It's all in the Practitioner

[cross]

well, the only styles i would say that would not be able to be tested would again be something like ground fighting versus a martial art. But of course little is known about this but taekwondo DOES have some ground fighting, you just don't learn it until you are some degree of blackbelt, even though i was taught a few cuz my instructor rocks.

Oh, and there is a video of a taekwondo blackbelt going up against a juijitsu school, and in the beginning of the video it asks, "How would a tkd blackbelt do against grappling?" and the whole video you think oh its this guy from the grappling school beating all these tkd guys, but in the end, it shows that it was the tkd guy that won! Then at the end of the video it says, "Never underestimate a tkd blackbelt!" but anyways..i think that says also of how it was probably him who dedicated himself a lot.

Thats all great. But if you want to learn to grapple you wouldnt go to a tkd school. Just like if you wanted to learn to kick high you wouldnt start training bjj. The training method matters much more than the person or the style. You can take any style and train it against resisting opponents and you will do much better than if you spent your time with inferior training methods.

[gzk]

well, the only styles i would say that would not be able to be tested would again be something like ground fighting versus a martial art. But of course little is known about this but taekwondo DOES have some ground fighting, you just don't learn it until you are some degree of blackbelt, even though i was taught a few cuz my instructor rocks.

Well, ground fighting and martial arts aren't mutually exclusive. I'm assuming you meant ground fighting vs. standup? If so, why can't you test them? Set up a competition where both are permitted; these competitions do exist.

What ground fighting techniques were you taught in TKD? Are you ever able to use them in live training (sparring) or in competition?

Oh, and there is a video of a taekwondo blackbelt going up against a juijitsu school, and in the beginning of the video it asks, "How would a tkd blackbelt do against grappling?" and the whole video you think oh its this guy from the grappling school beating all these tkd guys, but in the end, it shows that it was the tkd guy that won! Then at the end of the video it says, "Never underestimate a tkd blackbelt!" but anyways..i think that says also of how it was probably him who dedicated himself a lot.

Got a link to it? What sort of matches were they? MMA with striking and grappling, striking only, grappling only? What ranks were the grapplers at?

In any case, yeah, assuming the video is all legit and it's not a ridiculously unfair ruleset, it's still something where you need to look at trends from large samples and champion vs champion-type matchups.

[wingedMonkey]

Yea, I meant standup vs ground. Oh and fighting techniques for tkd on the ground are usually consisting of kicking people also but there are stuff like how to jump correctly if someone dives at you in order to have them just go underneath you and then you twist as you jump and axe kick them in the head. More ground stuff would be the whole kicking to shins/knees. Then there is the other rising kick which you do to people's faces. Nah, you can't use them for sparring, they are more of the military past of taekwondo which came from taekkyon. I

'll try and get the link for you'all, its pretty interesting, hopefully i'll get it on here by tomorrow.

[bushido_man96]

Oh and fighting techniques for tkd on the ground are usually consisting of kicking people also but there are stuff like how to jump correctly if someone dives at you in order to have them just go underneath you and then you twist as you jump and axe kick them in the head. More ground stuff would be the whole kicking to shins/knees. Then there is the other rising kick which you do to people's faces.

I really don't think that these are what most people would consider "ground fighting" techniques. They are techinques done standing, while someone else is on the ground. Most practitioners' definitions of "ground fighting" techniques are going to be related to those of ground submission types of moves, like arm bars, leg locks, and chokes. Things like that, where both of the fighters are on the ground, or darn close to it, like kneeling.

[wingedMonkey]

Oh and fighting techniques for tkd on the ground are usually consisting of kicking people also but there are stuff like how to jump correctly if someone dives at you in order to have them just go underneath you and then you twist as you jump and axe kick them in the head. More ground stuff would be the whole kicking to shins/knees. Then there is the other rising kick which you do to people's faces.

