After Australia had gold medal success at the 200 Olympics in Taekwondo, the sport is receiving a large amount of media coverage heading into this years Athens games. Which lead me to the following question- After seeing a fair bit of footage on the television , and seeing some enthusiastic defence regarding Taekwondo as a respectable art for self defence, is there a massive difference in training techniques and thier application between sport Taekwondo, which has obvious flaws, and what the forum members study? Thanks.
You can find sport and non-sport TKD under the heading of ITF, WTF, ATA, and lots of individual 'kwans'. You just have to check the individual school you're thinking of attending to see what they emphasize, and if they will provide what you're looking for in a martial arts class.
I've never heard it as sport Taekwondo and non-sport Taekwondo before, but All I know, is that people and clubs take the whole 'training' aspect to a certain degree. Some places, clubs, organisations include everything and go to championships in sparring or what have you. And some just focus an patterns. It all depends. Personally, I dont think there should be anyplace that only deals with certain aspects. Taekwondo is Taekwondo, and nothing should be left out. Having said that keep in mind that everyone has a limit as well, and only each person knows how far they can go. Showing no disrespect,
"taekwon-do is taekwon-do"...thats your biggest mistake, you think they call one wtf and the other itf for no reason, people like you are the reason tkd has a bad name, before you decide to speak about a subject as such, i suggest you research it a little and know what you are talking about.
he's only stating his opinion. Tae kwon-do is tae kwon-do, how you practise/implement it can vary but the art should fundamentally be the same, or it wouldn't be tae kwon-do.
well said. I don't see a reason for so many different "styles" of Tae Kwon Do. Back on topic. Yes they are different. It's hard to take sporting TKD and use it in an actual SD situation. This is why some schools teach both aspects in the same class like the school i train at.
except that if you train in one rather than the other, it is as if you are training in 2 different MA's. this is the reason that one should be called something else. so once again....taekwon-do "isn't" teakwon-do if we were going by the "taekwon-do is taekwon-do" theory, we could just say...shotokan is tkd, kickboxing is tkd...and so on, they just practice and implement different
Thanks guys. Seems there is some big training differences between clubs. While I am not considering changing my style, I got the impression there was some rather large differences in training and application between sport (Olympic) and those of you who train the self defence aspect. I am sure many techniques overlap.... Very dynamic art. Good luck with your training.
I don't think that is a mistake at all. That's the open-mindness that is needed for the continued development of TKD. Organization names have nothing to do with what is Taekwondo and what is not Taekwondo.
ok, cept when you train wtf, they take away alot and leave almost everything up to the legs, not even bothering to block(or hardly at all), now this is because it is sport based...how is this good for the development of tkd unless your only goal is to fight in a wtf sanctioned tournamnet(if thats your goal,...your on the right track)
Only when sparring, of course there are blocking, hand techniques, locks, takedowns and releases in the SD and all the patterns are mainly blocking and hand techniques. WTF and ITF all have the same techniques, the only real difference is the competition side. Mev.
There is only one true "style" of Taekwon-Do and taht is General Choi's Orthodox ITF Taekwon-Do. And rightly so. In our schools, patterns are the most important thing and competition sparring is just the fun aspect of it that we do from time to time. It's the Patterns and Pre-set Sparring that is valued. There is a huge difference between Free Sparring and Competition Sparring. With Free being about the art which is what TKD is all about, the art. The stuff you see in the Olympics (other than demos) is not the art. Any school that emphasise sparring more than patterns and technique is not a proper school.
Training for sport in WTF is fine, but there is much more to it that that. I believe that is a bad stereotype that is out there, however I do know there are schools who do train purely for sport, but not all schools do this. Again I think this is close mindness. You said yourself that there are other types of sparring, and sparring itself is the test of your technique that you have learned in patterns and drills. Having an empahsis on sparring does not make the school proper or not, simply that is how they train. Focusing on patterns and technique does not make a school proper either. Nor does what organisation a school belongs to. What makes a school proper is the instructor, and the students willingness to learn and to train. That is a proper school.
