The No Bullshit Fighting Member

Discussion in 'The Dojang' started by NoBullShitFighting, Feb 14, 2013.

  1. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    Hello. You may refer to me as NBSF, since the full name is very long and time consuming to write.

    I am joining this site to have meaningful discussions, this is a throwback to my name, as I do have opinions that are inflammatory in the martial arts community. Therefore I hope people will meet me with sincere arguments, instead of bullshit. But before I spill out my opinions I want you, as a reader, to know where I am coming from. Where I stand.

    I have 8 years of martial art practice, in addition to taekwondo I have learned and mastered some level of boxing and wrestling through various disciplines. I am very oriented towards the shifts within the martial arts community, heart of a whole, and I consider MMA and realistic self-defence as the peak of development of any martial art.

    To be quite frank with you, I consider various styles to be utter garbage. Not because the style is wrong, but because the teatchers don't want to make good fighters. They want to make dancers and eastern culture lovers. There is nothing wrong with being either, but I find it disrespectful if a person is paying to become a fighter.

    Taekwondo is the perfect example of this. It has all the nuts and bolts to compete in a K-1 tournament. Mix it up with some wrestling and it has a fair chance in the UFC, However, the art is in a standstill zone, as to often tradition will not allow it to become more effective. Thus it is rarely seen outside its own tournaments, compared to other styles.

    My goal for the future is to create a style of taekwondo that allows a fuller expression. That primarly is aimed towards realistic self-defence, K-1 and MMA. While keeping the patterns of both ITF and WTF. So that fighters of this discipline can enter almost any fighting tournament with relevant experience.

    It also needs a vast pressure on issues concerning self-defence and legal issues relevant for this topic. As the student is to be empowered, rather than learning flashy demonstration tech that doesn't work in real life.

    Currently I am researching BJJ and Krav Maga. However, I have bad prolapse in my lower back region and I am awaiting surgery. I am not allowed to compete in tournaments or practise BJJ or any strainious activity that might hurt my back.
     
  2. bowlie

    bowlie Well-Known Member

    There are a few here (me included) that share your view. I have done boxing and bjj, and got into taekwondo as a way to come back from an injury. One thing I will say is that I was very skeptical when I came here, thinking that taekwondo was wholly ineffective as a fighting style., but I have learnt alot, and some of what I thought was bullshit is actually very effective if done well.

    For example stances. I always fight in my boxing stance, and thought that the traditional TKD stances were a load of bull, and completely disregarded them. I recently learnt that the point of a stance is not to stay in it all the time, but is to teach the beginners ways of moving and changing body weight distribution so that you can get power in your punches. The problem with traditional martial arts in general is not that they are bad, but that they are taught poorly in alot of cases. Anyways, keep your mind open but critical, instead of discarding everything you come across, and you will learn alot. Oh, and welcome to the forum
     
    NoBullShitFighting likes this.
  3. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    I am happy you pointed this out. As I have already said: Taekwondo has all the nuts and bolts required to compete in a semi kickboxing, full kickboxing or even K-1 kickboxing tournament. The problems are not the fundamentals of taekwondo, but the fundamentalists of taekwondo. As most taekwondo schools practise what is truly a mediocre form of fighting, but they are treating their doctrines as they were infallible. That is a very bad combination. My belief is that taekwondo needs a reformation.

    I don't want to discard parts of taekwondo that are effective for attaining some skills. For instance, I truly dislike the olympic sparring, since it limits the fighters expression down to only kicks. However, this is a very ideal setting to practise timing, range and precision when kicking, and should be kept in taekwondo for that reason. I just want to add sparring with punching and grappling as well. This is not to far away from ITF, as I do see throws and punching often used in their tournaments. Going all the way to MMA and K-1 sparring is just a small step in the right direction. The added grappling will serve as a valuable experience in self-defence.

    When it comes to self defence one could stop the cooperative Uke, as it is called in judo. Instead take in exercises like sparring against a red marker wielding adversary, taking on the role as a knife-desperado, with proper protective gear and a white shirt, to count your red stains on afterwards. One should also give students a empowering schooling in laws and regulations regarding how to get away with using violence in an emergency situation, so that people don't train themselves to get behind bars.

