Self Defence - but is it?

Musashi · 18-12-2004 08:41PM

cheers for the links Colm.

Moss · 19-12-2004 04:42PM

syke wrote:

Actually, if you truely practice ITF, the it is your job to make people better, or at least to help them make themselves better. Again, perhaps read up on the philosophy of your ITF founder?

If you still disagree, then at least consider you are not teaching ITF, but merely thuggery.

Syke, I know its already been established that Colm doesn't teach ITF. I do ITF myself in UCD, but I also train once/twice a week with Colm in BJJ. There really is no contradiction between what Colm teaches and the philosophy of TKD. He simply teaches you how to improve your grappling skills for the purposes of competition, enjoyment and only if your really unlucky enough; self-defence. Theres nothing more to it.
He says it best himself: I provide an environment where people from all backgrounds and all motivations are free to discover for themselves what works in a realistic context.

He definitly doesn't teach thuggery! I wouldn't train with him if he did.

I know this has already kind of been covered, but just thought I should add my view, since I've done TKD aswell.
This thread is getting seriously long....

Musashi · 19-12-2004 11:46PM

I mainly studied ITF Tae Kwon Do and had my own school when I used to have time!
Mostly we learned and studied the syllabus of TKD, and every so often we definitely learned and taught how to out thug anyone you might meet.
What is the point of training how to break timber with a knife hand etc. and how to use these same moves in One Step and free sparring if we are not training to "maim or kill" , which, I was taught, was the purpose of all these techniques.
These were meant to be taught to soldiers. If they are reduced to empty hand combat something has gone badly wrong.Soldiers fight with long guns,pistols,knives and given no other choice bare hands and feet.They do not want a "fight",they want to remove the other guy as a threat!
Same thing if I am accosted by some Stanley Knife wielding little bollix.I do not want to fight him,if he's a threat to me and my family I want to destroy him,nothing close to a fair fight.If I can distract him and hit him when he's not looking so much the better.And if hitting him once doesn't do it I'm already commited so it's time to drive forward with maximum aggression until this threat is removed.This is no time to be fair or give him a chance,he was in the wrong . He started it and now I'll finish it.
If this is thuggery so be it, but I'm going home in (mostly) one piece,no matter what!

Clive · 21-12-2004 12:18PM

uberpixie wrote:

Tang Soo Do is Korean Karate.

TKD, while it owes a lot to Karate, is not the same thing. What the differences are I don't know.

I'm only a yellow belt in TKD and I have never praticed Karate,maybe someone out there with experiance of both might be able to tell us?

Many, many TKD people don't want to hear this, but TKD is modified shotokan karate. General Choi went to Japan and learned Shotokan, when he returned it was mixed around with a few other things. If you look at the forms (especially the WTF ones) you'll see exactly the same moves as in a karate kata.

The older texts on the subject often use the term Korean karate to refer to TKD. They also use terminology such as "shuto chigi" for knifehand strike which clearly betrays it's Japanese origins.

Gen Choi tried to make it less obvious (eg by incorporating the ridiculous "sine wave") but it's there to see.

memphis · 21-12-2004 12:55PM

Musashi wrote:

I mainly studied ITF Tae Kwon Do and had my own school when I used to have time!
Mostly we learned and studied the syllabus of TKD, and every so often we definitely learned and taught how to out thug anyone you might meet.
What is the point of training how to break timber with a knife hand etc. and how to use these same moves in One Step and free sparring if we are not training to "maim or kill" , which, I was taught, was the purpose of all these techniques.
These were meant to be taught to soldiers. If they are reduced to empty hand combat something has gone badly wrong.Soldiers fight with long guns,pistols,knives and given no other choice bare hands and feet.They do not want a "fight",they want to remove the other guy as a threat!
Same thing if I am accosted by some Stanley Knife wielding little bollix.I do not want to fight him,if he's a threat to me and my family I want to destroy him,nothing close to a fair fight.If I can distract him and hit him when he's not looking so much the better.And if hitting him once doesn't do it I'm already commited so it's time to drive forward with maximum aggression until this threat is removed.This is no time to be fair or give him a chance,he was in the wrong . He started it and now I'll finish it.
If this is thuggery so be it, but I'm going home in (mostly) one piece,no matter what!