I really don't think that these are what most people would consider "ground fighting" techniques. They are techinques done standing, while someone else is on the ground. Most practitioners' definitions of "ground fighting" techniques are going to be related to those of ground submission types of moves, like arm bars, leg locks, and chokes. Things like that, where both of the fighters are on the ground, or darn close to it, like kneeling.

I think you are kinda not seeing it , sorry its kinda hard to explain, i would be doing these moves WHILE actually being on the ground so i consider them ground techniques. They are actually for if u are knocked down during a fight...i know, its kinda weird.

[DWx]

well, the only styles i would say that would not be able to be tested would again be something like ground fighting versus a martial art. But of course little is known about this but taekwondo DOES have some ground fighting, you just don't learn it until you are some degree of blackbelt, even though i was taught a few cuz my instructor rocks.

We learn a bit of groundwork where I train in TKD. Most of it is joint locks to immobilize your opponent. I have been taught a few methods to choke but wouldn't wanna do this because I think it'd be to dangerous for me to try. Its nowhere near as detailed as even basic BJJ. We kinda treat it as a last resort if standing up isn't working. Its not really ground fighting but we also do a lot of take-downs on an opponent whilst remaning standing and then locking his/her arm etc.

If I was intending to fight a grappler I'd want to stay on my feet. The limitations of my style don't bode well for taking it to the ground. But then again, if I did remain standing for the whole fight, I might have the upper hand against a grappler? IMO though, the art teaches the fighter but the fighter interprets the art.

[bushido_man96]

I think you are kinda not seeing it , sorry its kinda hard to explain, i would be doing these moves WHILE actually being on the ground so i consider them ground techniques. They are actually for if u are knocked down during a fight...i know, its kinda weird.

Well, kicking while you are on the ground can go into ground fighting...however, this is the phrase that threw me:

but there are stuff like how to jump correctly if someone dives at you in order to have them just go underneath you and then you twist as you jump and axe kick them in the head.

That doesn't really sound like ground fighting, but more like kicking someone while they are on the ground. Not to say that you can't do it, but I don't think it is really classfied as ground fighting.

[bushido_man96]

If I was intending to fight a grappler I'd want to stay on my feet. The limitations of my style don't bode well for taking it to the ground. But then again, if I did remain standing for the whole fight, I might have the upper hand against a grappler? IMO though, the art teaches the fighter but the fighter interprets the art.

That is a nice, thought, however, the grappler will probably be more skilled at taking someone to the ground than we (as in TKD people, you and me ) would be at defending the takedown. That is how Royce Gracie was able to dominate the early UFCs. Everyone thought that they could avoid the takedowns, but in the end, it all ended up the same way. You really have to spend some significant amount of time training against the grappling to get really good at defending it.

Not to say it can't happen, though. However, knowing how to take someone down is the best defense against a takedown.

[dragonwarrior_keltyr]

I think there are arguments for it being all about the practitioner. For example, there was this former dojo-mate who for years was pretty bad at karate. He was one of those ones who was a orange belt for 3 years - those kind of kids. The one's who never seem to figure outt he concepts and just stay at the same level. But, he worked pretty hard and now he's an awesome fighter. All due to his hardwork. Another point that says it's all about the person is instinct and reactions when fighting. While grading last weekend we had to do free sparring. My opponant managed to sweep me and without thinking I threw my fist out and punched as I fell (I gave him a good bruise ). I hadn't been taught that it was just my reaction. Someone else may have done something different some people would be too surprised to throw any counter. Attitude determination and instinct play a good part in how good or bad a martial artist is.

However, there are some things that also make a difference. A good instructor, a good martial art and even other students play a part. Even a natural ma will be hampered by a horrible instructor or a scam ma. Likewise, if a person studied yoga for 10 years they probably couldn't beat a 10 year martial artist because the kind of training they did would not be effective in a fight. I did gymnastics for years, but that wasn't much use in a fight. Sure, I had flexibility and balance but the required training for ma wasn't there. For me it didn't come naturally like my reactions do after training. I think that the individual plays a large roll in their success or failure as a fighter but there are other factors as well.