    The standstill in taekwondo and the dumbing down of taekwondo in order to haul in more students and earning more money is effectivly halting the growth of the martial art. At least if one, like me, considers martial art as a science built on the shoulders of previous generations.
     
  4. bowlie

    bowlie Well-Known Member

    Actually we do alot of grappling and clinch work, at least in my club. Its not allowed in the comps, so its not an emphasis, but it is dont, particulary in the schools that are more self defense focused than sport focused. The problem with your idea, is that TKD is not made to appeal to the same people that muay thai does. Otherwise the people doing TKD would be doing muay thai instead. I do agree that there should be something like your idea, but I fear it wouldnt catch on, because its not something the vast majority of the TKD population want particularly. That said, its my dream to own a kickboxing gym based around TKD, and if you look on this site, there is a thread discussing Korean kickboxing, a style of TKD suited to kickboxing comps.

    Lastly, your assertion that MMA is the best self defense system isnt really right. Its a great base, but it is aimed at sport, not self defense. I think most self defense places go too far in the other direction, but I think a combination of full contact sport sparring, combined with self defense tactics is the way to go.
     
    NoBullShitFighting likes this.
  5. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    I see why grappling is not so easy to implement as the uniforms are not designed for such strain. However, one can wear different clothing when having grappling sessions. I am very happy to hear that you have found a club of that quality. I trained in a club like that myself.

    However, I do not consider MMA a good self-defence system. Self defence should be based on what is legal to do in a such a situation that requires effective action, with emphasis on effective and legal. I consider MMA good because it stresses versatility and allows a wide variety of strategies and movement. It also tests the validity of different grappling tech in a combat situation. MMA is for fighting an opponent with free expression, in those terms it is good for a fistfight on the street. I also recognize the fact that in any martial arts sparring there needs to be rules in order to insure some level of safety for the contenders, otherwise people would die and it would make us all look bad. I am waiting for the rules for DQ in MMA fights when a fingers hits the eye in an atempt at grappling. This is far to usual and i suspect it is being taken advantage of as a fingerjab, to be frank I doubt I would ever compete in a tournament where this isn't punished in some way.

    For a streetwise self-defence the fundamentals of Aikido is great when dealing with a charging opponent, avoid and redirect momentum. As this makes it easier to do things according to the law, not escalating the self-defense to what would be considered a fight. However, other situations will require immediate and harsh use of force to incapacitate the aggressor and get away safely. Students also should know how streetfights often escalates in order to be alert in a situation and avoiding a rising event that might require use of violence. It also needs to have a huge level of simplicity, while still being effective. Alot of the self-defense I see being taught is really for demonstrations as they are far to complicated, slow and difficult to ever pull of in a real situation.

    As for your appeal of taekwondo argument I will not deny or affirm that what you're saying is true. However, I must remind you of the fact that MMA is one of the fastest growing martial arts at the moment. However, it might be very true that elder people and children, that are a good income for people who run martial art gyms on full time, want a lighter form of training. My solution to this would be to get rid of the old belt system, only have white and black belts, black meaning ready to compete in tournaments, nowadays this is orange belt I think? Then different achievement marks, like in som types of karate. So if a person masters all the 17 WTF patterns they are awarded an achievement mark. If someone is really good at grappling they get awarded an achievement mark for that. Along with these they can also get the privileged of teaching within their field of expertise. The black belt was not inteded to be as elevated as it has become in the west. In japan children learn Karate in gym at school and have their black belts as they finish their semesters.

    Taekwondo is more popular with peope because of its brand. Kukkiwon have done an exelent marketing of their taekwondo, I am grateful for it as it makes my job easier. Regretfully the need to make money always comes at the cost of the quality. The first question an instructor should ask himself is if he wants to make money or great fighters. When people say things like "MacDojangs" a fastfood kind of taekwondo, they are referring to the dumbing down of the art in order to appeal to less hardworking students with a slower preferred pace of developing. I believe that there are many people who find taekwondo very appealing, they just see that the potential is being squandered away in order to make money. And they act angry, but mostly they are sad.

    So this is some of the things I stress with the concept of no bullshit fighting. Especially the part with not teaching demo-tech and call it self-defence. The student should get their moneys worth, both in self-defence, sparring and patterns. So can each literally decide for themselves what kind of notches to put under their belt. I am really putting alot of effort into this idea, I think it is a great idea.
     
