Sens55

Quick question: How important is it for a school to be affiliated? The reason I ask has to do with my training. I am studying under a 6th Degree Blackbelt in Moo Duk Kwan. Not Tang Soo Do Moo Duk Kwan, but Moo Duk Kwan. I know he's legit because I witnessed him being given his 6th degree. It was brought over from the Korean MDK group when the Korean National Demonstration Team was in town (not the Tigers but basically the same). That, apparently, is part of the problem. He had always been affiliated with the Korean MDK group. But, apparently after Hwang Kee passed there has been some turmoil there and they don't want to deal directly with independent U.S. schools. He's looked into dealing with the U.S. MDK group, but they want have him get "recertified" by a 2nd Degree somewhere here in the Midwest, charge him a large sum and then dictate what he can or can't teach. He doesn't want to do that, so he's looked inot other affiliations, but, for now, we're unaffiliated. Now, as far as my training goes, I'm happy. I know he's got a lot to teach and he's willing to do that. I don't plan on changing, I'm just curious to know if there are any "legitimacy" issues I may have to face later when I finally (after sooooo many years) get my blackbelt. Thanks in advance.

Sorry. I edited my previous posts (I hate when I fat finger). You guys obviously have an email update telling you when it's updated. Sorry 'bout that. Didn't mean to flood you.

We rarely use equipment (mostly only the kids). When the adults put on equipment then you KNOW someone's going to get popped. We go light to medium without and almost, but not quite, full speed with the equipment. We're not a Sport TKD Dojang, so the equipment is used to allow people the practice of really unloading on their punches and kicks with seriously hurting anyone. That being said, in those classes, I often go home more bruised than when we go without it pads.

Believe it or not, I don't think it's that uncommon. I originally started learning TKD from a place that would only let you take Hapkido after you had earned your Black Belt from him in TKD. He explained that he didn't believe a student had the "maturity and experience" necessary to be effective at HKD unless he/she had a background in the basics. What I now know to be the truth (I didn't stay at the school long) was that he was definitely "Business" side of TKD. Don't get me wrong, profits are always good. He wasn't exactly a McDojo, but he was more interested in opening another Dojang in the area than teaching. He let his Junior Blackbelts run the classes until you got to a higher level and then he'd run it. Turns out only he and one other instructor COULD teach Hapkido, so he used it as a reason to keep people training after they had gotten their blackbelt. Of course, he mostly taught the Sport TKD, so HKD was the first self-defense training many had ever seen. I don't believe the instructor was unqualified or suspicious, he just tried to push students into the area where he already had "economies of scale" taking place and he could make more money for less input than if he had to become more directly involved with teaching Hapkido to anyone that came in off the street for the same amount of money.

Both sport and "traditional" have benefits. Sport TKD is a great workout and can you in great shape. I don't believe sparring itself necessarily translates to good self-defense techniques. However, there's a lot to be said for getting used to taking a punch and giving one. You can learn how to close the gap, look for holes and exploit them. All of those are skills that will benefit you if you ever get into a scrap. Where I think sport TKD is ineffective for self-defense is that it can breed bad habits. I've seen lots of sport TKD's ignore the leg positions because their not afraid to expose them to sweeps or take downs. They also then to be a lot more focused on speed and getting of a quick shot (which is good), but ignores the true effectiveness of those kicks. As an example, I'm over 6' and 250 lbs. I am not as quick as some of the guys I workout with. They can dance around and score points all day long on me. BUT, if I catch them one time, I can drop them while their kicks do little more than wake me up. Most of the sport TKD situations I've seen they try to match you to people your age, size, experience, etc. However, in a real scenario, a 125 female might have to deal with someone like me (in size that is) and needs to know what will and won't work with me. It might not be the same as what will work for someone else closer to their size. Whew! Didn't mean to go so long. I only meant to say that I do not believe one is inherently better than the other. They both have points that can help you, it depends on what you need. But, don't blindly follow any one path and believe that it will teach you everything. You can learn something from everyone, even beginners, if you keep your eyes and ears open.

Vash, There are tons of websites, books, tapes, dvd's and such that you can order at any time. That being said, none of them are a substitute for training (especially under a qualified instructor). I'm guessing you may not be in the U.S. If you are, then there are plenty of places you can go. If you're not, then it depends on what is available in your area. Ideally you need to review your particular situation (your build, physical limitations, mindset, self-defense needs, etc) and find an art or classes that most closely match that need. Also, self-defense starts with a mindset. I know many martial artists that have perfect form, but would get hurt in a real-life scenario. Alternately, there are people with virtually no formal training that can more than adequately defend themselves. Regardless, there is no quick or easy answer. It's really depends on your situation. Good Luck.

I agree. Everyone should remember that martial arts, be it TJJ, BJJ, TKD or whatever, is a personal journey. And NHB or MMA events are only one way in which some individuals choose to gauge their success. Would either TJJ or BJJ be less effective if they taught a technique that didn't lead to a NHB victory but did allow a victim to gain an upper hand on an attacker and escape physical harm? Which is the true measure of success? Maybe both, maybe neither. It depends on the individual. My belief is that the techniques needed to subdue a trained opponent in a NHB match are not necessarily the ones that would be used to defend oneself if attacked on the street

WC-Strayder, It may be dangerous to assume that because a particular gym has multiple styles that they're a McDojo. Our dojo actually has TKD, Jiu Jitsu, Wing Tsun, Tai Chi and some Self-Defense classes. However, they're not taught by the same people, they're just sharing the gym. One guy owns the building and the other ones rent it and run their schools in it. So, if you just looked from the outside, it would look like one school teaching multiple arts. In actuality, it's multiple schools sharing one roof, and, of course, the marketing materials in the lobby. Like the others said, the true test of the instructor is in the material they teach. Also, not everyone's goal is for self-defense. Many people may study Kung-fu for cultural or aesthetic reasons that are purely personal.

Stold, You're right. Fighting on the street IS different. And, ask anyone, and they'll tell you that professionals are somewhat predictable. Amateurs (aka Streetfighters) are dangerous because they are extremely unpredictable.