Post 1: Taekwondo- An effective System?
Post 1: Taekwondo- An effective System?
“Taekwondo is not an effective martial art!”
I hear this or similar statements a lot nowadays by practitioner of other Martial Arts or combat sports, on the internet and even from people practicing Taekwondo itself. People tend to flock to Martial Arts (MA) like Krav Maga or MMA if they want to learn a holistic combat system. This problem is not unique to Taekwondo but also to other Traditional Martial Arts (TMA) like Kung Fu, Karate or Aikido. But why is that? After a quick search on the internet I found that there was a time when Taekwondo fighters where feared for their deadly kicks, especially to the head. Nowadays in Taekwondo competition and sparring people are flailing around with their feet due to eHogu and a restrictive kick- centred rule set. “But hold on a second! That is Taekwondo sparring! It has nothing to do with Taekwondo as a self-defence martial art!” some might say. And you are right my observant reader. It has not. But what do we have left if we do not count competitive Taekwondo? Frankly not a lot at first sight. Running in lines (gibon yonsup), breaking boards (gyeokpa), one-step-sparring (ilbo daeryon/matsogi) and of course forms (hyong/poomsae), self-defence (hosinsul) are with free sparring (jayu daeryeon/gyeorugi) the traditional “5 subjects” of Taekwondo. “But how does this prepare for real life self-defence?” some might ask. Since the rise of MMA people are quick to judge other MAs, if they do not work in MMA. But some talented individual (Joe Rogan, Bas Rutten, Cung Le …) have used aspects of competition style Taekwondo successful in MMA. And of course, I know MMA does not equal self- defence. It does have rules and "self defence don't have rules" and there is the cage, the fact that it is one vs one etc. .Still it it is a good indicator what could work. Further one might say that self-defence is not consensual violence and other rules apply to it. And it is true. I will dig deeper in it a future article but for now one question remains. Why do we mainstream Taekwondo practitioner do all the mentioned stuff like forms, basic movements etc.? Why is there hosinsul- a “subject” for self- defence if the art is all about self- defence. And why do the movements in hosinsul look different to those learnt in the other “subjects” and why does sparring looks COMPLETELY different? And why are most of the movements “learnt” deemed as ineffective by so many people? For what the heck do we even want to be “effective” for? I know it is not a healthy attitude to adhere to other people’s sayings. But dear reader, my opinion on this is matter is as follows. We are practicing martial arts. Some may do it due to health reason, other for the sport aspect or they just find enjoyment in moving that way- and that is great! really, more power to you! Taekwondo is also there for those aspects! But for me personally I think that something which wants to call itself Martial Arts, the Art of the god of war Mars, should teach at least some combative basics. There is a big divide between the many aspects of Taekwondo and a lot of people, me included, do not see the meaning between the “5 subjects”. I am curious and eager to learn more about those. I want to show through my work here that Taekwondo is indeed a practical, effective self-defence system and rediscover the meaning of the old teaching methods.©Le (2020)
Comments
Post a Comment