Martial Arts vs. Buisness
Langdow
What is everyone's opinions on dojangs that are run for profit?
K. Geary
run for very long in the U.S.
KMG
"Langdow" <snip...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:bsfx9.667574$Ag2.25...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Clothahump
> Hi everyone, just want to pose a question to the group.
>
> What is everyone's opinions on dojangs that are run for profit?
>
>
>
There is absolutely nothing in the world wrong with teaching martial
arts and making a living from it. The two are *not* mutually exclusive.
Kevin J
"Clothahump" <crs...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3DC5B2ED...@bigfoot.com...
My sister makes a decent living doing so, with around 150 students. Fees
are enough, without being excessive.
I think a teacher for whom the teaching is their profession are often more
serious about it. Of course, there will always be exceptions on both
sides.
Kevin J
Calummurdo Kennedy
>
> What is everyone's opinions on dojangs that are run for profit?
>
Hi There,
I teach at a Dojang were we do not charge students for training (other than
time and effort), and I think I prob expect more from my students in terms
of committment than if they were to pay a monthly due which I think helps
them to a degree. Having said that I may well be a better instructor if I
were financially motivated to spend two hours a day in preparation or was
able to buy all the equipment that we need!
Generally speaking there are some really bad profit motivated schools out
there and you can usually tell by the time you open the front door, but
there are also some really good ones, just not as many in my view.
Best Regards,
CalumMurdo Kennedy
GB-1-1563
www.taekwondo.freeserve.co.uk
>
Robert Low
Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I teach at a Dojang were we do not charge students for training (other than
>time and effort),
How do you manage for accomodation and equipment? Focus
pads, paddles, and punch bags aren't free...and neither
are most training halls!
Patrick M Geahan
> What is everyone's opinions on dojangs that are run for profit?
I have opinions on the master, not the business model.
While I agree that for-profit schools may be more susceptible to becoming
McDojangs, I also realize that simply being for-profit is not, in itself,
a difficulty. Like anything else, it has positives and negatives.
--
-------Patrick M Geahan---...@chartermi.net---ICQ:3784715------
Quote of the Week: "Children are like pigeons - its fine to keep 1 or 2 at
home for racing purposes but once they start crapping on my car, they're
vermin." andymurd on K5.
VMAA
than one that has no business plan. How many "free" dojangs have you seen
last more than 5-10 years? What would you treat better - something you paid
for, or something that was given to you free? There is nothing wrong with
making a profit and in turn - a living. When you have a love for the profit
*instead* of the art is when you see bad TKD results.
--
Dave Melton
4th Dan W.T.F.
"K. Geary" <mdkg...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:UWfx9.230021$qM2.79730@sccrnsc02...
Calummurdo Kennedy
"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:aq5ueg$36c$1...@sunbeam.coventry.ac.uk...
>
> Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >I teach at a Dojang were we do not charge students for training (other
than
> >time and effort),
>
> How do you manage for accomodation and equipment? Focus
> pads, paddles, and punch bags aren't free...and neither
> are most training halls!
>
We are a University Club so they provide the hall during term time for free,
during the summer break we can pay to book it or turn up and use it for free
if no-one else is using it. We're lucky in that we don't have to pay for
the hall, but anything else we need we either buy individually like sparring
equipment or everyone chips in.
We don't use much equipment as we don't have it and I don't usually find it
too useful, the only thing i really miss is a bag, we have kick shieild but
i prefer a bag.
--
Best Regards,
CalumMurdo Kennedy
GB-1-1563
www.taekwondo.freeserve.co.uk
> --
> Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Robert Low
Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
>> pads, paddles, and punch bags aren't free...and neither
>> are most training halls!
>We are a University Club so they provide the hall during term time for free,
>during the summer break we can pay to book it or turn up and use it for free
>if no-one else is using it. We're lucky in that we don't have to pay for
>the hall, but anything else we need we either buy individually like sparring
>equipment or everyone chips in.