  6. RTKDCMB

    RTKDCMB Active Member

    I've seen a lot of people like you who believe that they have come up with the ultimate fighting method superior to all martial arts, people like this guy;

    http://www.selfdefenceexposed.org/martialarts/index.html?gclid=CJKt26Kj97QCFSTZQgodtS0Azw.

    Who seems to be referring to the Vulcan neck pinch.

    They are a dime a dozen, they have previously been practicing either some watered down version of a martial art or they just plain sucked at it so they think that all martial arts are useless. While some of them would do fairly well in a real confrontation, many probably could not fight their way out of a wet paper bag. I'm not saying that you fall into either category mind. Unless you have been in dozens of real fights in the street using your fighting method then you cannot claim to have a realistic fighting style. If you had more than 8 years in the martial arts then you would be a bit more credible.

    MMA is a good sport but for self defence they have serious gaps that have developed over time. In the beginning the UFC was very realistic during UFC1-4 when there were no rules but it's not that way anymore. MMA does not train you for attacks from multiple assailants or weapons or street awareness. In real life there will be no winning on points or by referee stoppage or, weight classes and you will not have time to hit your opponent 200 times or spend 60 seconds trying to hold on to a leg for a takedown without the fear of copping an elbow to the back of the head (both things I have seen in UFC fights). A guy in the street is not going to get disqualified if he kicks you in the head while you are on the ground or punches you in the groin or breaks your fingers or pokes you in the eye and nobody will be trying to kill or maim you in the UFC. So it is not very realistic after all.

    Do not confuse reality with what you see on TV and in competitions, no one who has trained solely for self defence has ever competed in the UFC or K1 only those who have trained for sport so don't think that any martial art has been proven to be inferior to MMA because it has not.
     
  7. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    I knew a character like you would turn up eventually. I will try to deduce your blistering reply as well as I can and give it a fitting response. However, since your response at times are just clean attempts at dominating, rather than presenting a good case I am very uncertain of how well this can be carried out. I don't really see anything else but statements and straw-man arguments at first glance.

    First of all I have not come up with a fighting method. I am suggesting to broaden the horizon of what is being learned in order to be versatile. Then create diversity in what is being tested, so that people can take a degree in what they are interested in. This is blatantly obvious from what I have written. You can not have read my posts well enough, when you say that I think I have come up with a method superior to every other method you clearly demonstrate it, I am on the complete opposite side. I have reached the conclusion that the current method needs to be improved, but people are clinging to their doctrines as if it was the ultimate fighting method.

    MMA is superior as it is not a style, but a ideology aimed at taking what is useful from different styles and discard what isn't. From this origin it is very much up to the fighter, tradition is not a ruling factor of what is good or bad, instead reality gets to decide. This should be the deciding factor for what is kept or discarded in terms of self-defence. In addition self-defense needs to go hand in hand with knowledge of the laws and situations that can occur.

    Your paragraph starting with me being a dime in a dozen is a poorly disguised personal attack. And ending it with stating that it isn't makes you look even worse. Who are you fooling? No, you should drop that attitude at once. Let me also point out that I do not like to involve to much money with martial art, money corrupts martial art because the greed forces people to dumb down their teachings in order to keep students that excel slower. Making lots of money and at the same time making good fighters is very hard.

    However, I get that 8years is considered little, I have trained under people with more than 40 years of experience. On the other hand, do you not see the problem with this way of thinking.? Now it is the amount of years spent on learning a martial art that decides what is good or bad. Reality should decide, so the tech must be operationalized and tested in a situation that is as close to a real life situation as possible, while having safety in mind, so that the experience derived from it and unto the fighter is as relevant as possible. For instance when defending against a knife, instead of the cooperative partner giving you his knifed hand for you to disarm, why not dress up in a white shirt, put on protective gear and give your partner a red marker. See how well you fare against that, count the red dots on your shirt and try out some fancy moves to see if they work or get you killed. I believe many people will have a real eye-opener ahead of them, hopefully also adjust their self-defense teaching accordingly to their knowledge.

