styles/types of TKD

[sk0t]

champ64, where do you get off saying that JiDoKwan is the hardest style.

 

The different variations of TKD are situational at best.

 

ITF - has been slated as being more traditional, but it depends on who is teaching it, as to whether or not the validity of the aformentioned statement is true (practice point-sparring)

 

WTF - has been slated as more 'sport' oriented, but again that is situational, based on the instructor teaching it (practice full-contact 'Olympic' sparring)

 

ATA - "Songham TKD" is more of a unique branch of TKD following the path of the founder. They have their own forms, and they have their own method of sparring (point-contact)

 

there are other federations and other agencies that have their own form of TKD...

 

Keep in mind tho, and although they have the name of TKD, we cant think of it all a unified TaeKwonDo set ...because with different Poomsae and differeny Gyoroogi methods and different HonShul, it cant be unified.

 

And I dont like hearing how one method is HARDER than another, because it is all on a SITUATIONAL basis.

[RF_Brown]

Notice too the different ways of spelling it, and of course this too can vary from dojang to dojang but generally it is as follows,

 

WTF and ATA: "Taekwondo"

 

ITF: "Taekwon-Do"

 

Independent and also to the art in general as sort of a generic term: "Tae Kwon Do"

 

And the terms for forms also vary,

 

WTF: "Poomse"

 

ITF: "Tuls"

 

Tang Soo Do and Independent: "Hyungs"

 

RFB

[RF_Brown]

Well first off I was just thinking we seem to have to explain this about ever 3-4 weeks maybe someone could write up an unbiased article on it and one of the mods could sticky it to the board.

 

I tried a few times in responses to questions like this. The last one was back in Sept.

 

See the thread titled, "Differences between TKD and TSD" at: http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=14583&highlight=

 

Scroll to the bottom of page one to see my entry.

 

Thanks,

 

RFB

[mindsedgeblade]

Maybe someone could help me out with this. I haven't had time to talk with my instructor about it. We call our forms Kiban 1-5, and I've learned Pyong-an Cho-dan through Oh-dan. Which set mentioned do these fit into? My school is very self-defense oriented, with almost no tournament basis. I'm not sure of affiliation either- it really wasn't a factor in my choice.

[ranger1100ky]

Okay...--s--

My favorite subject...

First...

The ATA 'used' to use the Chang-hon style of forms.

General Choi, taught EGM Haeng Ung Lee, those forms, in about 3-4 days and nights, and when the ATA was founded... EGM Lee taught those forms to his students.

In the middle 1980's, Songahm forms were developed, not to 'change' Taekwondo... (The techniques used are still the SAME TKD that's taught in TKD schools around the world), but to change "HOW" it is taught. To make the teaching 'flow' for the student and the instructors in a uniform way.)

Look at General Choi's forms as one 'book' about the subject of Taekwondo.

Now look at EGM Lee's forms, as another 'book' about the subject of Taekwondo.

The Taekwondo is basically the same... a side kick is a side kick, a reverse punch is a reverse punch...

The two 'styles' go about the 'how to teach TKD' differently.

That's it... in a nutshell.

The same can be said for the WTF forms as well...

End of the day gang...

Taekwondo, is Taekwondo...

If your round kick is great in the WTF... then those in the ITF, and those in the ATA, will say, "Hey... you've got a great round kick!".

The 'difference' is in 'how the knowledge is imparted to the student'... NOT in 'different knowledge'.

Which one's better?

It's a matter of personal taste... I still enjoy practicing the Chang-hon forms...because those were the forms I used when I ascended to my first degree black belt...

But... I've also knowledge of Songahm... and I enjoy practicing those forms as well.

Before it's all said and done, I may even learn some of the WTF forms for my own enjoyment as well.

Either which way... if you practice TKD... then it doesn't MATTER which association you're in, or which 'style' appeals to you most.

Just keep practicing TKD, eh?

Your's in Taekwondo,

Paul

[TKDguy]

I thank your doing what Im doing, ......there is international, world and ata syle I think, whats western hemisphere Taekwondo? there is a picture of a guy then it says that he like help invent it something.... can you guys tell me what type of taekwondo im taking?? When I was a white belt we did left foot stay and when I was an orange belt I did chun gi which has the backstance in it.. you guys can ask me questions if that will help you guys figure it out..

thanks andrew

[UpTheIrons]

I disagree with Ji Do Kwan being the hardest style. Much of what I've read says that Chung Do Kwan training (the style I do) was almost brutal. Chung Do Kwan students had a reputation for having very powerful technique.

[Belasko]

Maybe someone could help me out with this. I haven't had time to talk with my instructor about it. We call our forms Kiban 1-5, and I've learned Pyong-an Cho-dan through Oh-dan. Which set mentioned do these fit into? My school is very self-defense oriented, with almost no tournament basis. I'm not sure of affiliation either- it really wasn't a factor in my choice.

Your description sounds a lot like the style I study, Chung Do Kwan TKD. From what I can put together there are 2 different CDK TKD styles out there. The one I'm in was an off shoot of WTF by Grandmaster Kim who started it in Arizona if I remember correctly. I'm not familiar w/ kiban but we do Pyong-an, Tae-guk, Kuk-mu forms plus others at the higher ranks. We don't necisarily have a heavy emphasis on self defense but we do have a heavy emphasis on practical application which can be applied to it. PM me if you have questions about it.

[TKDave]

One thing to remember, is even in the orgs, I have seen what you would consider different styles. I studied at an ATA school under Mike Allemier, who is a tough guy, and high up in Krav as well. He is interested a lot in the self defense. I have also seen ATA guys who are more about the fancy stuff, or the pretty techniques.. sadly these guys do well at point tournaments a lot.. but over all.. if you have a good instructor, the ATA system can work very well.

I have been to a WTF school which they just flip flop their kicks and it is all sport.. but I have been and trained at another one which you would say the style was more like kickboxing as it has face punches, and you will see more boxing a lot of the time than you will fancy kicks.

So, every school has good and bad. I think people like to look at the worst of other orgs and say that is all they are... this is just not the case. I have also moved in the military and had to go to an MA school which I found to be terrible, but I went in there, and trained hard and still got something out of it...

So it is a combo, does the basic foundation, the org have something that can provide a good learning system? I find yes in most orgs.

Does the instructor teach the MA in a way which not only works, but works for you and helps acheive your goals? This is one you have to really look at.

And 3, do you have the dedication? Do you have what it takes? I can go loose in a tournament, and blame it all on my style, but really.. it was probably a lot to do with me. It is funny, when people come to the reality that they suck, they blame the school or style, when they win, they take the credit.

[Sam]

Im quite happy to write an article up about hte difference between ITF and WTF but to be honest coming from the uk im not that knowledgable about teh ATA history other than the basics.

Also as to which is thebest style - there really isnt one - agian ill repeat what has been said its situational AT BEST.... sometimes it just may be down to the individual practitioners... seem to end up saying that alot.