That's good. You're lucky that your university isn't
charging you for the hall. It'll probably change sooner
or later---make the most of it while you can!
Calummurdo Kennedy
They've tried a few times or by changing the times of training. Generally
they are pretty good (well more good than pretty :-) and since we're
flexible its ok. I do think its sad that even with the low overheads that
we have students still find it expensive. Taekwon-Do is never cheap and I
really don't see why not.
Robert Low
Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
>> charging you for the hall. It'll probably change sooner
>they are pretty good (well more good than pretty :-) and since we're
>flexible its ok. I do think its sad that even with the low overheads that
>we have students still find it expensive. Taekwon-Do is never cheap and I
>really don't see why not.
I just took a quick gander at your website: there's a coincidence,
I took my MA at Aberdeen. Though that was long enough ago that
I think Judo was the only martial art club, and somebody was
just trying to get Aikido going. (I guess there must have been
a karate club too, but I don't remember that.)
As regards the web page: you don't think that describing
ITF style as the 'original, true and only' taekwondo is
just a tiny bit dismissive?
Calummurdo Kennedy
>
> Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
> >> That's good. You're lucky that your university isn't
> >> charging you for the hall. It'll probably change sooner
> >They've tried a few times or by changing the times of training.
Generally
> >they are pretty good (well more good than pretty :-) and since we're
> >flexible its ok. I do think its sad that even with the low overheads
that
> >we have students still find it expensive. Taekwon-Do is never cheap and
I
> >really don't see why not.
>
> I just took a quick gander at your website: there's a coincidence,
> I took my MA at Aberdeen. Though that was long enough ago that
> I think Judo was the only martial art club, and somebody was
> just trying to get Aikido going. (I guess there must have been
> a karate club too, but I don't remember that.)
I think they have a few others, there is a Ju Jitsu, 2 Karates (one is
called Self Defense one is called Karate), Judo, Aikido, TKD, and Another
that I can't think of.
>
> As regards the web page: you don't think that describing
> ITF style as the 'original, true and only' taekwondo is
> just a tiny bit dismissive?
>
Dismissive of what? As far as I know that Taekwon-Do as created by General
Choi is the first martial art to be called Taekwon-Do and therefore is the
true Taekwon-Do. I can start a Judo school but that doesn't mean I'm
teaching Judo does it? With regards the WTF/ITF I'm of the view that they
started at the same point 30/40 years ago but now are enirely different.
They are not the same in my view.
What / who do you think I'm dismissing?
Robert Low
Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
>> I took my MA at Aberdeen. Though that was long enough ago that
>> I think Judo was the only martial art club, and somebody was
>> just trying to get Aikido going. (I guess there must have been
>> a karate club too, but I don't remember that.)
>I think they have a few others, there is a Ju Jitsu, 2 Karates (one is
>called Self Defense one is called Karate), Judo, Aikido, TKD, and Another
>that I can't think of.
Things are clearly livelier. But then, it's been quite a few
years.
>> As regards the web page: you don't think that describing
>> ITF style as the 'original, true and only' taekwondo is
>> just a tiny bit dismissive?
>>
>
>Dismissive of what? As far as I know that Taekwon-Do as created by General
>Choi is the first martial art to be called Taekwon-Do and therefore is the
>true Taekwon-Do. I can start a Judo school but that doesn't mean I'm
>teaching Judo does it? With regards the WTF/ITF I'm of the view that they
>started at the same point 30/40 years ago but now are enirely different.
>They are not the same in my view.
>
>What / who do you think I'm dismissing?
You're dismissing what goes on in WTF schools as not being taekwondo
(or Taekwon-do, whatever).
Actually, I suspect there are people around who regard that what
has happened in the WTF as being the natural evolution of the earlier
form, so WTF TKD is the 'true' one and ITF is a living fossil.