    You also mix up my words. I make a distinction between the fighting and the self-defence in all of my posts. I consider taekwondo to have the nuts and bolts required to be effective in K-1 and kickboxing, ITF practitioners have entered WAKO tournaments and done great, the semi-contact rules for kickboxing are almost identical to ITF sparring. There are people in K-1 using taekwondo, so why deny the students the option of taking their taekwondo in this direction? As for the MMA, grappling has shocked the martial arts community with how effective it is, and should be implemented into taekwondo as a natural response to this. It is about giving people their moneys worth with a 360 degree full curriculum.

    The self-defense should be based on the principle of taking what works and discard what doesn't. Meaning that the flashy moves some instructors teach, that look really cool and is really for demonstrations to get more students and earn more money, they need to get discarded or at the very least stop marching under the same flag as self-defense. The one step exercises needs to stop. Instead one should get a real education in being streetwise that is adapted to suit the basic need of a student. This will involve exercises dealing with more than one opponent, create distance using chairs. Not least a good schooling in rules and regulations that apply in ones country for using self-defense. So students don't self-defence them all the way to a jailsentence.

    So in my view taekwondo should consist of three parts still. The art of expression through movement in the patterns, a versatile fighting education, a realistic self-defense education. They should learn both patterns from ITF and WTF, so that transitioning from clubs goes smoother, they should also add something themselves. Create own patterns, own combinations, own self defense. Recognizing the fact that taekwondo is dynamic, as a fighter needs to be dynamic. The hard elements are the nuts and bolts, the soft element is the practitioner, so the practitioner needs to be free to experiment in order to master it in the way that is effective for them.
     
  8. bowlie

    bowlie Well-Known Member

    It very much is a style. The UFC has a set of rules, and as it goes on longer it is turning more into a style based on fitting around those rules. I agree that discarding what is uesless and focusing on what is useful is a good idea, I am a huge fan of bruce lee. What I find really intresting though is seeing how the UFC has developed into its own style, and more importantly how that style is developing. To begin with, BJJ gave everyone so much trouble it was seen as the king maker. Now that people have stared learning it better its no longer the deciding factor, as everyone is at least proficient in it. Because of that the striking aspect is developing fastest at the moment, and im hoping that we will see a divergance of styles and people experiment with add in more traditional styles and techniques.

    Also, im not sure if its meant to as tone is hard to communicate over the internet, but your posts do come across quite aggressive, you might want to address that if you dont want to feel like you are being personally attacked by RTKDCMB.
     
    RTKDCMB likes this.
  9. RTKDCMB

    RTKDCMB Active Member

    I knew a character like you would turn up eventually.

    I am a character

    I consider MMA and realistic self-defence as the peak of development of any martial art.

    MMA is superior


    To be quite frank with you, I consider various styles to be utter garbage.

    And you accuse me of making statements and straw man arguments and trying to dominate.

    First of all I have not come up with a fighting method. I am suggesting to broaden the horizon of what is being learned in order to be versatile.

    I did not exactly say you believe you have come up with a method, I said people like you.

    MMA is superior as it is not a style, but a ideology aimed at taking what is useful from different styles and discard what isn't.

    MMA discards a great many things that are useful for self defence, they have only taken what is useful to them in their competition to be used within the rules. For example knife hand strikes to the neck, middle knuckle strikes to the temple, wrist locks, kicking to the groin, punching the kidneys, side kicks to the side of the knee, downward elbows to the back of the head etc.


    In addition self-defense needs to go hand in hand with knowledge of the laws and situations that can occur.

    The only thing you really need to know about the law is that you avoid getting into physical altercations as much as possible and you only use your martial arts in self defence or the defence of those who cannot defend themselves when you have no other choice. Use only the amount of force you require to defend yourself and no more or less and don't keep attacking them when they are no longer a threat. If you teach your students the right attitude and morality and follow the same advice you should be fine. However you must always keep in mind that it is entirely possible to do exactly the right thing and still end up in jail which is good incentive to try to stay out of trouble. The main thing is to survive the encounter, everything else is secondary.

    Let me also point out that I do not like to involve to much money with martial art, money corrupts martial art because the greed forces people to dumb down their teachings in order to keep students that excel slower. Making lots of money and at the same time making good fighters is very hard.