I couldn't agree more with ya, great post by the way, certainly gets my nod of approval.

On reflection this is exactly how I would see the situation, guy started on me, guy is a threat, guy needs to be removed as a threat!

Thanks! My 2 cent in the box anyways!

Moss · 21-12-2004 01:29PM

memphis wrote:

On reflection this is exactly how I would see the situation, guy started on me, guy is a threat, guy needs to be removed as a threat!

Not too sure about that memphis. Musashi gives good advice, but not certain if it applies in your situation. Usually when a guy comes up to you outside a nightclub or wherever and starts squaring up to you and giving you abuse, what he is looking for is for you to throw the first punch so he, and maybe his mates also, can jump in and beat you up. Then he can walk away saying 'He hit me first!'. To me it seems you walked right into the trap. You gave the impression in earlier posts that you could have backed away (correct me if I'm wrong here).

On the other hand if you did percieve the guy as a serious threat and it seemed he was determined to attack you you should have done what Musashi said and followed through until you could get away safely.

With hindsight which do you honestly think applies to the situation you were in?

GuanYin · 21-12-2004 01:44PM

memphis wrote:

I couldn't agree more with ya, great post by the way, certainly gets my nod of approval.

On reflection this is exactly how I would see the situation, guy started on me, guy is a threat, guy needs to be removed as a threat!

Thanks! My 2 cent in the box anyways!

So much for you being sorry for your rash actions eh?

What exactly is "starting". Did he throw a punch? Did he actually physically threathen you?

Could you have avoided the confrontation?

One more thing to consider these days, many people now either know a style of martial art or carry a weapon of some sort. If martial arts are about safety and survival, good instructors will tell you that evasion is the best tactic for very good reasons.

logic1 · 21-12-2004 02:44PM

syke wrote:

So much for you being sorry for your rash actions eh?

He can be sorry for his actions but still feel justified in the action he took. I see nothing wrong with this. Try not to be so condescendingly snide eh?

What exactly is "starting". Did he throw a punch? Did he actually physically threathen you?

I'd guess they weren't holding hands and singing songs about daisies.

Could you have avoided the confrontation?

I think that's a moot point at this stage. The confrontation wasn't avoided. He has had to deal with his actions and now feels justified in what he did even if he is remorseful that it came to that. Maybe in a future confrontation he'll have learned his lesson and won't make a snap decision to fight but instead defuse it amicably. Even a sage like yourself could view this as a learning experince which bettered his character.

One more thing to consider these days, many people now either know a style of martial art or carry a weapon of some sort. If martial arts are about safety and survival, good instructors will tell you that evasion is the best tactic for very good reasons.

Sometimes evasion is not an option. I don't think a single person here debated whether evasion would have been the best tactic. AFAICS everyone has agreed evasion would have and is the best tactic but sometimes it's simply not feasible.

As to whether it was feasible here or not only one person posting knows and that option wasn't taken so again it's a case of spilt milk over bolting cows with leaking udders after the shed has been left unlatched. Or something of that sort.

.logic.

Colm_OReilly · 21-12-2004 03:26PM

It's extremely rare that you'd hear of any ma instructor talk about situational awareness in any sort of practical and healthy way. As for carrying a weapon, that is just not good.

2KR

Moss · 21-12-2004 03:27PM

logic1 wrote:

He can be sorry for his actions but still feel justified in the action he took. I see nothing wrong with this. Try not to be so condescendingly snide eh?

If he feels justified in his actions then why would he be sorry? I really don't think the two go together. I think Memphis needs to clarify this.

If he feels justified in the actions he took does this not imply that if a similar scenario arose in the future he would take the same actions again. In other words if someone starts squaring up to Memphis when he is outside a club or walking home he will hook a punch at them before he does anything else. What happened to walking away, putting you hands up and saying you don't want to fight etc.