I think Kickchick boiled it down, sport and non-sport TKD have almost nothing in common from what I can see any more. I like to watch it (sport) but I don't know if it has any real applications. Now don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want to get in a fight with any of these people, but they don't have a lot of self defense applications.
Concerning different styles.... Here's something I posted previously about styles of TKD: I think that we are also seeing Taekwondo schools beginning to operate differently, sort of like specializing based on the instructors' or the students' desires and/or strengths and weaknesses. In my own personal opinion, I would say there are the following general types: (1) Sport-oriented Taekwondo school - focuses on competition style sparring and has aspirations to do well in tournaments. Plusses to these schools is that you get lots of sparring, great footwork drills, and lots of kicking (and punching) practice. You work lots of forms and will probably get a great workout. Minuses to these schools would be a possible lack of attention to self defence and sparring/fighting beyond the rules of tournament TKD. (2) Traditional style school - focuses on the traditions and character training of the Korean arts. May work a great deal of repetition of deep stances, punches, blocks and etc. Forms practice will be intense with a focus on power generation instead of flash. Self defence will probably be covered fairly well, from a striking set of skills. Plusses - students will develop good basic skills and will be able to generate good power and speed through heavy repetition of the basic skills. Minuses - Some of these schools may not be open to new ideas, especially from other styles. (3) Progressive schools - may have started as one of the first two and for some reason has opened up to more cross training, realistic self defence and other "popular" skills sets. May even included options for ground grappling, free fighting, and so on. Plusses - Students should develop a strong set of skills that have been practiced against resisting opponents. Will have access to current trends in martial arts and ease of cross training. Should have solid self defence system. Minuses - May not be accepted as "real" TKD nor as a "real" Cross training (or MMA) school by peers and colleagues. May de-emphasize tournament skills, especially in fast footwork and kicking techniques. May get away from some of the "traditional" character development that makes TKD systems appealing to parents, teachers, and other character education people. The above is just my opinion based on schools I've trained in or watched. If anyone wants to add something or debate a point, please do so. (In case you're wondering, I would consider my school a #3, but also a school that began as a combination of #1 and #2 and which has evolved into a #3. I see no problems with schools evolving to fit the times and still remaining "Taekwondo".) (http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11651&page=2&pp=15&highlight=progressive) Believing that "only you" are studying the "only pure" style of an art is a good way to miss out on lots of good opportunities to learn from people who do things a bit differently. Hopefully on this site, you will grow and expand and realize that there are many ways of practicing TKD... and they may be different from yours. Check out this thread here for a good discussion on the WTF and ITF. Good training! http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2677&page=5&pp=15&highlight=WTF+ITF
good read thomas, except again, tkd IS itf. wtf is modified for the sport aspect (once again not bad if you want sport) and finally your "#3" "progressive"...is crosstraining in different arts and is not taekwon-do anymore. i cannot understand why people constantly think they can change or bring in different martial arts and still call what they do taekwon-do i personally am an itf black belt,...and also train in grappling(diff sorts ie. bjj, judo, shootfighting, roman greco, submission wrestling) also train in kickboxing(muay thai), and jkd...more specifically; winchun, kali, escrima ect. i do not do all of this and just call myself a "progressive" taekwon=do practicioner. i say i do taekwon-do, if you want the rest we will have to train more, although it is not taekwon-do.
Hmmmm.... After reading through this and a couple of other threads one thing jumps out at me: the only people saying "our" TKD is the real one are the ITF practitioners. Not all ITF feel this way of course, but the ones saying that seem predominantly ITF. So my question would be, is this something taught in ITF? In our school (admittedly only WTF) we are taught to accept every other martial art as an equal to our own, one being no better or worse than any other. We are no allowed to say anything derogatory about any art, particularly ITF TKD. It's all a question of acceptance and respect.
