Ottman

Shazkar, If you are eventually going to train in both arts, I don't think it matters which one you start in. Based on your situation of having to go to college in 6 months. I'd make sure that whichever art you decide to start, you can find a school teaching that art in your new location. It would be a waste to start out in one art for 6 months and then have to switch to a different one. This might work if you were switching from TKD to Karate, or BJJ to Judo, but to switch from a striking art to a grappling art after just six months will all but nullify that 6 months of training. You really can't pick up enough experience in 6 months to be able to retain any skill if you don't keep up your training in the same art. I'd research what types of schools are in the area you're moving to, and make your decision based on that. If you can find schools for both styles, I'd personally start in TKD. It takes less time to progress up the ranks, and focuses on simpler strategies and concepts, and it gives you a very well rounded workout. While BJJ is certainly a great workout, you won't get nearly as much cardio and aerobic exercise, and, IMHO, if you are starting out not in very good shape, TKD training will give you a good foundation of fitness to build on (and in BJJ you will definitely have a chance to do some serious building.)

If we made most of these changes, it wouldn't be TKD, it would be some other MA. Every MA has drawbacks and weaknesses, that's why I crosstrain. Problem solved.

Yeah, Sorry to go off topic there. I also agree with Johnnymac's very reasonable advice. Hope everything works out for the best!

ocdavis, I went through a very similar experience. I got my 1st dan when I was 15, (sophomore in HS at the time.) I continued to train at my dojang for about a year, and then kinda just stopped. When I went to college I started getting into other martial arts on my own, and realized how great of a foundation I built with my TKD training. Like you said, everything was fresh again. Eventually, however, I began to miss the formalized training and routine of belonging to one dojang (a home dojang if you will), where I had access to a great instructor very supportive of my cross training, and a lot of dedicated students I could train with. I went back to TKD training with a whole new outlook on developing not just TKD as my instructor teaches it, but my own martial arts as I express them. This is something that my instructor is very supportive of, but we both know that it is nothing she can teach me. Now that I'm a black belt, as you've said, I need to find my own direction in martial arts, and I think that, as others have alluded to, a lot of people get so fixated with getting a black belt, that they don't know what direction to take afterwards, because they've never had to think about what lies beyond. They are used to having an instructor direct their training, and never had a vision of where they wanted their training to take them. Now that the director has nothing left to direct, it's up to the student to take the reigns and start dictating their own development as a martial artist. I don't think that the majority of martial arts students out there have this vision. This level of training is not for everyone, and let's not knock down the acheivement of getting a black belt. A lot of people don't even make it that far. It really takes a special, dedicated, driven person, who absolutely loves MA's, and can't get through a day without thinking about them to step up their training to the post black belt level. Again, it's all up to the individual, especially at this point in their training, and not everybody has the desire, drive, dedication, discipline, and determination to continue on the much different path of training after getting a black belt.

Amen TKDmom. Especially on this: As far as I know they don't do poomse in the olympics, but if you haven't seen the sparring, IMHO, it leaves something to be desired.

I'm getting this too, but you can hardly say that throwing someone to the ground and choking them out or submitting them is defensive. Grappling and felling can be extremely offensive but yet at the same time be defensive in the way of a lock or hold as you alluded to as opposed to a knock out blow. The same could be said about striking/kicking. A shot to the solar plexus versus a stike to the throat comes to mind or a stop kick to the hip to break balance versus a snap to the groin. I'm not really disagreeing with you, just your semantics. And yes, I also like proficiency in each and would recommend it to any serious MA. I understand where you're coming from Red. The point I was making was that I think that it's a lot easier to act defensively with throws and locks than it is with strikes. I came to this conclusion after starting BJJ, and understanding the contrast between striking arts, and grappling arts (which I'll use to encompass all non-striking styles), and I also am not disagreeing with what you've said. Sure you can control the force with which, and the area you decide to strike, but in all, striking is a more hostile activity. You can use it for defense, but you still have to batter someone, regardless of how much power you use, in order to use a strike. While you can certainly cause major damage with throws, locks, and chokes, it's easier (IMO) to control the hostility of a situation with grappling arts than with striking arts. Rather than get into a striking battle with an opponent, in which adrenaline levels rise, and therefore control usually declines, using grappling techniques to stop that type of escalation is, in my mind, far more defensive, and far more in contol method of handling the situation than using striking. I guess I'm coming at it from more of an Aikido school of thought, but then that's where the semantics come in don't they? I personally, would reserve the use of striking as a last resort on the street, partly because I don't wish to hurt anyone and feel I can better prevent injury to an opponent using grappling methods, and partly because self defense laws for martial artists in most states seem to favor the criminals, rather than the victims. I don't want to get pinned with any 'assault with a deadly weapon' charges in the act of defending myself just because I have a black belt in TKD. But this is a whole other issue, so I'll stop myself before going off on some crazy rant about self defense laws.