Also it seems to me Memphis has changed his tone alot. Take these few quotes for example:

memphis wrote:

At the end of the day I'd rather forget the whole thing happened, I have learnt from it I assure you of that. What happened will not happen again, I can vow to that, and if it does I will look at the situation differently, and most likely walk away.

And this:

memphis wrote:

Alot of points being thrown around above, and the vast majority of them appear to be very negative of my actions. I accept that. I've already said I am not happy about what I did, and I also accept that I have gone and broken probably every rule there is in the TKD book.

He even gave out to Syke for giving him too much guilt:

memphis wrote:

And Syke, I don't mean to offend, but I already feel bad about the whole thing.... thanks a bunch for adding to that guilt! Perhaps next time you'll be more understanding!

Now Memphis is saying he acted appropriately:

memphis wrote:

On reflection this is exactly how I would see the situation, guy started on me, guy is a threat, guy needs to be removed as a threat!

Look, Memphis I'm not trying to piss you off but it is a big turn around to say that you were in the right all along. Anyone could make the mistake you made, its actually a very easy one to make, I'm not getting all judgemental, it could have been me.
However, if I was to learn from it I would still say its not the best response. I think pretty much everyone on this thread agreed on this point earlier. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but I think my arguments are reasonable.

logic1 · 21-12-2004 03:37PM

Moss wrote:

If he feels justified in his actions then why would he be sorry? I really don't think the two go together. I think Memphis needs to clarify this.

If I was in a confrontational situation where there was absolutely no way out except an aggressive attack against an opponent then I would be in a regretable position. One which I do not like being in. I take no pleasure in hurting other people *but* after the event is over I would feel justified in my actions (if there was really no other course of action) and also regret. Regret that a person put me in that situation and regret that it took such aggressive action to get out of that situation.

However I wouldn't feel a sense of guilt as memphis did.

If he feels justified in the actions he took does this not imply that if a similar scenario arose in the future he would take the same actions again. In other words if someone starts squaring up to Memphis when he is outside a club or walking home he will hook a punch at them before he does anything else. What happened to walking away, putting you hands up and saying you don't want to fight etc.

I don't think so. You're describing a scenario where there's the possibility of an easy resolution and instead he took the hard way out and fought. We haven't received clarification that this was the case (even though it may look likely).

So if we think about a scenario as I've described above where there's absolutely no other way out than to fight this does not then automatically mean that the next time you face a small bit of aggro you're immediately going to fight. Everyone here has pretty much agreed fighting is the last resort. In Memphis' case specifically we don't know what way it happened and I doubt he wants to go over and over the situation continuously on this thread.

Also it seems to me Memphis has changed his tone alot. Take these few quotes for example:

And this:

He even gave out to Syke for giving him too much guilt:

Now Memphis is saying he acted appropriately:

Well it takes time to go over any hands on action scenario in your mind. There's various stages post event that need to be analysed. And one of the first reactions is definately a sense of guilt which Memphis obviously felt. But at the end of the day he feels justified in the force he took to resolve the situation. Tbh it seems Memphis got more of a beating then the aggressor - I may be wrong though.

Look, Memphis I'm not trying to piss you off but it is a big turn around to say that you were in the right all along. Anyone could make the mistake you made, its actually a very easy one to make

Again I wouldn't describe his actions as a mistake as we don't know 100% he had a viable way out.

I'm not getting all judgemental, it could have been me.
However, if I was to learn from it I would still say its not the best response. I think pretty much everyone on this thread agreed on this point earlier. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but I think my arguments are reasonable.

Of course walking away without any hands on is always best. Sometimes it just doesn't work out that way. Live and learn.

.logic.

Moss · 21-12-2004 04:01PM

logic1 wrote:

If I was in a confrontational situation where there was absolutely no way out except an aggressive attack against an opponent then I would be in a regretable position.

