Differnces among various martial arts

[Ellacooper]

I am Very confused that What's the difference between karate and Tae-kwon-do? Or Kung-fu?

Please describe briefly.Not only general difference .

[Zaine]

I don't think that's a thing that anybody could describe briefly. The differences between the various systems can be subtle or vastly different. For example, TKD has a lot more kicks than Shorin Ryu would.

[Archimoto]

I am Very confused that What's the difference between karate and Tae-kwon-do? Or Kung-fu?

Please describe briefly.Not only general difference .

I recommend googling the history of each art as a good place to start.

And I'm not trying to be funny - I mean it - to know the origin of an art is essential.

[sensei8]

Briefly...

Karate = More hand techniques

TKD = More kicking techniques

Both utilize many varied methodologies as well as ideologies. In that, to the layperson, both appear the same, however, they're not. These varying methodologies and ideologies make their core styles, but in that, it's the practitioners that validate or disqualify either of these arts.

Both styles are effective, imho, nonetheless, it's the practitioners that carry the responsibility to follow said core so that what the founders have created IS effective, as possible.

The differing cultures that said styles have been birthed from play an important role in both the methodologies and ideologies, however, "man" isn't happy until the style changes, when it's "man" that must change to be effective.

Both styles, imho, are simple and direct in their curriculum/syllabus, and at times, both are attacked from time to time for varying reasons. Both have form/kata, but not all, on both sides of the fence, utilize Bunkai [applications found within said forms/kata] for one reason or another.

Karate supports and teaches the three K's: Kihon [basics], Kata [Forms], and Kumite [sparring]. In that, all three must be utilized at all times. One without the other is akin to a three-legged chair depending only on two-legs; ineffective.

In the long and the short of it all, neither of the styles are without their pros and cons; they'll vary depending on whom one speaks to about either of the styles.

Proof is on the floor, but not with the styles, but with the practitioners themselves on an individual basis. The banner bearers of either style can make or break a school, but not the styles!! Those styles are both solid!!

No matter which style, not all governing bodies and/or said schools are always on the same page. The reasons why are as wide as the oceans are and as they're deep.

My vehicle is Karate, but I've also, for a shortened moment, walked with TKD in the hopes to broaden my MA horizon; my journey has been rich, but that's because I'm eclectic in my MA journey, welcoming all that can improve my MA betterment.

Karate or TKD? Both, for a split second, look similar, but their as far as the north pole is from the south pole; opposites that attract.

[Archimoto]

Briefly...

Karate = More hand techniques

TKD = More kicking techniques

Both utilize many varied methodologies as well as ideologies. In that, to the layperson, both appear the same, however, they're not. These varying methodologies and ideologies make their core styles, but in that, it's the practitioners that validate or disqualify either of these arts.

Both styles are effective, imho, nonetheless, it's the practitioners that carry the responsibility to follow said core so that what the founders have created IS effective, as possible.

The differing cultures that said styles have been birthed from play an important role in both the methodologies and ideologies, however, "man" isn't happy until the style changes, when it's "man" that must change to be effective.

Both styles, imho, are simple and direct in their curriculum/syllabus, and at times, both are attacked from time to time for varying reasons. Both have form/kata, but not all, on both sides of the fence, utilize Bunkai [applications found within said forms/kata] for one reason or another.

Karate supports and teaches the three K's: Kihon [basics], Kata [Forms], and Kumite [sparring]. In that, all three must be utilized at all times. One without the other is akin to a three-legged chair depending only on two-legs; ineffective.

In the long and the short of it all, neither of the styles are without their pros and cons; they'll vary depending on whom one speaks to about either of the styles.

Proof is on the floor, but not with the styles, but with the practitioners themselves on an individual basis. The banner bearers of either style can make or break a school, but not the styles!! Those styles are both solid!!

No matter which style, not all governing bodies and/or said schools are always on the same page. The reasons why are as wide as the oceans are and as they're deep.

My vehicle is Karate, but I've also, for a shortened moment, walked with TKD in the hopes to broaden my MA horizon; my journey has been rich, but that's because I'm eclectic in my MA journey, welcoming all that can improve my MA betterment.

Karate or TKD? Both, for a split second, look similar, but their as far as the north pole is from the south pole; opposites that attract.

Wow!!!

[ps1]

Doctrine.

The difference between any martial arts is always in their doctrine. Almost all martial arts have the same techniques, more or less. But the differences come in the way they choose to use those techniques.

For example, most karate systems believe in very strong punches with low to mid level kicking. Their training is designed to reinforce that use. Most other weapons, such as throws and high kicks, are used sparingly.

Tae Kwon Do, on the other hand tends to focus on shorter fast hand strikes to set up powerful low, medium, and high kicks. The drills and other training they do is designed to reinforce those habits.

This is a VERY general and VERY unfair description of each art. There are many different systems within karate and tae kwon do respectively. The only way to really learn all those differences in a way you can understand is to start training and learn them first hand. It can take years to truly understand a system.

[sensei8]

Doctrine.

The difference between any martial arts is always in their doctrine. Almost all martial arts have the same techniques, more or less. But the differences come in the way they choose to use those techniques.

For example, most karate systems believe in very strong punches with low to mid level kicking. Their training is designed to reinforce that use. Most other weapons, such as throws and high kicks, are used sparingly.

Tae Kwon Do, on the other hand tends to focus on shorter fast hand strikes to set up powerful low, medium, and high kicks. The drills and other training they do is designed to reinforce those habits.

This is a VERY general and VERY unfair description of each art. There are many different systems within karate and tae kwon do respectively. The only way to really learn all those differences in a way you can understand is to start training and learn them first hand. It can take years to truly understand a system.

Solid post!!

For me, Doctrine is the same thing as methodology/ideology.

[Nidan Melbourne]

Each are rather different. So like what others have said look it up on google. But TKD has a large focus on kicks over hand strikes, whilst karate has a good balance of kicks and hand strikes.

Although Karate has roots in kung fu, so there are some techniques in karate that looks very similar to kung fu.

[andym]

look at it in terms of a family tree. Kung Fu is the grandparent. Karate a parent. TKD a child.

[andym]

More technically, Karate follows Kung Fu's lead - forms training and the application of the forms with a partner. Karate then developed free sparring. Which Kung Fu and TKD adopted. TKD has now focused almost solely on sparring methods.