    I agree. I do not make any money out of martial arts, I have a job for that, every one of the instructors in my style would teach for free if they did not have to pay for hall hire and advertising, which mostly comes out of their pockets.

    For instance when defending against a knife, instead of the cooperative partner giving you his knifed hand for you to disarm, why not dress up in a white shirt, put on protective gear and give your partner a red marker. See how well you fare against that, count the red dots on your shirt and try out some fancy moves to see if they work or get you killed.

    I'm not sure why you would need protective gear against a marker pen, we don't even use it when we spar with the rubber knives and they're a bit more pointy. And why would I do a fancy move against a knife? When we practice the individual knife defence techniques we practice the blocks, avoidance, grabs, joint locks, takedowns, arm breaks, turning the knife on them. When we spar with the knives we keep it simple and try to keep the knife away and block hard to deflect the knife away when it gets too close and only do the grabs and takedowns etc when the opportunity presents itself and always make it absolutely clear that if you have to defend your self against a knife you will get cut.

    Here is a video of some guys supposedly practicing realistic knife defences without doing the static methods that most traditional martial arts teach. If these guys used their skills (or lack thereof) that they displayed in the video then they would get killed in the street.



    The one step exercises needs to stop.

    You obviously have no real idea of the value and purpose of the one steps if you can't see the connection to patterns.


    Instead one should get a real education in being streetwise that is adapted to suit the basic need of a student. This will involve exercises dealing with more than one opponent, create distance using chairs.

    The style that I am trained in is purely for self defence and is based on common sense and includes defence against multiple assailants, grappling, ground defence and environmental/situational awareness and it has been shown to be effective in real situations (on at least 2 occasions our black belts have successfully fought off 5 attackers with no trouble at all). Patterns are not just for artistic expression they contain essential elements of the art and ensure the basics are practiced properly and regularly in 2 dimensions.
     
    Collier1313 likes this.
  10. Ted Martin

    Ted Martin Member

    I find it funny that you and I would want to start our conversations “I knew a character like you would turn up eventually” . All arts are welcome here but as long as they carry a level of respect and appreciation for each other.

    I see you are a man of many talents studying some of many different arts. I guess that makes you and I somewhat equals. I too studies Karate (Wye Do Rye) to a green belt, then MuayThai, and finally a WTF taekwondo where I am now a registered 1st level Dan. But this is where all the similarities end because I recognize Martial Arts for what they are not just a place to make fighters.

    I see WTF taekwondo as a standalone sport with defined limitations and qualities but its similarity to K1 are grossly overstated. Yes they both use kicking and they sometimes have 3 – 3 minute rounds but again this is where the similarities end. The majority of work done in K1 is boxing and Muay Thai with a sprinkle of other elements from various arts mostly apparent in the stances the competitors use during the fight. Yes they kick each other but the majority of the fight and TKO’s are executed with hand combat. Taekwondo punching is derived from karate with straight sharp jabs and are often unused because scoring focuses on strong concentrated kicks almost exclusively(different in ITF). This TKD punch in a tradition TKD fighting stance (wide walking stance) would be highly ineffective in a K1 match. In fact, I see K1 fighting and TKD as similar to each other as basketball is to soccer. They both have nets, they both use a ball but one is focused on its hands whereas the other is focused on its feet.

    Registered clubs mostly teach traditional arts with the history and terminology, as well as the tenants. They also deviate to teach some self-defense as well as sparring as it is defined in tournament TKD. Most parents don’t sign little Jonny up to learn how to punch people in the face and take a shot to the head but rather to give the child tools to grow with. Control, respect, teamwork, plus the tenants are all aspects little Jonny can used later in life and why we see an increasing number of students with challenges like ADD and OCD. The traditional arts have a lot to offer beyond leaning to kick and be kicked.

    I can see your vision to have TKD added as a fundamental component to MMA, sharing a seat with BJJ, Muay Thai, boxing, and wrestling and I think that is an admirable cause. I enjoy MMA just as much as the next guy but I take it for what it is, a sport with its own confines that is different than any other. I too was once like you thinking the arts should be all about fighting and defense and everything else is garbage but then I had kids and woke up to what the arts are really about.