Does this really apply to memphis? In memphis's previous posts he expressed remorse for not responding to this particular situation as he felt he should have. Thats very different from 'regretting' being in a fight that was completely not your fault. You make it seem as if Memphis was set upon and had no alternative to fight back, therefore he regrets being in a fight but feels justified in his actions.
However going by what Memphis has said himself, it seems alot more like Memphis was challenged to a fight, he took the bate and threw the first punch. He then said he was sorry he did this and if the same scenario arose again he would walk away. My last post was merely highlighting the fact that Memphis appeared to have gone back on this.

Logic1 it seems to me your portraying Memphis's scenario as more desperate than he has described it himself.

logic1 · 21-12-2004 04:11PM

Moss wrote:

Does this really apply to memphis? In memphis's previous posts he expressed remorse for not responding to this particular situation as he felt he should have. Thats very different from 'regretting' being in a fight that was completely not your fault. You make it seem as if Memphis was set upon and had no alternative to fight back, therefore he regrets being in a fight but feels justified in his actions.

That's the whole point I've stressed in every single post but that you've obviously missed.

We don't know the exact scenario Memphis was in. To me his posts do not clearly distinguish the situation. So my point is IF HE WAS in a truly desperate situation he did the right thing. IF NOT then he didn't. Simple as.

However going by what Memphis has said himself, it seems alot more like Memphis was challenged to a fight, he took the bate and threw the first punch.

That's certainly one way to interpret his posts but again I think you make an assumption that he was challenged. We don't know if he saw it as a challenge or a neef to prove himself or as an attack agiainst his ego. We're simply not provided with enough information. We can only read his posts made thus far and come to a conclusion. I'm trying to keep all options open where as you've pigeonholed him into a martial arts student with something to prove scenario.

He then said he was sorry he did this and if the same scenario arose again he would walk away. My last post was merely highlighting the fact that Memphis appeared to have gone back on this.

His last post to me signified he still regretted his action but felt vindicated that it was the only way out. I don't see any indication that he says he'd go straight to aggressive action if it happened again.

Logic1 it seems to me your portraying Memphis's scenario as more desperate than he has described it himself.

As I've said I'm not. I'm simply conjecturing on the type of event it may or may not have been, meanwhile you've firmly decided he had something to prove and attacked someone with only minor provocation.

We don't know what happened at the end of the day it hasn't been explained fully and as I've already said memphis seems to just want to forget about the ordeal and rightfully so. This would also signify his regret. I don't see that there's any further analysis can be done without new info tbh.

.logic.

Moss · 21-12-2004 09:17PM

Your right we don't know exactly what situation Memphis was in, thats why I based pretty much everything I wrote on what memphis had wrote himself in previous posts. Thats also why I said in my first post on this subject 'correct me if I'm wrong here' leaving it open for memphis to clarify what actually happened.

logic1 wrote:

We don't know the exact scenario Memphis was in. To me his posts do not clearly distinguish the situation. So my point is IF HE WAS in a truly desperate situation he did the right thing. IF NOT then he didn't. Simple as.

Fair enough. In your previous posts it came across as though you were exaggerating the seriousness of Memphis's scenario to justify his actions. Apologies if that wasn't the case. However, I still think we can deduce a fair amount from what memphis has already said.

logic1 wrote:

I'm trying to keep all options open where as you've pigeonholed him into a martial arts student with something to prove scenario.

I didn't try to pigeon hole him into anything. It comes across clearly enough in previous posts that this guy started squaring up to memphis, pushing him and was "mouthing on to [him] about [him] doin TKD" and he "smacked him one", for which Memphis said he was very sorry, clearly believing it to be an unnesseccary response:

memphis wrote:

What happened will not happen again, I can vow to that, and if it does I will look at the situation differently, and most likely walk away.

logic1 wrote:

I'm simply conjecturing on the type of event it may or may not have been, meanwhile you've firmly decided he had something to prove and attacked someone with only minor provocation.

.
I haven't firmly decided anthing. I have nothing at all against Memphis. Again I can only comment on the evidence I have in front of me, which is memphis's previous posts, and anything i've written is based on what has been conveyed to me by those posts, while all the time welcoming Memphis to correct me if I'm wrong. My first post was directed at Memphis. I was hoping he would respond and clear this up.