I don't find either point of view particularly useful. They're
different forms of TKD, just as yoshinkan, Tomiki, etc are different
forms of aikido; or as Shotokan, Kyokushinkai, Goju-Ryu, Wado-Ruy
etc are different forms of karate; and so on.
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Calummurdo Kennedy
>
> Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
> >> I just took a quick gander at your website: there's a coincidence,
> >> I took my MA at Aberdeen. Though that was long enough ago that
> >> I think Judo was the only martial art club, and somebody was
> >> just trying to get Aikido going. (I guess there must have been
> >> a karate club too, but I don't remember that.)
> >I think they have a few others, there is a Ju Jitsu, 2 Karates (one is
> >called Self Defense one is called Karate), Judo, Aikido, TKD, and
Another
> >that I can't think of.
>
> Things are clearly livelier. But then, it's been quite a few
> years.
>
As lively as Aberdeen can get...
> >> As regards the web page: you don't think that describing
> >> ITF style as the 'original, true and only' taekwondo is
> >> just a tiny bit dismissive?
> >>
> >
> >Dismissive of what? As far as I know that Taekwon-Do as created by
General
> >Choi is the first martial art to be called Taekwon-Do and therefore is
the
> >true Taekwon-Do. I can start a Judo school but that doesn't mean I'm
> >teaching Judo does it? With regards the WTF/ITF I'm of the view that
they
> >started at the same point 30/40 years ago but now are enirely different.
> >They are not the same in my view.
> >
> >What / who do you think I'm dismissing?
>
>
> You're dismissing what goes on in WTF schools as not being taekwondo
> (or Taekwon-do, whatever).
>
My view is that WTF is something different like Judo and Karate are
different. I see no reason to call all Taekwon-Do groups the same when
they're not. Even in the same organisation you have different instructors
doing things differently never mind in different orgs.
I don't see WTF schools as Taekwon-Do as I understand it. If they want to
use the same name fine, but I don't think what I teach and what they teach
to be the same as generally speaking we will have a different set of goals.
Same with Judo etc.
> Actually, I suspect there are people around who regard that what
> has happened in the WTF as being the natural evolution of the earlier
> form, so WTF TKD is the 'true' one and ITF is a living fossil.
>
Could be, but as far as I know the term Taekwon-Do was created by General
Choi not thousands of years ago. With regards evolution then why not go
further back and before whatever was before WTF or before that and so on.
Eventually you'll get two ameoba banging heads of each other!
As an aside I wouldn't say that General Choi created punching/kicking etc, I
would say that he put what already existed into a art and tried to
extrapolate the best bits. He then analysed what was already there and then
tried to explain it and that is what he deserves credit for, not inventing
the punch.
> I don't find either point of view particularly useful. They're
> different forms of TKD, just as yoshinkan, Tomiki, etc are different
> forms of aikido; or as Shotokan, Kyokushinkai, Goju-Ryu, Wado-Ruy
> etc are different forms of karate; and so on.
When does a form become a variant become a different system? I think it
would be clearer to say that WTF and ITF are not the same art. They were
once based on the same system but have developed differently. Different
names would be clearer especially for new guys and gals.
Robert Low
Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
>different.
OK. I don't see them as *that* different, more different as
two different styles of karate are different. But you're entitled
to your point of view (even if my own is, of course, more
sensible ;-))
>I don't see WTF schools as Taekwon-Do as I understand it. If they want to
I think the club I go to is typical. In a typical session, we'll
warm up, stretch, practice basics (sometimes on empty air, sometimes
against paddles, or heavy bags), do some partner work on basic
techniques and combinations, do work on patterns and/or do some
sparring. The sparring may be one- or three-step, free sparring
with armour and significant contact under Olympic rules, or
with light or no contact and a more inclusive collection of techniques
(hand/elbow strikes to head, sweeps etc) allowed.
Is that really so different from what you do that you regard it
as a different art/sport rather than a different flavour of
the same one? I certainly see no more difference than between,
say wado-ryu and shotokan, which are both versions of karate.