    I think it will be a hard sell to convince a traditional martial artists to abandon the fundamentals for an unproven hybrid taekwondo method on a site dedicated to traditional TKD but on an MMA site you may get more traction.
     
    Collier1313 likes this.
  11. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    I am not going to answer a post that is as chopped up as this. If you have had people doing the same to you you should know that this way of writing is to tiresome and runs a risk of distorting the debate as usually paragraphs are taken out of context. You can say what you want, but when you're finished it ends there. I suggest reading my posts again and writing a proper response that won't take an entire hour to write a reply back for.
     
  12. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    To address the respect and appreciation issue. I find OL sparring, as you are talking about, worthy of appreciation and respect for its usefulness. I have already said what I find useful about it. I find practitioners effort worthy of respect and appreciation. I release the need for feeling respect and appreciation when it is being marketed as one thing and is something completely different. It is the same way about everything else, if you buy a car and it doesn't work because of its construction you should complain about it. If the guy that sold you the car then starts to inquire about your right to have an opinion since you are no engineer or mechanic, well then he is a jackass. The same goes for a student complaining about the mediocre sparring and self-defence sold to him in a martial art class.

    OL-sparring has no similarity to K-1 what so ever. We don't disagree here. OL-sparring, as the kukkiwon wants it to fit in, even for those with strict full-contact restrictions needs to be lighter. However, taekwondo has the nuts and bolts needed to compete in K-1, it is used by Cyrus Washington and Serkan Yilmaz. We have also seen it in the UFC with Anthony Pettis. So it is applicable. People who don't think taekwondo could fit in at K-1 do so because of their learned disposition and are just proving my point. The way taekwondo is being taught holds it back from reaching potentials that are in line with the practitioners wishes. What gives other people the right to decide for the student if they should be fighters or sporters?

    We also agree about the parents not wanting to sign up their children to get beaten up. That is a situation I am well-aware of. And my view on this is that it is very wise to teach many children if you need to make money because you're running a business. But one must realize that this will have consequences for what you can teach. This will in turn have consequences for your brand, including yourself as a master, in the longterm. So you need to make a choice, do you want to be a great master or a great salesman.

    Taekwondo being a social thing is a relatively new idea for me. Back when I was a whitebelt the club was a very training focused place. The master was a very old-school authoritative and strict foreigner. He also taught for almost free, using the money he got from us to buy shared protective gear, insurance and equipment. And he was very demanding. I for one liked to get pushed that far. The club run by my own people was very different, one could actually talk without asking for permission and bowing, in my old club that would cost 50push-ups, if you didn't manage 50 you could go home.

    I also don't want martial artist to get rid of things that work. I just want them to broaden the horizon so that they might choose their own path with taekwondo. Also, I don't want to sell it, I want to teach whoever wants to learn. It is not about money for me at all. I would love to walk in my masters footsteps, making the club as cheap as possible.
     
  13. Nightwing

    Nightwing Member

    Can we move this conversation to the Sparring section please :)
     
  14. Nightwing

    Nightwing Member

    double post
     
  15. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    I don't think that would be a good thing to do. this is about more than sparring. Also I didn't intend it to be a post for the sparring section. Just a personal statement about my standpoint, I could make a post about this subject for the sparring forum. This post is to wide to cover a specific topic, the discussion would float all over the place.

    This post was just an assertion of my opinions, that I am entitled to have.
     
  16. RTKDCMB

    RTKDCMB Active Member

    Funny but I don't remember typing blablabla. I hope this writing style is easier for you to read, no one else had any trouble reading chopped up replies so here it is again in one piece.


    I am a character

    And you accuse me of making statements and straw man arguments and trying to dominate.

    I did not exactly say you believe you have come up with a method, I said people like you.

    MMA discards a great many things that are useful for self defence, they have only taken what is useful to them in their competition to be used within the rules. For example knife hand strikes to the neck, middle knuckle strikes to the temple, wrist locks, kicking to the groin, punching the kidneys, side kicks to the side of the knee, downward elbows to the back of the head etc.

    The only thing you really need to know about the law is that you avoid getting into physical altercations as much as possible and you only use your martial arts in self defence or the defence of those who cannot defend themselves when you have no other choice. Use only the amount of force you require to defend yourself and no more or less and don't keep attacking them when they are no longer a threat. If you teach your students the right attitude and morality and follow the same advice you should be fine. However you must always keep in mind that it is entirely possible to do exactly the right thing and still end up in jail which is good incentive to try to stay out of trouble. The main thing is to survive the encounter, everything else is secondary.

