applications derived from hyung

[JSun]

I let a classmate borrow a Tai Chi chin na book the otherday. We were in class and started discussing how many of the locks in chin na are applied using postures from the forms. He described and demonstrated some techniques that aren't on the syllabus he thought might be applicable based on a few different KSW hyungs. Is this something one starts to study and learn after 1st dan, or is it really all about interpretation and improvisation of self defense techniques?

[JKN-Taylor]

I was once told that Hyung is best described as an "abstract" series of movements. Every movement you make in any of our Hyung can be interoperated (or I guess even misinterpreted) in many different ways.

For example, one arm motion could be interoperated as a strike or offensive move by one person and another could assume that the same "arm motion" is a defensive block, and they would both be 100% right.

When you are practicing your Hyung, try to imagine all of the possible applications of each movement. "could I use this kick to block an attack?"... "I wonder where this strike would land"... "how many opponents am I facing with this form?"

I don't know if I helped any. If not, I hope you find an answer ^^

JGN Taylor

[JSun]

I think we're going to start discussing more underlying theory and construction of each hyung after class, when it's just a few of us up at the dojang. It's not something that's ever really addressed while in formal training, but I think dissecting the forms are a great way to develop combinations. That ties into the "abstract" series of movements you're describing. Striking combinations can include offensive and defensive postures so you have a good point.

I generally don't put myself into scenerios when practicing my hyung. It's more of a meditation state for me. Similar to playing the guitar, I just get lost in the flow.

[baubin2]

Hmmm... I only just thought of this, but it seems an analogy worth sharing.

I believe that forms in MA are very similar to fingering exercises when playing an instrument. I played the flute for a long time, and there were plenty of exercise books that were full of nothing but technical exercises I had to learn. Arpeggios, scales, patterns, repetitions of the same theme in different keys, etc. The scales page was a killer to memorize, every major and every melodic minor scale played as fast as you could make it. Very little of this actually showed up in my musical pieces of course, especially the scales. But the scales, which showed up least of all in actual music (at least, the exact fingering patterns of the scales, I know music is played in keys) were considerend the most fundamental instrumental building block, a fact which nobody questioned, ever.

So no a scale is not a concerto, and sections of hyungs are not practical to use in a fight. But knowing your scales will make you a much better player, and similarly, knowing your hyungs will make you a much better MAist. If someone has a problem with this analogy please post.

And it is all your fault JSun, for mentioning the guitair :p

[KSW_123]

I think that each move does have meaning but that sometimes we attribute too much meaning to the moves. My favorite example of this is in Jun Geup Hyung, where I originally thought I was spearing someone's guts open and ripping their entrails out. Maybe instead that sequence is just a nice artful way to do attack, block, counterattack. It seems to me that blue belt is an appropriate level to think about that concept.

I think it was JKNEIEIOMMC (did I get that right?) who posted a very nice list of things that forms are good for, apart from the martial moves themselves.

Also I think some of the moves in the forms are really not meant to be used in self defense or fighting, at least not the way they are practiced in the forms. I have crawled over my oponents defenses and hammer fisted him on the head, but I have never successfully used a Hwae Jun Soo Do as done in a form. I don't view this as problem however, form is art.

[Wolf]

The scales page was a killer to memorize, every major and every melodic minor scale played as fast as you could make it. Very little of this actually showed up in my musical pieces of course, especially the scales. But the scales, which showed up least of all in actual music (at least, the exact fingering patterns of the scales, I know music is played in keys) were considerend the most fundamental instrumental building block, a fact which nobody questioned, ever.

Ever played much jazz. That's worse, we had to memorize every major (ionian), minor (phrygian), mixolydian, and dorian. Then once you get those you should learn your lydian, aeolian and locrian's as well. That's really tough! :D Anyway, didn't mean to hijak the thread.

[AZeitung]

Ever played much jazz. That's worse, we had to memorize every major (ionian), minor (phrygian), mixolydian, and dorian. Then once you get those you should learn your lydian, aeolian and locrian's as well. That's really tough! :D Anyway, didn't mean to hijak the thread.

