YoungMan

Why would an ATA Instructor care about a chuan fa seminar?

I disagree. A MMA fighter will learn enough surface technique to get by in a ring, in the same way that a sport TKD fighter learns enough technique to win a match. Think about it: How many techniques do they really do? I agree with Tengu: there simply ae not enough hours in the day to study more than one martial art in depth, unless that's all you plan to do. For the rest of us, work, family, and personal time cut into whatever other training we might wish to do. By personal time, I mean time to ourselves spent not doing martial arts. You need that too. If you are truly dedicated to a martial art, that in itself will take up much of your time. That's one reason why I'm very suspicious of so-called masters of 10 different styles. It would not be humanly possible to put the time and dedication to master 10 arts unless you plan to live 300 years. Only in the the movies. Not to say other styles don't have things to offer advanced students. I do think if you are a novice of one art, you have enough to worry about.

One of my wife's running friends is going to DVR it for me. I'm looking forward to seeing how Jason Chamber's MMA background stacks up against a Korean free fighter. Jason might be fighting for personal pride, but the Korean guy is most likely fighting for Korean pride and thus has more to prove.

If they are going to Korea, they most likely will get the Kukkiwon version of Tae Kwon Do history. Although in fairness, the Kukkiwon has been more honest in recent years about the history of Tae Kwon Do, referencing the Japanese occupation of Korea and acknowleging the influence of karate and kung fu on post-war Korean arts. But it will most likely focus on modern Tae Kwon Do, which bears little to no resemblance to Japanese karate, and could legitimately be called a reemergence of the traditional Korean style of fighting.

Three rules I like to live by regarding street fights: 1. Do not feel you have anything to prove. Having a chip on your shoulder is a fast route to injury or worse. 2. If you survive a streetfight, you won. 3. Eventually you will meet someone who is better than you.

If I had a potential student tell me that he studied karate as well, I would most cerainly tell him to pick one. It's not as if I have anything against karate-I don't. But I also believe in loyalty and concentrating your energy in one direction. Not to mention karate has its own culture, beliefs, way of doing technique etc. that can directly contradict styles like Tae Kwon Do. I'm also not saying that TKD is better. I believe it's better to focus on one art and understand that before you branch out. And learning one art for 1-2 years does not qualify you to do that by the way. Another problem we Americans have: a buffet martial art mentality. Learn several arts at once to be "well rounded".

As I don't consider wrestling a martial art in the same sense as Tae Kwon Do, I wouldn't really have a problem with it.

Everybody has their personal favorites that they'd love to see them do. It's really been informative seeing these different styles in action, and noting the differences and similarities. Much better than that XMA show Discovery Channel showed awhile back. This is the real thing. When they go to Korea, I would like to see if they do a segment on TKD's early days and the fact that it was used by the police and military before it became known for fre fighting.

In traditional Tae Kwon Do, we believe all power comes from the Dan Jeon, located about 2" below the navel. The stances aid in stability and balance and driving the power forward, but power comes from the Dan Jeon. This is regardless of the technique being used.

Most likely it will be Jason Chambers fighting, since his size is closer to the Koreans' size. Not only will he not be allowed to use hand techniques to the head (which I'm sure he's used to doing), he'll have to get ready for high roundhouse kicks, as well as standing/jumping back side kicks and spinning heel kicks and axe kicks-all done at about 100 mph. Not to mention wearing armor and headgear. That should be great viewing right there! The training segments and history should be interesting as well. Hopefully it will open peoples' eyes as to how effective Tae Kwon Do really is.

If a student of mine, especially a color belt or junior black belt, wanted to cross train, I would expect them to ask me. I don't own them but it goes back to the Instructor-student relationship. if you don't practice a traditional art, or you consider your Instructor as nothing more than a service provider, you might not understand. I would most likely not want a color belt to cross train. I would take a black belt's request case by case. If I say no, and they do anyway, it implies a lack of respect and I very well might tell them to train elsewhere. I could just as easily bring in guest Instructors who could show them various helpful techniques outside the art. That's what our Instructor did. He brought in karate, judo, and other Instructors (who he trusted) who showed his students techniques from their arts. Cross training was unnecessary.

Can't wait for the Tae Kwon Do episode. I hope those two think it's going to be like American point fighting. Boy are they going to be in for a surprise! Not to mention seeing how seriously elite Koreans take Tae Kwon Do training. Let's see them try breaking granite or marble slabs.

Many years ago, my Instructor was training in judo at the time he started Tae Kwon Do and wanted to do both. His Instructor had two words of advice: Pick one. If a student of mine wanted to do the same thing, I would have the same advice. Pick one. After you reach Master level you can do whatever you want.

Know what you should have for equipment? Sandbag, kwon go (striking board), mirrors (optional). It's also nice to have a couple of target pads and an airshield. That's it. Anything else is overkill.

Just curious: Does Bill Klase claim 10th Dan in the style he founded?