Hapkido-Kid, I'm sorry, but I have to completely disagree with you. Cross training in different arts has done nothing to hinder my training at all. In fact the exact opposite is true. The path we walk on (that I walk on anyway) is not split up by different styles. It is the path of a martial artist trying to be the best he can be, and every different style I study only helps me refine my skills. Right now I am actively studying TKD, BJJ, Kendo, Capoeira, and Jeet Kune Do principals, all simultaneously, and I couldn't be happier about it. I'm even thinking of adding Aikido to the mix as well. Studying all of these different styles gives me a way to sort out what works for me and what doesn't, and allows me to find true meaning in my own martial arts.

Well, I'm not an expert in Judo information at all, but from what I've been told and read and heard, it seems that Judo was developed from Ju Jitsu as more of a defensive, competition style of the art. I know that Ju Jitsu focuses on the groundwork first and foremost, so you probably won't learn any standing throws in Ju Jitsu until you've reached the upper ranks (Level 4 or 5 and beyond which, in my BJJ class, is Purple belt and up.) Judo, on the other hand, (again, from what I hear) is almost reversed from BJJ. You will concentrate on throws from a standing position, while groundfighting will be secondary, and won't come until you advanced a few ranks. They both seem to teach both throws and groundfighting, but at different times and with a different emphasis. BJJ (or any style of JJ) seems to be more about submissions and combat, while Judo seems to be more about defense and competition. I'm sure others will have better info, but here's something to start with. If you haven't already, I'd go to each school and watch a class or two, talk to the instructor about what you have in mind for your own training, and see if you can take some sample classes to figure out which style is best for you. Good Luck!

The only person you need to push you to become the best you can be is you. In fact you're the only one who can push you to such an end. It's not something that can be forced in my opinion. To get back to the post: I do agree with you 1st. I think a lot of people on this forum bad mouth schools that charge lots of money, but in the end, even martial arts instructors have to make a living, especially in today's world, and if they are good enough instructors to deserve such fees, then they should get them. If a person doesn't like how he's being instructed, and doesn't think it's worth his time and money to train there, then it's up to him to go somewhere else to seek better instruction. Just as with anything else, quality costs money, so I usually equate high prices with quality instruction until it's proven to me otherwise.

Interesting. Very impressive technique and athleticism. Maybe we'll see some of these guys in the WWF (or whatever they're calling themselves these days) or in the next Jackie Chan flick, but the question remains: WHAT DOES THIS STUFF HAVE TO DO WITH MARTIAL ARTS?!?

I don't mean to undermine this discussion, as a lot of the points expressed here have been very well thought out, viable, arguments, but I personally think this whole discussion is a moot point. Any of us would and can change things about our own training, but this doesn't mean that a whole style needs to change in order to coincide with what an individual practitioner thinks is best, even if that practitioner is a grand master. This type of idea that you can change the way a martial art is taught or practiced goes contrary to the whole idea of a 'Martial Art' as a way of expressing your own combative technique, whether it's for defense, offense, show, sport, or just because you like to do it. Now their has to be some sort of organization in order to do things like host national and international tournaments, or set up a federation to support the growth and popularity of the art, and the people who teach and practice it. This type of organization is a good thing because it allows outdsiders to be educated about the art, and it lays down a foundation for people not familiar with the art so they know what they can expect if they decide to start training in a particular style. It also creates a forum for insiders to get together and support each other and the art they love. This being said, the only thing you would ever need to change is the function and setup of this type of organiztion to make sure it is serving the art and the people who train in it and not the other way around. The 'Art' of TKD will take care of itself. Each practitioner will always have his/her own unique way of training and practicing, regardless of the style they practice, and no one can ever force you to change the way you do your MA's. Therefore, it doesn't make a shred of difference whether you train based this master's standards or that organization's standards. Luckily for us martial artists, there is no one organization that controls who can and can't teach or train and how they must teach or train. We have the power to pick which school, which style, and which master we train under. If we don't like one or the other, we can always switch. If you don't like the way the olympics are run, you don't have to participate. If you don't like either ITF or WTF style sparring, you can enter a different style of tournament. There are so many MA's and MA organizations out there that anyone can find what they're looking for, if they get out there and pound the pavement to find it. It's up to each of us to make the best out of our own training, and if you're not happy with the way things are run, either switch styles, or make the decision to train your way, and no one else's. Who's gonna stop you? The power is ours already.