Aeolian is just minor, so that shouldn't be a big deal. Don't forget blues scales (major and minor - major being from the key a minor third below, starting on the same note, so no big deal there, either), harmonic, natural, and melodic minors. Of course, a scale can be divided up in an arbitrary number of ways, but I don't think many of the others come up in jazz too often.

[baubin2]

Ever played much jazz? That's worse, we had to memorize every major (ionian), minor (phrygian), mixolydian, and dorian. Then once you get those you should learn your lydian, aeolian and locrian's as well. That's really tough! :D Anyway, didn't mean to hijak the thread.
I've played some jazz, but not much. I know enough to guess you are referring to various types of scales used specifically for jazz. I've done a very little with the scale you use for blues (whichever that is), but that is it. I was mostly a concert band and classical music person, so I didn't do much besides major scales and the three types of minor scales. Jazz was fun though, and I espeically liked the parts where you do improv, which I was pretty good at, as jazz is a particularly easy type of music to get a good feel for. Do you play an instrument then Paul?

[Wolf]

Aeolian is just minor, so that shouldn't be a big deal. Don't forget blues scales (major and minor - major being from the key a minor third below, starting on the same note, so no big deal there, either), harmonic, natural, and melodic minors. Of course, a scale can be divided up in an arbitrary number of ways, but I don't think many of the others come up in jazz too often.

You're right, got it and phrygian mixed up. Haven't studied my theory in about 5 years.

[JSun]

I've played some jazz, but not much. I know enough to guess you are referring to various types of scales used specifically for jazz. I've done a very little with the scale you use for blues (whichever that is), but that is it.

A blues scale is a minor penatonic, which is a five note scale, based on the aeolian mode. Major penatonics are used a lot in country music. If you want to check out some swinging modal jazz, pick up Miles Davis's Kind of Blue. He revoutionized the way jazz chord structures are composed and arranged. Another scale, a simple one at that, most people over look is the chromatic. Charlie Parker would burn up the sax using primarily Mixolydian and chromatic bebop scales.

[Wolf]

Actually a blues scale is more than a pentatonic. Not including the octave it is a 6 note scale.
1, flat 3, 4, flat 5, 5, flat 7

[Wolf]

Also, sorry this thread got seriously hijaked :D

[JSun]

Actually a blues scale is more than a pentatonic. Not including the octave it is a 6 note scale.
1, flat 3, 4, flat 5, 5, flat 7

Good point, I forgot about the chromatic passing flat 5, even though I use it pretty often when throwing down on the blues. If you want to get technical, I guess you could say the blues scale has more than 6 notes. It's really the upper harmonics that occur when the flat 3 and 4 are harmonized that's considered the "blue" note. You know, the one that makes you :cry: in your beer when your dog dies or wife leaves you. Well...I guess that depends on your wife, right? :D

[KSW_123]

Jsun, do think about ranges of combat when you are doing your form? I use 4 ranges in my general thinking, wrestling, in-fighting, punching, and kicking. If so then you can use that idea to help figure out some of the form stuff. An exemple is the initial kick in Ki Cho Hyung #1 and #2. In #2 the centerline is protected, whereas in #1 it is not. To me that translates in range 3 for #2 and range 4 for #1.

[JSun]

Jsun, do think about ranges of combat when you are doing your form? I use 4 ranges in my general thinking, wrestling, in-fighting, punching, and kicking. If so then you can use that idea to help figure out some of the form stuff. An exemple is the initial kick in Ki Cho Hyung #1 and #2. In #2 the centerline is protected, whereas in #1 it is not. To me that translates in range 3 for #2 and range 4 for #1.

I don't give range too much thought when I practice forms yet. I'm still focusing on my stance work and continuity. I've focused on practical application of some of the strikes as combinations and counters, but not to any great degree. I generally work on my range and timing when I spar. I see your point about the inital kick in KCH#1 leaving the centerline unprotected so it has to be executed in the long range, and the kick in KCH#2 executed in punching range because of the initial block. That makes sense considering the kick is at a downward 45 degree stomp. What's your take on the application of that blocking posture? I was watching a seminar on DVD the other day and the instructor brought up an interesting point on the application of the x block. He presented the block as a dynamic trapping method, where the only time the arms are crossed are as the inside hand crossing the centerline passes the oncoming strike to the outside hand to be redirected. We learn the block in Maek Chi Ki as a static position with the wrists crossed. That doesn't make quite as much sense to me.