Saying that we weren't there, so we can't know, is an easy way out of an argument. While we have evidence we can debate the issue.

logic1 wrote:

We don't know what happened at the end of the day it hasn't been explained fully and as I've already said memphis seems to just want to forget about the ordeal and rightfully so. This would also signify his regret.

I don't think so really, let me give you an example. If I was in a car accident through no fault of my own, I would obviously regret been in a car accident and would want to forget about it. However if I caused a car accident through negligence I would be sorry and promise myself it wouldn't happen again. Do you see what i'm trying to say?

uberpixie · 22-12-2004 01:23AM

Clive wrote:

Many, many TKD people don't want to hear this, but TKD is modified shotokan karate. General Choi went to Japan and learned Shotokan, when he returned it was mixed around with a few other things. If you look at the forms (especially the WTF ones) you'll see exactly the same moves as in a karate kata.

The older texts on the subject often use the term Korean karate to refer to TKD. They also use terminology such as "shuto chigi" for knifehand strike which clearly betrays it's Japanese origins.

Gen Choi tried to make it less obvious (eg by incorporating the ridiculous "sine wave") but it's there to see.

"On April 11th, 1955, the name Taekwon-Do was officially adopted for the martial art General Choi Hong Hi had developed using elements of the ancient Korean martial art of Taek Kyon and of Shotokan karate, a martial art he had learned while studying in Japan."

Well thats taken from the ITF website so I don't think anyone in hiding the fact karate has had a huge influence on TKD :-)

What I am interested in what is the actual differences in techniques between karate and TKD. Is there much?

Musashi · 22-12-2004 01:26AM

What I am interested in what is the actual differences in techniques between karate and TKD. Is there much?

That needs its own thread really!
Memphis,Sico,anyone??

memphis · 23-12-2004 04:46PM

Ok, I have to Clarify a few things fast.

I have felt much guilt for my actions, mainly because I don't like to fight, I don't like to get aggressive, and I most certainly don't like to get a black eye.

I have had this whole thing playing about in my head since it happened, and yes there is still some guilt there, but I believe that at the time, and taking the scenario, where I was drunk, alone, and walking through a car park where there was nobody else about only me and the attacker, who started on me, was being abusive (both verbally and physically), I warned him off, told him I didn't want to fight, but he kept pushing me about, so I smacked him one. I probably should have and could have walked away, but if I did what was to say that he wasn't gonna hit me from behind?

To me (now) I believe I did what had to be done, I took the action I thought was the best solution at the time, I however came out the worst. But I think I did the right thing by trying to fight him off, even if I did come out the worst end.

Hope that clears up a bit of the confusion!

Dyr · 23-12-2004 05:50PM

Dont think there was much else you could do in those circumstances, to be honest.

Musashi · 23-12-2004 07:54PM

Memphis, in the circumstances,if you felt pre-emptive striking was the best move then it was! The only mistake you may have made was allowing this guy back in the fight once it went "hands on".You had the advantage at that stage of being in control,knowing the fight was about to start.You had the momentum and the first strike of a possible combination in.
He was able to get back in the fight though, topple you and start in with the boot?He should never have had the chance to come back once it kicked off.You could have maintained dominance and stopped him cold right there,and been on your way.

Can I ask if your the typical TKD guy? Long and lean and all legs?

Was this guy bigger,smaller,trained? if you could tell by the way he held himself?
Was he more a boxer or a brawler.What did he use to gain the upper hand?Why did he stop ? Did people arrive along while you were geting hit?
Most important though, how are you dealing with the "after action"?Have you talked with mates from the club about how this happened? What you did right and wrong,how they might have handled it? How would you manage the adrenal dump if in this position again?You know that feeling when you just know the situation is going to go to a fight? Are you nervous or afraid after this,or just angry and looking to prove yourself? I doubt you are from your previous posts,but you need to take what you can from this and then leave it alone.Don't keep dwelling on the "what if's" but get on and make your self a better person and Martial Artist!