There are relatively small differences in the execution of
some techniques, but I don't see them as being as significant
as you seem to.
>As an aside I wouldn't say that General Choi created punching/kicking etc, I
>would say that he put what already existed into a art and tried to
>extrapolate the best bits. He then analysed what was already there and then
>tried to explain it and that is what he deserves credit for, not inventing
>the punch.
He certainly deserves a lot of credit for making TKD a popular
martial art/sport.
>When does a form become a variant become a different system? I think it
>would be clearer to say that WTF and ITF are not the same art. They were
>once based on the same system but have developed differently. Different
>names would be clearer especially for new guys and gals.
There's a hint of that already available. WTF guys tend to
use taekwondo (no spaces), while ITF tend to write Tae Kwon Do,
of TaeKwon-do.
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Calummurdo Kennedy
>
> Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
> >> You're dismissing what goes on in WTF schools as not being taekwondo
> >My view is that WTF is something different like Judo and Karate are
> >different.
>
> OK. I don't see them as *that* different, more different as
> two different styles of karate are different. But you're entitled
> to your point of view (even if my own is, of course, more
> sensible ;-))
>
> >I don't see WTF schools as Taekwon-Do as I understand it. If they want
to
>
> I think the club I go to is typical. In a typical session, we'll
> warm up, stretch, practice basics (sometimes on empty air, sometimes
> against paddles, or heavy bags), do some partner work on basic
> techniques and combinations, do work on patterns and/or do some
> sparring. The sparring may be one- or three-step, free sparring
> with armour and significant contact under Olympic rules, or
> with light or no contact and a more inclusive collection of techniques
> (hand/elbow strikes to head, sweeps etc) allowed.
>
That is different from what I have seen from the various WTF people I have
seen. Most are from abroad and have never learnt to block. At all. In any
way shape or form. They tend to have phemonmenal kicking speed but nothing
else. Those that do have blocks tend to have very weak blocking abilities
or only a few variations. Certainly I've never met a WTF person who has
heard of circular block or wedging block.
Do you ever practice releases from grabs for example? Flying techniques
etc? Generally speaking I've found that most WTF people operate a limited
arsenal of kicks rather than the spread of techniques you suggest above.
> Is that really so different from what you do that you regard it
> as a different art/sport rather than a different flavour of
> the same one?
From what you say then it sounds like you practice similar things to
ourselves (in the same way that Karate would do most of the above too).
When you start a walking stance knifehand low block where does the knifehand
start? In the TAGB it is shoulder level, in the ITF it should be the lowest
point on the lowest rib. This sounds small but the difference is in
purpose, one is a deflecting technique the other is a full on attack. One
is exposed one is less so. And so on.
I'd really have to see what you practice in the way of techniques, but from
what you have written your training style sounds similar.
> I certainly see no more difference than between,
> say wado-ryu and shotokan, which are both versions of karate.
> There are relatively small differences in the execution of
> some techniques, but I don't see them as being as significant
> as you seem to.
>
Is more power more important than balance? Is speed of technique more
important having a powerful technique? It is a question of priorities. In
my view I want to defend myself not to score points. WTF tends to be
competition focoused so you approach things from that angle, I approach from
self preservation first. I think the difference i napproach is what
differentiates most martial arts.
>
> >As an aside I wouldn't say that General Choi created punching/kicking
etc, I
> >would say that he put what already existed into a art and tried to
> >extrapolate the best bits. He then analysed what was already there and
then
> >tried to explain it and that is what he deserves credit for, not
inventing
> >the punch.
>
> He certainly deserves a lot of credit for making TKD a popular
> martial art/sport.
>
> >When does a form become a variant become a different system? I think it
> >would be clearer to say that WTF and ITF are not the same art. They were
> >once based on the same system but have developed differently. Different
> >names would be clearer especially for new guys and gals.
>
> There's a hint of that already available. WTF guys tend to
> use taekwondo (no spaces), while ITF tend to write Tae Kwon Do,
> of TaeKwon-do.