[KSW_123]

What's your take on the application of that blocking posture?

I treat it more of as an idea rather than posture? I don't think of blocks as static postures, so I like to think of the movement getting into the posture and what would it defend against. That one seems to block well against a (near) simultanious groin and throat shot. It doesn't seem to be good for the midsection or head because your hands and arms would just get smooshed to your body.

QUOTE=JSun]
I was watching a seminar on DVD the other day and the instructor brought up an interesting point on the application of the x block. He presented the block as a dynamic trapping method, where the only time the arms are crossed are as the inside hand crossing the centerline passes the oncoming strike to the outside hand to be redirected. We learn the block in Maek Chi Ki as a static position with the wrists crossed. That doesn't make quite as much sense to me.[/QUOTE]
Hmm... I don't do Maek Chi Ki with a static block. I also don't step back like the book shows. I think those two things are shown at first to help people feel confortable about a punch coming at the face. So I think your intuition is correct.

There is something called a braced block, which is very similar to an X-block, so in our forms that also might be what is occasionally intended???

I get a little confused in Ki Cho Hyung #2. Maybe the first X-block is a grab and pull back then spin out of the way (against somone doing an overcommitted punch). The second one may be just to place our hands in a good position for the soo do strike.

I think about this stuff to make myself go to sleep at night. I figure it is better than counting sheep :)

[ember]

KJN has explained that Maek Chi Ki, Maek Cha Ki, and JMM Ki Bohn Soo are in part distance training for sparring. The step is a vital part of the technique, as you learn how far to step out of range based on what your partner does.

This was reiterated in seminar this year.

Not stepping only works on memorization of the target points.

Hmm... I don't do Maek Chi Ki with a static block. I also don't step back like the book shows. I think those two things are shown at first to help people feel confortable about a punch coming at the face. So I think your intuition is correct.

[KSW_123]

Not stepping only works on memorization of the target points.

I step, just not back. I step forward and to the appropriate side.

[ember]

I'm not quite picturing. Do you mean you do one step (into the striking position) instead of two (back and then forward)?

I step, just not back. I step forward and to the appropriate side.

[KSW_123]

I'm not quite picturing. Do you mean you do one step (into the striking position) instead of two (back and then forward)?
Exactly

[ember]

I seem to remember KJN saying something about that at seminar. For the seminar, he even insisted we practice Mak Chi Ki 12 & 13 with the full step-back, rather than the cat-stance YKJN had shown me.

But I'm a little vague on what more he may have said beyond what I already posted (distance training).

Exactly

[KSW_123]

I seem to remember KJN saying something about that at seminar. For the seminar, he even insisted we practice Mak Chi Ki 12 & 13 with the full step-back, rather than the cat-stance YKJN had shown me.

But I'm a little vague on what more he may have said beyond what I already posted (distance training).

I think how you practice these evolves as you progress in rank, as well as your own personal taste. I don't like stepping back because it takes time and makes it feel like I have to reach out to block the punch. I'm lazy, if someone can't hit me, I'm not going to reach my arms out.

Sometimes I practice taking a second step or pivot after the first to realign myself to my opponents centerline and establish a good defensive position.

I do remember when I was afraid being punched if someone got too close.

I've been nailed in the face by not paying attention to my partner, but for me it is price worth paying.

[JSun]

Sometimes I find my self switch stepping on MCK 12 & 13 instead of taking a half step or full step back. I come around quicker with the elbow that way.

[KSW_123]

A couple of things I worry about when I play around with steps for MCK. First, can it handle timeing changes on my partner's part. Second, does it add power to my strike.

[zac_duncan]

Correct me if I'm wrong but in Volumn One of the black textbooks doesn't your GM say pretty explicitely that forms in his system are not intended to simulate a fight but rather as conditioning methods. I believe he notes that a marathon runner would be a poor basketball player because they perform different exercises?

[KSW_123]

Correct me if I'm wrong but in Volumn One of the black textbooks doesn't your GM say pretty explicitely that forms in his system are not intended to simulate a fight but rather as conditioning methods. I believe he notes that a marathon runner would be a poor basketball player because they perform different exercises?