Roper · 24-12-2004 01:18PM

Howya Memphis,
Wasn't going to post here as its a bit long in the tooth this topic and I'm only here a wet day....

But it seems a few people are getting a bit sanctimonious about TKD, about martial arts and about your reaction.
You fuct up, you hit a guy when you reckon you could have walked away and you got a bit of a hiding. Welcome to the longest list in the world, I'm a member!
Sure, you should have walked away, and drink or no drink, I reckon you probably should have too. But you didn't, you made a choice, you payed for it. End of story. You'll know better next time.

Theres a few people in here who reckon they wouldn't allow you to train again.
I've come across quite a few instructors in my time who try to impose their morals on their students. If a person is 18 and over, what he does outside of the gym is his business. So if you wouldn't let him train because he slugged someone, well then go see if anyones cheating on their missus or avoiding their taxes and kick them out too.

Its not a religion, its a physical activity in which you might TRY to PROMOTE a disciplined reaction to a confrontation. But what a person does once they get there is a whole different story. To try to imply that TKD students somehow represent a certain moral code is beyond ridiculous.

Sorry for throwing my opinion in late.

Happy Christmas, stay out of trouble!

Barry

memphis · 24-12-2004 07:50PM

Musashi wrote:

Can I ask if your the typical TKD guy? Long and lean and all legs?
Was this guy bigger,smaller,trained? if you could tell by the way he held himself?
Was he more a boxer or a brawler.What did he use to gain the upper hand?Why did he stop ? Did people arrive along while you were geting hit?
Most important though, how are you dealing with the "after action"?Have you talked with mates from the club about how this happened?

Just to answer the above few questions. I'm 23 years old, about 5'9" tall, and weighing almost 80kg (so really I'm short and lean), yes, i general like to fight with my legs, but I have always had a good hook with a fist (even before I did MA).

Hard to say wheither the guy was trained in MA, but my guess is that he was more just a brawler than anything else. he got the upper hand cos he managed to trip me, then continued to get dirty and punch me in the face while I was down.

It was nasty business really.... something that I would rather forget about, than dwell on.

pma-ire · 28-12-2004 01:28AM

I just logged into this site and this is the first real thread I have read. But I must say that you should just ignore the ones attacking you for not being the walking Budda in the REAL situation.

It's very hard not to react to such taunts. I've been picked on because of my training in MA. Not because I was talking it up. But my friend was talking to another guy who was talking about me and my buddy said "Paul does Martial Arts Bhoy! He'll kick your arse !!" I talked my way out of that strange situation. Then kicked the ****e out of my pal

You can only learn from your experience, and I'm not gonna analize it for you. Thats you job

But you have got one thing that a lot of MA'ists lack...

...you have experienced a real situation.

(Also it's good to see that you are sorry it happened !! Would you be sorry if you had won ??

)

memphis · 28-12-2004 04:13PM

pma-ire wrote:

(Also it's good to see that you are sorry it happened !! Would you be sorry if you had won ?? )

I think thats beside the point at this stage. I didn't punch him to try win, I punched him to try get him to F**k off (needless to say it didn't work). Was a silly move, an action I'm not proud of, but I feel I did justise to the situation by fighting back and not walking away. People will react differently, and from all the opinions flying around above, its best left that people will look on the situation differently, some may have walked away, some may have stood there ground, my point is there is no right or wrong way out of such situations.

pma-ire · 29-12-2004 03:52PM

memphis wrote:

I think thats beside the point at this stage. I didn't punch him to try win, I punched him to try get him to F**k off (needless to say it didn't work). Was a silly move, an action I'm not proud of, but I feel I did justise to the situation by fighting back and not walking away. People will react differently, and from all the opinions flying around above, its best left that people will look on the situation differently, some may have walked away, some may have stood there ground, my point is there is no right or wrong way out of such situations.

Don't get me wrong here Memphis :eek:

I was not comparing it to sport fight by saying WIN

That was just a figure of speach. If you look at what I said I was backing you up in your actions, and in what you had just posted here :rolleyes:

Chill amach, a buachaill

Self Defence - but is it?

Comments