To the guy in the street Taekwondo, Taekwon-Do, TKD, Tai Kwon-Do and Tae
Kwon Do are all the same. They might know that Judo and Karate are
different, but would they know that WTF and ITF were not the same? Then
again would it make much difference if they did?
Robert Low
Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
>seen.
Well, maybe the club I go to is atypical, after all :-)
It could be that the majority of WTF clubs are entirely
devoted to training athletes for tournaments.
>Most are from abroad and have never learnt to block. At all. In any
In some sense, the best block is not to be there. But sometimes
you can't get away and need to put another bit of you in front
of the vulnerable bit. Certainly, we learn to block.
I'd guess that a lot of what we do is pretty much the same
as you, but presumably with the addition of some practice
for Olympic rules sparring (naturally with the consequence
that we're spending less time on the other stuff).
>else. Those that do have blocks tend to have very weak blocking abilities
>or only a few variations. Certainly I've never met a WTF person who has
>heard of circular block or wedging block.
I'm not sure about circular block (we maybe call it something
else), but wedging block is certainly part of the kup syllabus
we use.
>Do you ever practice releases from grabs for example?
Sure: self defence is a topic I omitted from my list. Defenses against
grabs include holds, strikes, releases, take-downs and so on. We also do
a certain amount of self-defense against armed attackers, but mostly
what we learn when we practice knife-defense (for example) is that
you're screwed :-/
> Flying techniques
>etc?
Sure. Jumping and flying kicks, and mainly for fun, rebounding
off the wall ones. Jumping and flying kicks are
required as part of the destruction component of gradings,
at the higher grades.
>When you start a walking stance knifehand low block where does the knifehand
>start? In the TAGB it is shoulder level, in the ITF it should be the lowest
>point on the lowest rib. This sounds small but the difference is in
If we're doing it as part of basic techniques, I guess the chamber
position would be the higher one. Outside that context, it would
doubtless depend on just where the hand was just before the block/
attack on the other guy's limb was required.
>Is more power more important than balance? Is speed of technique more
>important having a powerful technique?
Sometimes, to both :-) No point in being powerful if you
can't land a strike, no point in being there first if you can't
do any damage...
> It is a question of priorities. In
>my view I want to defend myself not to score points. WTF tends to be
>competition focoused so you approach things from that angle, I approach from
>self preservation first. I think the difference in approach is what
>differentiates most martial arts.
That's a fair point. I have no objection to distinguishing between
the martial sport of TKD and the martial art of TKD (though some
do). WTF sparring is a martial sport---but don't forget, it's
a pretty harsh one. It is full contact, so competitors do get
more used to hitting and being hit than is normal in traditional
schools, where contact is generally light to none.
>To the guy in the street Taekwondo, Taekwon-Do, TKD, Tai Kwon-Do and Tae
>Kwon Do are all the same.
And quite possible all the same as karate, kung fu, and kickboxing.
> They might know that Judo and Karate are
>different, but would they know that WTF and ITF were not the same? Then
>again would it make much difference if they did?
I think the only honest thing to do is for each club/school to
be up-front about its aim; whether it's to provide exercise,
sporting competitors, or teach self-defense. Whether the club
is WTF or ITF affiliated means less than the intent with which
the material is taught. And when it comes down to it, all
anybody can do is say 'take a few lessons and see if it's
what you're looking for'.
Langdow
With regards to who preceeded who, the ITF organization preceeded the ITF by
10 years or so . . . however, Gen Choi did not create TKD as it is actually
a cumulation of many different schools. Gen Choi did have a vision and
create the ITF that much is for sure though. The name of Taekwondo was not
so much created by the good General either, but it was submitted by him in
place of another person who suggested the name but could not be at the
naming meeting, although Gen Choi did take credit for it (that is debatable
btw depending on who you talk to)
The original organization of TKD was actually the Korean Taekwondo
association (KTA) which was created twice actually, once before the korean
war, collapsed because of that and other reasons, and then again once
everything was a little more stable.