We have the amazing ability to change topic on these threads so if you are referring to last few replies, they are about a set of pressure point striking techniques.

As far as forms go, they don't simulate a fight, but each motion should make sense in its own right, modulated by the fact that the motion is done as "art" as opposed to "application". That is why I think the title of the thread makes good sense, because it says "derived from" as opposed to "in".

[JSun]

Correct me if I'm wrong but in Volumn One of the black textbooks doesn't your GM say pretty explicitely that forms in his system are not intended to simulate a fight but rather as conditioning methods. I believe he notes that a marathon runner would be a poor basketball player because they perform different exercises?

Well, you skewed the sections of the book a bit. The GM is actually refering to the martial conditioning exercises, Mohm Puhl Ki, when he makes the comparison to other sports with KSW. The statement refering to techniques not applicable for self defence on the street is in regard to Ki Bon Soo 1-15. The KBS techniques are fundamental techniques that are the basis for more advanced wrist and throwing techniques. Obviously you've delved into the text a bit. From a traditional CMA perspective, what opinion do you have of KS, zack? Have you picked up on any of the Korean forms?

[zac_duncan]

Well, you skewed the sections of the book a bit. The GM is actually refering to the martial conditioning exercises, Mohm Puhl Ki, when he makes the comparison to other sports with KSW. The statement refering to techniques not applicable for self defence on the street is in regard to Ki Bon Soo 1-15. The KBS techniques are fundamental techniques that are the basis for more advanced wrist and throwing techniques.

Sorry I didn't respond earlier, I don't check this section often.

I must have an older edition. I looked it back up and I was right. He does say that the hyungs are for conditioning, not to simulate a streetfight. He makes comarisons to athletes stating that a good basketball player wouldn't make a good marathon runner becaue they trained different motions or something along those lines. In my book he doesn't say anything about the street effectiveness of Ki Bon Soo.

Obviously you've delved into the text a bit. From a traditional CMA perspective, what opinion do you have of KS, zack? Have you picked up on any of the Korean forms?

I trained in KSW for five years. I was a dan bo with something along the lines of twelve or thirteen stripes. I learned the entire under black cirriculum and a bit of the post black. For some reason though, I kept getting injured before Kuk Sa Nym would come to town and I never tested in front of him. There's a long story in there, but I left KSW and started hapkido, which I've done since (alongside a little CMA).

As far as the forms, I've always loved Gum Moo Hyung (though I haven't practiced it in a while and I probably suck at it). Go Keup and Dae Kuep have some interesting stuff. I think the forms before those are really good for coordination, balance and strength training. They certainly helped me when I was starting MA. Once you get those benefits from them though I didn't find them to mesh well with the rest of the system. The motins in the forms are very big and linear, while the rest of the system is small, tight and circular.

What do I think of KSW? I think it's an extremely comprehensive modifcation of hapkido. It's got a lot of good technical info to it and it will do a lot as far as developing a lot of desirable physical attributes. I do think that to some extent it suffers from the same things that many Korean MAs suffer from.

(Caveat, I'm sure this varies from school to school, teacher to teacher)
The techniques, I feel, are too specific and the teaching format (with all the repition of the same techniques against various attacks), reinforces that. I'd say that by the time you get to Go Keup Sa Mahk Soo, you've already learned most of the techniques, most of what you get after that is variations. Variations are very valuable, but in my later training, my teachers found ways to let me find those variations dynamically. Instead of having 200 specific defenses against a wrist grab, I was taught how to flow with it and find the right technique. That method was a lot more effective for me.


That said, in a sparring session a few nights ago, I managed to pull off Ahp Euh Bok Soo #8 when my opponent fed it with just the right attack. So, I still make a lot of use of the KSW techs and have great respect for them. I also think that KSW's emphasis against using force Vs. force set me up very well to start learning a Chinese internal system.

Just my thoughts
-zac

[JSun]

I must have an older edition. I looked it back up and I was right. He does say that the hyungs are for conditioning, not to simulate a streetfight. He makes comarisons to athletes stating that a good basketball player wouldn't make a good marathon runner becaue they trained different motions or something along those lines. In my book he doesn't say anything about the street effectiveness of Ki Bon Soo.