    I agree. I do not make any money out of martial arts, I have a job for that, every one of the instructors in my style would teach for free if they did not have to pay for hall hire and advertising, which mostly comes out of their pockets.

    I'm not sure why you would need protective gear against a marker pen, we don't even use it when we spar with the rubber knives and they're a bit more pointy. And why would I do a fancy move against a knife? When we practice the individual knife defence techniques we practice the blocks, avoidance, grabs, joint locks, takedowns, arm breaks, turning the knife on them. When we spar with the knives we keep it simple and try to keep the knife away and block hard to deflect the knife away when it gets too close and only do the grabs and takedowns etc when the opportunity presents itself and always make it absolutely clear that if you have to defend your self against a knife you will get cut.

    Here is a video of some guys supposedly practicing realistic knife defences without doing the static methods that most traditional martial arts teach. If these guys used their skills (or lack thereof) that they displayed in the video then they would get killed in the street.



    You obviously have no real idea of the value and purpose of the one steps if you can't see the connection to patterns.

    The style that I am trained in is purely for self defence and is based on common sense and includes defence against multiple assailants, grappling, ground defence and environmental/situational awareness and it has been shown to be effective in real situations (on at least 2 occasions our black belts have successfully fought off 5 attackers with no trouble at all). Patterns are not just for artistic expression they contain essential elements of the art and ensure the basics are practiced properly and regularly in 2 dimensions.
     
  17. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    Is this style ITF or WTF taekwondo? Is it a certain kwan?

    I don't see your point. You are just claiming that I know nothing about taekwondo and boasting about your own club. Your club might be a very good club that teatches great self-defense, it doesn't change anything for the students in clubs that don't have the same way of doing things, this is almost every club in the divided taekwondo community. I don't mind people being different, as long as I get something that is different because it is better. You have a right to express your opinion, you don't need to be a douche towards me in the process. Being a douche doesn't make you sound more convincing.



    Let us take a look at a master black belt examination from a very common type of taekwondo in scandinavia, the mudo method. What is your opinion on the self-defence tech in this video at about 0:50? I have showed it to a friend of mine who is working on just self-defense for bodyguards and security personel through Krav Maga. He just laughed and said he didn't want to comment on it.

    I for one do not like the way this is being presented as self-defense, I could justify it if you say it is part of learning poomsae, but that is not what is happening in the gyms where I've been, and that is at least 5 different WTF and ITF dojangs in different parts of the country.

    Here is why I am a sceptic to this knife-defense we see in the first video.



    A good reason to practice with a helmet with a transparent solid full front of face protection is to not get the plastic knife in the eyes. And one should wear boxing gloves to not stun the arm of the training partner when punching the nerve near the wrist and elbow. The attacker shouldn't worry to much about poking out your eye, so that you get to fight an opponent without to much restraints. Also, protective gear is often worn for the sake of the insurance money.

    For the legal matters I think it is important to teach the students the fine print. So that the student can make his own decision as a responsible person accountable for their own actions, so that the teacher can rest with a clear conscience. The law is the deciding factor, every thing else runs a risk of being to simplistic or inaccurate.

    I am also ready to change my mind about MMA and realistic knife defense if you come up with something that is very convincing. Remember though, I don't mix the two. MMA is for a free expression in sparring. Self defence is for effectiveness and genuinity. But sparring should be a tool to test the self-defense, and I am more in favour of this tool than one-step self-defense for testing what skills actually are in the can.
     
  18. bowlie

    bowlie Well-Known Member

    It looks like ITF, but I couldnt say for sure. The techniques shown look ok for the most part, but if thats how they are practiced its not going to work. This looks like the first stage of learning, applying against an unresisting opponent. From there you should work up to doing it against a fully resistant opponent. Saying that, this seems to be a grading or demonstration. The way you demo things is different to how you train. Like when MMA fighters do behind the scenes things. Instead of showing there real training, they show fancy made up things, like training with weird equipment, or doing traditional forms and patterns for the camera.
     