Gen. Choi who was Kwan Jang of the Oh Do Kwan school was involved in the
creation of the KTA and as one of the original directors of it, but he left
to create the ITF when his own views and visions weren't being excepted.
Okay here's the thing that annoys me to no ends, just kidding ;) The WTF was
spawned by the KTA . . . but it was not spawned as a martial arts
organization, rather as a sporting organization. It is the Kukkiwon, also
spawned by the KTA, that is the organization that governs the "art" of this
type of TKD. Schools that are practicing "WTF" are practicing sport, I
certainly do, but there is also the Kukkiwon side which covers the poomse,
the self defense aspects, which I also practice (alot more seriously I might
add)
I'm not going to say anything about technique differences because I think
you're totally right. Gen Choi did not create punching or kicking, he
refined them for himself and taught them that way. Same with every other
instructor in the world, they take what they are taught, apply their own
understandings and then do the technique and then teach it that way to their
students, thus evolution is born. The student's understanding is only going
to be as good as the instructors teaching of the concepts, whether it be ITF
TKD, WTF/Kukkiwon TKD, Karate, Judo, Akido, insert random martial art here.
I don't think either style or art is better . . . they're just different
Regards
CalumMurdo Kennedy
>
> Calummurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Robert Low" <mtx...@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk> wrote in message
> >> I think the club I go to is typical. In a typical session, we'll
> >That is different from what I have seen from the various WTF people I
have
> >seen.
>
> Well, maybe the club I go to is atypical, after all :-)
>
> It could be that the majority of WTF clubs are entirely
> devoted to training athletes for tournaments.
>
> >Most are from abroad and have never learnt to block. At all. In any
>
> In some sense, the best block is not to be there.
Absence is the number one self defense system. Running away is number two.
> But sometimes
> you can't get away and need to put another bit of you in front
> of the vulnerable bit. Certainly, we learn to block.
>
> I'd guess that a lot of what we do is pretty much the same
> as you, but presumably with the addition of some practice
> for Olympic rules sparring (naturally with the consequence
> that we're spending less time on the other stuff).
>
Yep, its just a question of priorities and end goals. My only bug bear is
when you hear people saying that they are teaching self-defence when they're
not. Or they let people believe that they are (TaeBo would be an example I
guess).
> >else. Those that do have blocks tend to have very weak blocking
abilities
> >or only a few variations. Certainly I've never met a WTF person who has
> >heard of circular block or wedging block.
>
> I'm not sure about circular block (we maybe call it something
> else), but wedging block is certainly part of the kup syllabus
> we use.
>
> >Do you ever practice releases from grabs for example?
>
> Sure: self defence is a topic I omitted from my list. Defenses against
> grabs include holds, strikes, releases, take-downs and so on. We also do
> a certain amount of self-defense against armed attackers, but mostly
> what we learn when we practice knife-defense (for example) is that
> you're screwed :-/
>
> > Flying techniques
> >etc?
>
> Sure. Jumping and flying kicks, and mainly for fun, rebounding
> off the wall ones.
We call that Reflex kick which is a lot of fun and looks really good. It
sounds even better (well last night I had to run up the side of a wall then
spin round mid air and perform a head high kick....)
> Jumping and flying kicks are
> required as part of the destruction component of gradings,
> at the higher grades.
>
> >When you start a walking stance knifehand low block where does the
knifehand
> >start? In the TAGB it is shoulder level, in the ITF it should be the
lowest
> >point on the lowest rib. This sounds small but the difference is in
>
> If we're doing it as part of basic techniques, I guess the chamber
> position would be the higher one. Outside that context, it would
> doubtless depend on just where the hand was just before the block/
> attack on the other guy's limb was required.
>
That's true, I think people sometimes forget also that TKD is a flexible art
and that if you have been taught correctly then you can vary a technique
according to the situation and keep the effectiveness.
