD instructors to pedophiles being a much better negative ad campaign. Think about it. MMA and sportive MA schools have focus and purpose. LARP schools who claim to build everything in a person BUT fighting ability, are the ones who have no drive, purpose, ability and chances are just pathetic excuses for human beings, rejected from most in life so they relish in the adoration of children. Scary people to leave your kid around if you ask me.

[snoozn]

You study under Amal Easton? I have heard nothing but good things about him. One of my best friends growing up was a student of his and spoke very highly of him. Like so many others have said, I think that if the writer of the e-mail/pamphlet actually visited a bjj/mma school with a children's program he might change his mind, unless it is all just a smoke screen to protect his financial interests. But I am hoping for the former rather than the latter.

Yes, Amal and all the instructors there are great guys and good role models for the kids. I feel my kids are learning real self defense and also good ethics. I was so inspired watching the kid's classes that I'm now taking BJJ myself.

I don't think the writer of that pamphlet really cares if BJJ/MMA or other schools are good. I think the pamphlet is mostly about marketing. He seems to know his school isn't that great (large class size, lack of instructors, long contracts suggest this), so he puts down everyone else.

snoozn

[ironlurker]

The MMA instructor he's referring to is Jim McCaan...a submission wrestler, JKD guy and old-school boxer. He never says "traditions are BS" the exact quote is "the study of the true essence of combat removed from ritualistic BS and blended together with
Blood, Sweat, & Tears. " Note he said Ritualistic BS..not Traditional.

That's a great find, I just knew it had to do with competition in his area. In my mind, this makes Ran Zohar a little worse. If he was some naive, out-of-touch, uber-traditionalist TKD guy who actually believed what he said I'd think it was more excusable.

Ok Guys, if my report offended anyone I appologize. What you have to keep in
mind is the CONTEXT of the entire report. Remember, it is not an essay, but
essentially a marketing piece and its audience is a typical "Mom" of a 6 year
old. When I wrote it I did so through the eyes of a typical mother and rather
than have it be a lengthy dissertation on martial arts styles or history, its
basic purpose is to warn parents about illegitimate instructors IN MY AREA and
what I consider to be dangrous practices for children.
Here's the most important conextual point: The report is VERY SPECIFIC to a
particular "competing" school in my area, and much of the report was written so
that if anyone who read it walked into that school they will know exactly
what's up.

-first of all, backpedaling, which is always weak
- admits it's specifically aimed at an audience who lacks the proper knowledge to evaluate his claims
- admits it's aimed at his competition

The Jim McCaan guy is moving to this school: http://www.competitiveedge.cc/#

Our programs include the martial arts of Taekwondo, Kickboxing, Boxing, Grappling / Submission Wrestling, Catch-as-Catch Can, and Scientific Wrestling. Supplemental programs include Cardio-conditioning classes, Taekwondo Competition and Private Intense Training.

They're offering both TKD and MMA, so this explains why he says kids shouldn't even be in the same gym with MMA. I think tearing a whole sport apart just because you can't compete with your "professional fees" sucks, especially when MMA just became legal in PA.

[Don Gwinn]

Jim McCaan looks a lot like me. I'm a special education teacher (I teach 6th grade SRS/SRC)
I also drive an ambulance in my spare time.

Who would want their kids to learn from a guy like that?

[Stick]

This "report" should be forwarded to Mr. McCaan along with Ran Zohar's defense of it.

I'm serious.

Hell, someone just e-mail him a link to this thread.

[Virus]

I just read the last page of this thread, so forgive me if I'm off target. I think the best anti-TKD ad would be that clip where the TKD guy gets headslammed into the ground with the words "tae kwon owned" in big red letters coming up when his head hits the ground.

[bodhistate]

I'm curious how you arrive at the notion that any style/art/sport removes philosophy/ethics/etc. Different to be sure, but...it seems quite logical (dare I say preferable) that the 'philosophy' of a confrontational art be about the actual confrontation. For example...position before submission. This is a training/engagement philosophy, and frankly one I find more appropriate than the 'punch him in the eye' variety. You can find every life teaching everywhere, to varying degrees, if you look for it (just check out all those 'everything I needed to learn about life I learned in X' books).

And as for ethics, I think -questionable business practices aside- anything with rules, where you have to work together with others, is going to provide a solid foundation of ethics. Martial arts are really no better or worse, as a whole, than any other activity kids (or adults) can be doing, further, I don't think any subsection of MA (beyond a particular school) is any better or worse either.

It's all a matter of degree and definition. Shaolin kung-fu is one of the best examples of this. To truly be a "Shaolin martial artist," you need to live and train n a monastary and be a monk. Religious and philosophical study is just as important as the MA itself. For the lay person, they can study Shaolin kung-fu, but without pulling in all those other aspects of training, they aren't really Shaolin MAists. Once you get to American training of Shaolin, lip service is given to the religious side and most people just try to learn some fancy tricks. I do see a big difference between the general life lessons that you can learn everywhere, and the intricacies of those lessons that come from study.

Whether or not an MA is any better or worse than another is a matter of perspective. This guy views the behavior (and by extension the ethics) of the local MMA school as something really bad you need to protect children from. Obviously, other people disagree with him. GnPing a win can be viewed as a very brutal, unneccessary way of beating your opponent (while literally beating him), and the soccer moms won't see it as a "nice" way of winning a fight (and depending on the laws in the area, the cops might not either). On the other hand, everybody getting a trophy for showing up is false and insulting to those of actual talent. Whose ethics are better than the others? All a matter of opinion.

The TKD guy is doing himself a disservice by propogating such a negative stereotype. He could even get charged with slander, since he admits it is about a specific individual. If anything, he needs to go back and rewrite those "guidelines" according to the ethics he suggests are important in them.