    Collier1313 likes this.
  19. RTKDCMB

    RTKDCMB Active Member

    I assume you are talking to me. Why does everyone think you are boasting when you are just describing what your art does? If I said something like "my martial art is the best martial art ever devised" or "other styles are utter garbage" then that would be boasting, I would never say anything like that.

    To answer your first question - No my school has nothing to do with the ITF, it is an independent school, I'm not sure what the style in the video is.

    To answer your second question - I am not sure exactly what the attacker in the video at about 0.50s was trying to do. Was he trying to catch a butterfly behind the other guy's head or trying to give him a hug and just had poor depth perception? He may have been going for a double ear slap or a neck grab and just doing it with his arms too wide. As for the defence, the wedging block was a decent choice if the attacker was able to get that close (The defender did not allow him to grab him which is always preferable) but the twin upset punch was not. The main flaw in his choice of technique - why drop both hands to deliver two punches with less than half the power of one punch and leave your head wide open for another attack for such a long time (nearly 2 seconds in the video)? There are many defences that would have been more effective such as; from the blocking position an palm/elbow strike ala Yul Kuk hyung, kick or punch him before he grabs you (with his arms grabbing from that wide this is easy) or from the wedging block grab both arms and knee or front kick him in the groin or solar plexus or from the wedging block double inward knifehand strike to the neck, grab behind the neck, pull down and knee him in the groin or solar plexus. I can see why your Krav Maga friend was laughing.

    You have a right to express your opinion, you don't need to be a douche towards me in the process. Being a douche doesn't make you sound more convincing.

    You should take your own advice.
     
  20. NoBullShitFighting

    NoBullShitFighting Active Member

    I am sorry if you think I am being a douche towards you. It was certainly not my intention to be a douche towards you on purpose, I do not like you badmouthing me and do naturally want to retaliate. However, I understand what everybody in this thread wants. You I don't understand. What is it you want? Do you want to tell me that your club is a great club? Are you trying to present a case for taekwondo being equal or better than MMA? Are you comming with suggestions for what a good method of teakwondo should have? Are you encouraging me to be helpless and accept taekwondo in its current state?In any case you don't provide reasons for why this would be a better path. I am not going anywhere and you are free to post as many questions and statements as you want. However, I would be able to answer you way better if you keep it a bit more simple and discuss one topic thoroughly at the time.

    But see, here you go again with setting up the false premisesand debating against that other than what I am actually saying.

    You wrote: If I said something like "my martial art is the best martial art ever devised" or "other styles are utter garbage" then that would be boasting, I would never say anything like that. You are obviously implying that I said this in my first post. Perhaps I have been unclear, I consider the styles to be great, the problem is not the contents of, for example, taekwondo, as I have said before: It has the nuts and bolts to compete in K-1, a full-contact tournament with a high amount of allowed strikes and targets, when mixed with BJJ it could stand a chance in UFC with even fewer rules. The problem is how they are being taught. Many places acrobatic and flashy moves are being advertised as legit self-defense that could save your life. The olympic point sparring is being advertised as fighting. But all of a sudden they get into a more streetfight or a fight with lesser rules and they have to be MMA fighters, then they know nothing. But often taekwondo students learn punching to the face and grappling, why not have a little wrestling and boxing against a less cooperative opponent in a safe environment? Sparring.



    That way if you practice taekwondo you can enter OL if you want, WAKO and ITF if you want, K1 and UFC and so on. Your slogan in here is that people have to choose their own path. So with what right does a style narrow their options down?

    I don't really see a problem with saying that some martial arts are garbage. All martial arts are not created equal. There seems to be some political correctness going on here. MMA is better than taekwondo, no discussion needed. A regular WTF taekwondo practitioner has no ground game or striking strategies what so ever. In a no rules fight the MMA fighter would win, probably just by using BJJ. I practise taekwondo to, I want it to be the best fighting method and self-defense method in the world, it just isn't by to days standard. And instead of excusing that fact I am going to do something about it.

    Perhaps your club is way ahead of me. As you are not to bound by the demands of ITF and WTF you have a decent shot at teaching some really great stuff without being weighed down by style ruling as law, but Australia is just to far away from me, I have to make without. s
     

Share This Page