> >Is more power more important than balance? Is speed of technique more
> >important having a powerful technique?
>
> Sometimes, to both :-) No point in being powerful if you
> can't land a strike, no point in being there first if you can't
> do any damage...
>
> > It is a question of priorities. In
> >my view I want to defend myself not to score points. WTF tends to be
> >competition focoused so you approach things from that angle, I approach
from
> >self preservation first. I think the difference in approach is what
> >differentiates most martial arts.
>
> That's a fair point. I have no objection to distinguishing between
> the martial sport of TKD and the martial art of TKD (though some
> do). WTF sparring is a martial sport---but don't forget, it's
> a pretty harsh one. It is full contact, so competitors do get
> more used to hitting and being hit than is normal in traditional
> schools, where contact is generally light to none.
>
Your right, but for my purposes I practice to avoid getting beaten up :-)
It can help if you are used to contact and you can deal with it, personally
I'm a big softie and want to keep away from it.
> >To the guy in the street Taekwondo, Taekwon-Do, TKD, Tai Kwon-Do and Tae
> >Kwon Do are all the same.
>
> And quite possible all the same as karate, kung fu, and kickboxing.
>
> > They might know that Judo and Karate are
> >different, but would they know that WTF and ITF were not the same? Then
> >again would it make much difference if they did?
>
> I think the only honest thing to do is for each club/school to
> be up-front about its aim; whether it's to provide exercise,
> sporting competitors, or teach self-defense. Whether the club
> is WTF or ITF affiliated means less than the intent with which
> the material is taught. And when it comes down to it, all
> anybody can do is say 'take a few lessons and see if it's
> what you're looking for'.
Wise words indeed.
Robert Low
CalumMurdo Kennedy <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Your right, but for my purposes I practice to avoid getting beaten up :-)
>It can help if you are used to contact and you can deal with it, personally
>I'm a big softie and want to keep away from it.
There's a reason I don't go to tournaments. Actually, two. One
is I don't like getting hurt, the other is I'm now old enough
for it to take a significant amount of time to heal up.
I stick to sparring with moderate contact. I hope that's
a reasonable compromise between not being damaged and still
having some idea what it's like to get hit so I wouldn't
freeze up in shock if I were actually attacked.
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
storys
"CalumMurdo Kennedy" <calum...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aqdh3p$8in$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> Yep, its just a question of priorities and end goals. My only bug bear is
> when you hear people saying that they are teaching self-defence when
they're
> not. Or they let people believe that they are (TaeBo would be an example
I
> guess).
>
You can't necessarily blame the Tae Bo people. I've been told by people who
take this that they are learning how to fight & that I should be careful of
them on the mat. This when I know the instructors & what they teach & it
isn't that Tae Bo is anything but aerobics! In the case I mntioned I thought
about inviting her out for a sparring session but I thought better of it &
just left.
...................Tom..........................
CalumMurdo Kennedy
"storys" <sto...@delete.execulink.com> wrote in message
news:uslu4pb...@corp.supernews.com...
I've nothing against TaeBo or the people who take it. It is good exercise,
its fun and its good for people. The reason I gave TaeBo as an example is
that most people would know of or know at least one person who has claimed
that they know how to defend themselves as a result. I think the
instructors who are selling the self-defence myth should be knocked - not
necessarily the people taking part in the class.
Best Regards,
CalumMurdo Kennedy
GB-1-1563
www.taekwondo.freeserve.co.uk
> ...................Tom..........................
>
storys
>
> its fun and its good for people. The reason I gave TaeBo as an example is
> that most people would know of or know at least one person who has claimed
> that they know how to defend themselves as a result. I think the
> instructors who are selling the self-defence myth should be knocked - not
> necessarily the people taking part in the class.
>
Agreed. The problem seems to be that no matter what the instructors say the
students (some )get a different message.
...................Tom......................