Different arts and Instructors have different attitudes about cross training-some are more traditional than others. If you feel your Instructor is lenient and easygoing, talk to him privately about your desire. And yes, ask permission. It is a matter of respect on your part to do so. It means you think enough of him to ask his permission to study another art. Respect his wishes either way. One problem we Americans have is this attitude that we don't have to ask our instructor for permission to do anything. As a result, we have a reputation for being "cowboys" with big egos. From what you described of him, it should not be a problem. But if he says no, respect his wishes.

I've been at work, in work clothes, doing my job, when someone asks me if I work there. I have to look at them for a few seconds because I cannot believe someone could be that clueless. I have also been in uniform, with (black) belt tied around my waist, when someone (usually a kid) asks me what rank I am.

Just out of curiosity, I looked up his Kukkiwon certification. Let's just say what he claimed and what the Kukkiwon recognized were quite different.

I would agree with that. The two have undoubtably heavily influenced each other. But that's also something that differentiates Tae Kwon Do from, say, Japanese or Okinawan karate. Karate is essentially the same as it was 50 years ago. It doesn't change. Tae Kwon Do, especially Kukkiwon Tae Kwon Do, is markedly different than it was 50 years. One of my theories about this is that the second generations and later instructors made a conscious decision to get rid of the Japanese influences and embrace the Korean influences that they could now openly practice. I have seen pictures of Kim Soo pacticing with Tae Kyon students. If that happened, who's to say other Tae Kyon techniques and methodologies weren't taken as well. For instance, I've seen clips of the Tae Kyon front kicks, push kicks, back roundhouse/spinning heel kick, jumping kicks, wheel kicks, and side kicks on YouTube. They look exactly like how we do kicking. Which means, somewhere along the way, Tae Kyon technique was reintroduced into Tae Kwon Do. Because Japanese styles don't do things like that. Now whether or not those technqiues were always there or consciously introduced later is a matter of debate.

I found it hard to believe Daniel-san could beat a trained Okinawan black belt, especially one who wanted to kill him. Ralph Macchio seemed to be sleepwalking through KK3. KK4 was obviously a blatant attempt to appeal to female students, and not well acted. Pat Morita looked like he was doing it for the money.

I'll tell you something, I've seen numerous clips of Tae Kyon fighters demonstrating kicks, stepping technique, and sparring. Much of what they do is eerily similar, if not exactly like how our organization practiced. Our organization is Chung Do Kwan, if that means anything. Now, some say that Chung Do Kwan is merely Shotokan transplanted to Korea. But I'm telling you the things I saw Tae Kyon students do, and the way they did them, struck me as being very similar to the way we did things: kicking, stepping, sparring. Nothing Japanese about them.

He added more than just the sine wave, he was the co-creater of the Chang-Hon forms, arguably the first Korean TaeKwon-Do forms as the other Kwans used the Pyong Ang forms until '67 when the Palgwe were created. He also developed military TaeKwon-Do through the Oh Do Kwan which introduced a significant amount of Koreans to the art. Probably a better word that is sometimes used to describe him is a Father of TaeKwon-Do as he did help to nurture it especially when he was President of the KTA. The Chang Hon forms were essentially Shotokan forms with Chung Do Kwan kicking. And he didn't create all the forms. Some of them were created by various Chung Do Kwan black belts as they joined the Oh Do Kwan. Some, if not many, of the Chung Ho forms were taken wholesale from Japanese karate, which is where Choi got his original training. However, to his credit, Choi did recognize the need for Korean-based forms. It was a first step.

So like I said, modern Tae Kwon Do is much more descendant from Tae Kyon than Karate. I tend to agree. The second generation of Instructors consciously removed the Japanese influences and emphasized the Korean aspects (movement, kicking, steps etc.). I saw an interesting clip of Kukkiwon black belts practicing, and they moved almost exactly like Tae Kyon fighters. Conversely, I saw a clip of Tae Kyon fighters sparring, and they moved and fought almost exactly like Tae Kwon Do students.

Helping to unify the Kwans is not the same as creating a martial art. He promoted Tae Kwon Do, but contributed little to the substance aside from the sinewave. Most of the substance he got from Chung Do Kwan, of which he was a student according to Won Kuk Lee. As was Ki Hwang. As for the name, there is a debate as to whether or not he created it. He says he did, but Duk Sung Son claims Choi stole it from him and took credit.

One of the things I really hate is when people try to say that Tae Kwon Do is nothing more than Japanese karate in Korea. In the beginning, there was undoubtably a Japanse influence. But modern TKD bears no resemblance to karate, and indeed from the earliest days, established its own identity away from any foreign influences. And for that, Chung Do Kwan must be thanked. If it were up to some of the other schools, it would still be Kong Soo Do and practicing Japanese forms. Indeed, in an interview, Won Kuk Lee mentions Japanese karate and Funakoshi only briefly. He establishes Tang Soo Do as a Korean style. And he was one of the most important Founders. Without him, TKD as we know it simply wouldn't exist. Choi was a great promoter. But much of the substance of what we call TKD was from Lee.