Sorry, you're right. I was the one mistaken about the hyung section. My text does, however, state that "under black belts should not try to develop these (ki bon soo) techniques for use in streetfighting". I think this is the new edition, though.

I trained in KSW for five years. I was a dan bo with something along the lines of twelve or thirteen stripes. I learned the entire under black cirriculum and a bit of the post black. For some reason though, I kept getting injured before Kuk Sa Nym would come to town and I never tested in front of him. There's a long story in there, but I left KSW and started hapkido, which I've done since (alongside a little CMA).

Five years, huh. I've only been in it for 8 months. You must have a pretty in depth understanding of the under-JKN corriculum then.

As far as the forms, I've always loved Gum Moo Hyung (though I haven't practiced it in a while and I probably suck at it). Go Keup and Dae Kuep have some interesting stuff. I think the forms before those are really good for coordination, balance and strength training. They certainly helped me when I was starting MA. Once you get those benefits from them though I didn't find them to mesh well with the rest of the system. The motins in the forms are very big and linear, while the rest of the system is small, tight and circular.

I'm just beginning to see that in Ahp Eui Bok Soo. That's my most recent set. I think the circular techniques make sense to me as a result of my Taichi background. I've only reached Cho Geup Hyung, but I've seen the blackbelts practicing Gum Moo Hyung and it looks fun. I'm about to tackle DKHyung. I don't think it'll take too long, since there's not too many postures in it.

What do I think of KSW? I think it's an extremely comprehensive modifcation of hapkido. It's got a lot of good technical info to it and it will do a lot as far as developing a lot of desirable physical attributes. I do think that to some extent it suffers from the same things that many Korean MAs suffer from.

I absolutely agree.

(Caveat, I'm sure this varies from school to school, teacher to teacher)
The techniques, I feel, are too specific and the teaching format (with all the repition of the same techniques against various attacks), reinforces that. I'd say that by the time you get to Go Keup Sa Mahk Soo, you've already learned most of the techniques, most of what you get after that is variations. Variations are very valuable, but in my later training, my teachers found ways to let me find those variations dynamically. Instead of having 200 specific defenses against a wrist grab, I was taught how to flow with it and find the right technique. That method was a lot more effective for me.

I've been trying to approach my training like that myself. The setups for the techniques are a bit unrealistic at best. I learned a 108 posture Eagle Claw Chin Na form that uses many of the underbelt wrist and arm locks, but it's a two man set so the locks flow from one counter to the next. I think it's helped me see the techniques in a much more dynamic way.

That said, in a sparring session a few nights ago, I managed to pull off Ahp Euh Bok Soo #8 when my opponent fed it with just the right attack. So, I still make a lot of use of the KSW techs and have great respect for them. I also think that KSW's emphasis against using force Vs. force set me up very well to start learning a Chinese internal system.

Just my thoughts
-zac

Great thoughts. Thanks for your insight into the system. There's not really to much difference between the ying-yang and the um-yahng, is there?

-J

[zac_duncan]

Sorry, you're right. I was the one mistaken about the hyung section. My text does, however, state that "under black belts should not try to develop these (ki bon soo) techniques for use in streetfighting". I think this is the new edition, though.

Good to know that I'm not insane.

Five years, huh. I've only been in it for 8 months. You must have a pretty in depth understanding of the under-JKN corriculum then.

In-depth? Well, it's been years. I had a very solid technical grasp of the cirriculum, and because I've continued hapkido I'd say that I've still got a good technical grasp, but I know I've forgotten some variations and the order of techniques in my head is all screwed up.


I'm just beginning to see that in Ahp Eui Bok Soo. That's my most recent set. I think the circular techniques make sense to me as a result of my Taichi background. I've only reached Cho Geup Hyung, but I've seen the blackbelts practicing Gum Moo Hyung and it looks fun. I'm about to tackle DKHyung. I don't think it'll take too long, since there's not too many postures in it.

That set and too ki are probably my favorite sets in the system. For some reason, that Eui Bok Soo set displays a brutal mindset that some of the other sets seem to lack. Don't get me wrong, they contain the potential to be nasty, but it seems under the surface, with that set, the nastiness is right out front where I like it.