Great! Good luck in all of your training karatekid!

tufrthanu, I have to agree with you about the ISKA, and XMA and NASKA 'gymnastics expositions' as I like to call them. What is happening to my beloved MA's?!? Everytime I see a triple backflip kick, or someone doing six cartwheels and a double layout flip with a half twist, and then throwing in a kick or two somewhere in the midst I want to scream. Take the black belts away from these people and give them leotards with sequence sewn on. Much more appropriate garb for what they are doing. I was at my last USTU tournament ever a couple years ago, and in the middle of competition, all rings were closed so we could see a demonstration by some TKD team of 'experts'. The show included more spins than kicks, and more cartwheels than any martial arts technique. When it got to the breaking portion of the show, I had to stifle my laughter to stop myself from being impolite. These so called experts and black belts were breaking 1/4 inch thick peices of balsa wood after a couple of flips and flashy things that had nothing to do with the actual kick or punch that finally broke the board (if you could call them boards). I'm sorry, but this type of thing is a joke, and doesn't impress me at all. I teach three year olds that can break inch thick pine boards with a variety of basic techniques, and if they saw someone cartwheeling at them, they would take a sidestep out of the way and nail them with a solid side kick on the way by. If these guys are really experts, and really martial artists, why not try to at least break real boards, even if you're going to keep all the flashy stuff. I mean come on, is there no dignity left in the art anymore? Or has TKD and many forms of karate and kung fu simply devolved into acrobatics and showmanship? It reminds me of medieval fools and court jesters vieing for the attention of their lords. It's rediculous. Thank the maker for UFC and Pride fighting, and still the ultimate in pugilism: pro boxing. Much more fun to watch. Poomse is great for training, but in competition it can be compared with figure skating and gymnastics. I don't have any problem with these two sports, but please keep them out of my MA's!

I've been doing TKD for over 11 years and BJJ for about 2 years. I would never stop doing TKD. It has become the foundation for which I build the rest of my training. However, I love BJJ and now I want to get into Aikido as well. I think it comes down to the individual's MA maturity. TKD, and most arts that focus on striking are (IMHO) very appealing to those with little MA experience. They think that punching and kicking someone (beating them in other words) is the best defense to have when that same someone is trying to hit or beat them. Once they understand that striking technique can only get you so far in a fight, they start to realize that grappling and throwing arts like JJ and Judo offer a way to control an attacker rather than just letting your fists and feet fly and hoping to land a blow that will knock out an attacker. You don't know how many hits it will take to incapacitate someone, but you do know that if you throw them to the ground and apply a choke or submission, they cannot hit you back, and you will have control of the situation. I believe it's only natural for someone experienced in striking arts to gravitate towards grappling and throwing arts once they understand the limitations of striking as a defensive tactic. Striking is for offense. Grappling and throwing is for defense. I like to be proficient in both just in case, so I think you're on the right track, and if you can only do JJ once a week, keep up the TKD training to at least supplement your physical fitness regimen. Also, if you're so close to BB in TKD, finish up and get there. No reason not to, right?

It's called "Into the Sun". It's been out for about a year. I don't think it was in theaters, but you should be able to buy it anywhere they sell DVD's. I just happened to have found it on the New Release wall at Blockbuster about 9 months ago, and I liked it so much that I bought it the next week.

I have some friends from brazil and they tell me that I have to go down there and experience Carnivale. As soon as I get a chance I will.

P.S. Yeah, you can switch schools and find a better instructor. I've always been a supporter of being proactive. Waiting for a governing body to fix things doesn't appeal to me, nor give me confidence at all.

Well luckily I haven't had the problem of slipshod instruction, and I have been known to be a fiercely independent, rugged individual, so maybe my attitude twoards the whole notion of a governing body is skewed, but if you're talking about an organization where the entire operation of martial arts training is completely standardized, sure you have a measure of what to expect, but you end up closing yourself off to a lot of possibilities for expanding your training and skills. You end up working twoards the standard and competing according to this standard, and in becoming fixated on attaining and maintaing this standard, you neglect a lot of exploration into other aspects of martial arts training, and thus are only able to function within this standard. The ATA, as you've described it, sounds a lot like what the WTF is accused of being. I hear people thrash the WTF for only teaching to be able to win at olympic style sparring, and therefore it doesn't teach the self defense and discipline philopsophies that are an integral part of the martial arts. We hear the word mcdojang quite often when talking of the WTF, and the ATA seems to be doing that exact thing: Churning out cookie cutter dojangs. Now I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they maintain very high standards of instruction, but can they hold their own against other styles? Is there enough variety, and potential for exploration in a standardized training program to be able to teach students to be able to adapt and react to any situation? Will the instructors be able to look at each students different abilities, strengths and weaknesses to adapt the training program to the student, or will they simply measure the students ability according to the blueprint the ATA has outlined? These are questions I would have, the answers to which would determine my view of ATA Tae Kwon Do as a true martial arts training program, or just a competetive sport that can't really hold its own outside of its own organization. This is the group-think syndrom that I'm afraid all these governing bodies are a catalyst to, and I personally see them as diluting the arts they represent for exactly that reason.

