Tom Yum

Got this thread idea from an earlier one I wrote, where the USMC observed the effectiveness of Tae Kwon Do from Korean mercenaries during the Vietnam war. One might assume that TKD had an influence in MCMAP in the 60's and 70's.

I remember reading a little bit about Echanis in Black Belt a while ago. Echanis was an Army SF Operator during the 60's and 70's and an expert in the art of Hwa Rang Do. Echanis studed HRD under GM Joo Bang Lee and put it to use while conducting ops in Vietnam and South America.

Hwa Rang Do is a completely different art than Tae Kwon Do, as far as I can tell. HRD has roots in the martial arts from Buddhist Temples established by migrant Chinese monks. However, the art does not look exactly like gong fu. It does contain a great deal of grappling, which TKD doesn't - I studied a different Korean art for several years and remember getting into some ground finishing holds before the advent of the UFC.

So the question I have is why have military hand to hand styles changed so much over the decades - why reinvent the wheel?

And if styles like TKD and HRD have been used to kill our enemies in the battlefield in the recent past, why are they not studied more intently today?

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

Blue Wave Gym

Tom even the Iraqi army knew karate during the first gulf war tma is in most militaries now so rbsd and sports combat are more functional ways to train.

__________________
Tiens, voila du boudin,
voila du boudin,
voila du boudin
Pour les Alsaciens, les Suisses, et les Lorrains
Pour les Belges, il n'y en a plus,
pour les Belges, il n'y en a plus
Ce sont des tireurs au cul. Tireurs au cul

Tom Yum

Agreed that combat sport methods are much more functional in terms of training methods, but the techniques of many TMA's work.

I guess I'm trying to open the stage to effective TMA's that are not as popular as their combat sport relatives. MMA is awesome and very valuable, but there's little exposure to the TMA's out there that work - or better yet, fighters/instructors who make them work.

Before BJJ's huge popularity streek, there were guys like Gene Labelle who taught submission wrestling for self defense, with weapons and to folks in LEO/security. There's another master instructor, before Labelle who studied jiu-jitsu and aikido in Japan and taught here in the states to LEO - can't think of his name - Robert Wagner?

Hwarangdo and taekwondo where used by Americans operating in Vietnam and South America, before MMA.

If it ain't broke, why fix it?

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

Blue Wave Gym

To be in the special forces in the R.O.K you have to have a 1st Dan in Tkd
Bruce Lee studied Judo with Lebell, Ju-Jitsu with Wally Jay, and there are indian wrestling exercise as well as a savate and Mauy Thai kick illistrated in the Dao of JKD. So you're right in that sens that there's nothing new under the sun but I think the way most Tma's are taught today illistrates that they are broken. In a recent article by Dan Inasanto he said that the martial arts have evloved so much in that the average person of the sixties would not be nealy as knowlegable as a person of today. I think if both the striking and grappeling aspects are trained in an alive manner then a tma would be functional have fun finding a schoool like that.

__________________
Tiens, voila du boudin,
voila du boudin,
voila du boudin
Pour les Alsaciens, les Suisses, et les Lorrains
Pour les Belges, il n'y en a plus,
pour les Belges, il n'y en a plus
Ce sont des tireurs au cul. Tireurs au cul

Tom Yum

From what I've seen from a few Marine detachments working out, MCMAP's empty hand close quarter work looks like traditional japanese jiu-jitsu and aikido. The striking looks like it could be karate and muaythai - so it looks like they still use quite a bit of effective TMA in their training. They're using it alot overseas. The classes are even taught a little like a TMA class with instructor commands (i.e. "STRIKE!"). But they eventually move onto more dynamic training with what they drilled.

Like you mentioned, this combination would be hard to find in a civillian school but I'm sure there are some out there.

Those that do teach like this require you to earn the right to do these moves not only from forms practices but as we know - slow choreographed sequences. Its not until you reach higher levels, serious commitment and alot of payments later that they close the doors from the public and let you get real with it.

And here we are one of the key issues of TMA vs. MMA arts - how fast can you put it to use? I suppose it depends on where you are and what you need.

In a civillian setting MMA (for empty-handed, single opponent fighting) is your winner hands down in terms of learning something that you can use quickly and effectively.

Take two equal guys train one in MMA for 6 months and another in a TMA for 6 months and I'd wager that the MMA guy would win within the first round; he's also probably fare better in an altercation assuming it was empty handed and not badly outnumbered.

However, traditional methods (taking out the forms and other non-combat practices) have proved themselves in the battlefields with and without weapons for years in the military against deadly opponents - again referencing the USMC reference to TKD and the Army SF reference to HRD in the 60's and 70's - and earlier with combatives (judo, karate & gongfu) during WW2 & Korea.

Too bad the TMA guys in civillian schools don't integrate more modern training into their styles.

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

Earl Weiss

>>And if styles like TKD and HRD have been used to kill our enemies in the battlefield in the recent past, why are they not studied more intently today?<<<

The premise is faulty. I submit to you that it has probably been thousands of years since any number of troops were killed without weapons of any sort. Teaching empty hand Martial arts in the military has little to do with battle field effectiveness . It has to do with building mental toughness and esprit de corps. So, why not go with the flow and teach whatever is popular.

Lets face it, you can train your troops all you like in empty hand combatives. I will take the force with little or no empty hand training and be satisfied that they have stuff like knives, clubs, swords, guns, hand grenades, etc.

I think some navy seal once said, if you are egaged in empty hand combat, something has already fgone terribly wrong.