[Amnell]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

That is BS, Amnell. Look into it. Koreans have lied about a lot of things. The only form of kicking art the Koreans ever had prior to Japanese Karate influence was not a martial art, but actually a kicking game that in no way resembles TKD, like you said, but it is NOT TKD. Go read some facts and you will learn, and dont believe what your stupid teacher tells you. People find it romantic the notion TKD is an ancient art used to kick horse men from their saddle. That is just stupid. It is Karate, plain and simple, havn't you ever wondered why the Karate moves were all so similar if it was an entirly different art? Answer that.

Well, that's because the style the military was using didn't rely on just kicks like TKD does, genius. The info I got on TKD didn't come from any of my instructors; it came from research. I've never, EVER, heard of someone using TKD to kick a mounted soldier off of his horse before. If someone told me that they did that and they could still walk, I would laugh in their face! Karate influenced TKD. It is not the parent art.

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Yes, sweety, but just because TKD has its own sport, that does not change the fact that guys are using it to win kick boxing fights and that the original art was designed for street combat.

Why are you calling me sweety again? Didn't we go over that last week??? I never said that people didn't use TKD in kickboxing. I was only talking about the difference between the sport practice of TKD and the sport practice of MT. To reiterate again, I'm talking TKD is it is typically practiced today: it is not generally taught as an art you would use to defend yourself on the street, even if it could be used that way.

Originally Posted by Tenchu

I am really starting to think you are completely clueless...

Can you then explain the exact difference where someone who can win a Muay Thai fight is not overly qualified to fight on the street, also? Because I am thinking you are assuming all MT guys have brain damage or something, and can not fight without pillows on their hands...

... What does ANY of that have to with what I said??? My point was that Muay Thai is considered a sport art. Where did I say that being a sport made it ineffective on the street? Stop putting words in my mouth.

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Om, you must be learning a different style than I am then! I bet you have trouble with those back kicks!

Eh, not so much o_O . Back kicks are fun, and learning to do them from a cat stance is quite interesting--it's more about "when" than "how".

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Yeah, I know what you are talking about, but the whole thing does not work out of the TKD stance. I am starting to think you are not doing strictly traditional TKD. It is the same trouble I have doing TKD kicks from a MT stance. I can not side kick or back kick without doing dramatic stance changes first, in most cases, and that is often a give away to your opponent.

Hence the step before the kick. The step sets you up to do the kick very nicely. You're right, my school was not strictly traditional. Most TKD schools in this area aren't because if you can market yourself as teaching self-defense, you can get more soccer moms to bring their kids to your school. Hence, the TKD schools blend techniques from different styles into their curriculum to make it look street-effective (and someone who trains hard really will be, too). Learn how to do a cross-step; that should make it easier to throw a sidekick. From the MT stance, that would probably carry you sideways rather than forward... Hm, you'd have to experiment a little :P . HF ^_^

Originally Posted by Tenchu

That is a misconception. And dont believe it can not happen. I have seen black belts who can punch perfect, but struggle to answer the question of how to make a strong fist with your hand so your bones wont break when you punch.

Granted, but I'm missing how this relates to what I said :P .

Originally Posted by Tenchu

You can not use the blade of the foot when you kick above waist height. The angle is poor and you will do better with the heel. When you use it to strike at the legs you simply use the blade as a pivot, to help further flcik the heel into the opponent, but you dont actually strike with the blade. It can not transfer power at that angle. Weight is best transfered through a straight line, place a right angle in there, like at the joint of the ankle, and you will lose power.

Not true! I have watched MANY people break boards that were at chest level with the blade of their foot. One of our second-degrees broke one at head level with the blade of his foot.

I think I may have caused some confusion, though: We were taught to kick on the edge of our foot, sure, but we were hitting--ideally--on the spot on the blade that's right next to the heel. So we were sort of using the heel, but the foot was turned to the side rather than coming in straight. It's kinda hard to describe.

In any case, no one ever complained about losing power or having problems breaking the boards.

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Where are you getting this shit from, guys? I would like to see it, because I have not seen any proof of it.

You can always start with Wikipedia. Then move to a real encyclopedia and finally into some actual literature on the subject. Seems to work for everyone else :P .