So you're saying the reason for these orgs. is to regulate forms? If so, my school is officially a WTF school, but we do forms from both ITF and WTF standards, as well as other arts. Therefore, could the WTF come in and take away our certification, or could we be dually certified, and either way, why would we want to go to the trouble? What does either organization do for us? As far as I know, they do nothing for us (but I'll have to ask my instructor about this, 'cus I'm not sure what they might do.) I am sure, however, that if you asked 10 students from my school, at random, what org. we belonged to, 9 of them probably wouldn't know, and most of them probably haven't even heard of either WTF or ITF, or ATA for that matter. So I guess my question is: what exactly do these organizations currently regulate, and if so few people know about them, then why do we need them? And if we don't need them now, why have them come in and start dictating how and what to teach?

Iceman and Aodhan, You both make some interesting points, and I didn't know that the ATA went to such great lengths to promote quality instruction, but I still stand firm that these organizations are in it more for business than anything else, and therefore should stay out of monitoring the quality of instruction. If they want to offer classes for instructors in how to teach under their certain standards, that's fine, great even, especially if the instructors are interested, but if they are able to control what/how/where an instructor teaches, then I have a major problem with that. Martial arts are an expression of the self after all, and if they become too regulated by organizations and beauracracies, then they run the risk of losing this very fundamental part of the training itself. I wouldn't want to see everyone doing the exact same techniques, the exact same way under the exact same standards. This goes contrary to the whole reason I train, which is to find out as much about myself, with as much freedom of expression as possible. If I can find an instructor who can help to accomplish this, then I don't care what s/he is certified in, (or if they're certified at all.) Again, if the ATA, WTF, ITF, or whoever else, want to put on tournaments and promote the sport of TKD then they certainly should maintain standards for being able to compete in these tournaments, and competitors not instructors, should need to be certified that they know the rules and understand the method of competition. This should not be something that the ATA, WTF, or ITF impose on instructors before they are able to teach a martial art they have mastered. Maybe I'm putting too much faith into the student being able to figure out whether the instructor is a quality instructor or not, but that's jsut the way I think.

Cancun just sounds too crazy for me. I would really like to get to the parts of mexico that aren't big tourist attractions. I went on a tour of the mayan ruins near Acapulco and they were pretty cool. I really want to go to south america actually and see Machu Pichu.

Never happen, most orgs are just way to big. That's why we have a certification process so qualified personell will make the good decisions. I don't think the ATA, WTF, ITF, etc. have any business setting standards for instruction at all. These organizations function NOT to dictate to instructors what/how/when/where/why they should be teaching, but to bring together instructors and martial artists under an organization that can determine standardized rules for competitions, and provide services to help the instructors with their BUSINESS, not their teaching. This is the biggest reason (among many others) that I hate the ATA vs. ITF vs. WTF debate. It really has nothing to do with the way an instructor teaches, or the style they teach with, and more to do with business than anything else. Does the Professional Boxing Association (or federation or whatever they call themselves) tell gym owners, and boxing managers and trainers how to train their boxers? Not the last time I checked. Instead they exist to sanction and promote matches and determine rules for competition. It's just business and has nothing to do with the art of boxing, just like the WTF and ITF and ATA are about business and not about the art of TKD. Any certifications and standards they have should be focused entirely on maintaining safe competitions, and should have nothing to do with an instructor's ability to teach the art of TKD as they see fit.

Yeah, everyone spoke english there. I tried to converse in Spanish as much as possible though so I could practice. I really want to head over to the Yucatan and check that out. (I'll be steering clear of Cancun though.)

Acapulco.

How come they can't seem to win at the olympics then? Not to bring up the 'timeless' debate about olympic style sparring as opposed to every other type of sparring, and the whole WTF vs. ITF thing too. I've heard more than enough of that. I guess I can understand parents wanting their children to learn from a native speaker, since even though your Korean colleague can speak perfect english, not many americans can, and even fewer do. I know I used to be able to formulate perfectly grammatically correct sentences in spanish, but then I went to Mexico and everyone there speaks in their own style of slang, as is the case everywhere in the world. It took me a while to assimilate most of it into my own spanish, and by that time I had to leave. Think back to your own english classes in high school. Do you ever really use the grammar and structure that was taught to you there? I know I rarely use it in full, because if I did, my friends would have no idea what I'm talking about. The same can relate to martial arts. You can break down styles that are local to certain areas of the world, but if you train in America, even if it's with a Korean master, then travel to Korea, I doubt the training and specifics would be the same, even though the style is the same. I doubt many masters have total control over the specifics of how their students train. Whenever there are groups of people doing something, a group mentality will evolve to acertain extent, and regardless of whether this group is training in the same style as that group, there will definitely be differences between each.