I've been trying to approach my training like that myself. The setups for the techniques are a bit unrealistic at best. I learned a 108 posture Eagle Claw Chin Na form that uses many of the underbelt wrist and arm locks, but it's a two man set so the locks flow from one counter to the next. I think it's helped me see the techniques in a much more dynamic way.

I'm learning a very similar set, not as long, but it does flow nicely and shows me some counters that I had not learned. Since you've done Tai Chi, it also wouldn't hurt to try your KSW techs in a Tui Shou setting. In xingyi we have an exercise we call san shou and some peole call rou shou that's similar to push hands, but with an emphasis on striking. It's amazing to me how, when I put my emphasis on striking how many of my joint locking techniques present themselves.

Great thoughts. Thanks for your insight into the system. There's not really to much difference between the ying-yang and the um-yahng, is there?

Nope, not too different at all. Good luck.

[ember]

Thread bump, bringing this back up since hwarang_cl posted a very similar question a month or two ago. Maybe we should tie them together?

[JSun]

I've got another question to add under this thread. During Ki Cho Hyung Part 1, posture 13 and 14 (back palm strike with the left hand, switch into a left front stance and ridgehand strike with the right), how connected are those movements? Does anyone swing both arms at once? It appears to me to almost resemble an outside parry against a straight cross or jab, followed by a ridgehand to the neck at Hohn Soo Hyul. I think swinging both hands at once generates more power through the hips when switching from horse into front stance. Any ideas?

[KSW_123]

I've got another question to add under this thread. During Ki Cho Hyung Part 1, posture 13 and 14 (back palm strike with the left hand, switch into a left front stance and ridgehand strike with the right), how connected are those movements? Does anyone swing both arms at once? It appears to me to almost resemble an outside parry against a straight cross or jab, followed by a ridgehand to the neck at Hohn Soo Hyul. I think swinging both hands at once generates more power through the hips when switching from horse into front stance. Any ideas?
I think your idea is good. We do that motion a bit different. We turn into the long stance with the left hand extended, no strike, followed immediately by the ridge hand. This would support your idea of a parry.

I don't think it is the original intent of the form but I like to think of this motion as ridge hand that turns into a flesh grab.

[Bahng Uh Ki]

During Ki Cho Hyung Part 1, posture 13 and 14 (back palm strike with the left hand, switch into a left front stance and ridgehand strike with the right), how connected are those movements? Does anyone swing both arms at once?I've never seen anyone make those two strikes at once.

Hitting my imaginary opponent, swinging around from that inside kick with that side knife hand, and down on a ridgehand, I imagine his head getting in the way of the second strike. Seems like if I hit his side first, he's collapsing, and ripe for my second strike. Hopefully, he falls down before the next strike, because I think he would be in the way when I finish off those last two imaginary opponents in front and behind.

So, do we hit twice, or hit once and see what happens, then hit again? If forms are choreographed self defence sequences, then we would be blocking with that other hand rather than having them nicely tucked at the hip, wouldn't we?

I think of forms more as a dance than a choreographed self defence sequence. Actually, I think of them as interconnected positions designed to strengthen the body; to teach our body how to move in a martial arts way. I guess dance covers that well enough.

Try hitting both at the same time during class and tell us what your instructor says. :)

[Ferran]

If I remember correctly, underbelt hyung are modern ones, created with phys. ed. in mind. So no SD is implied.

Even so, it'd probably be nice to practice them with someone to punch us (or someone to punch _to_ ;) ) when there's a parry, to get some extra precision.

[JSun]

I don't think it is the original intent of the form but I like to think of this motion as ridge hand that turns into a flesh grab.

If the strikes at hohn sool hyul it could be a hair grab as well.

[JSun]

I've never seen anyone make those two strikes at once.

Nor have I. That's why I asked. The motion of swinging both arms to incorporate a block and a strike together is a much quicker than blocking, then striking. I've also seen it in many various of Chinese gung fu forms and, since our forms have a decidedly Chinese flavor, I thought it might be possible those postures could be interpreted as such.


Hitting my imaginary opponent, swinging around from that inside kick with that side knife hand, and down on a ridgehand, I imagine his head getting in the way of the second strike. Seems like if I hit his side first, he's collapsing, and ripe for my second strike. Hopefully, he falls down before the next strike, because I think he would be in the way when I finish off those last two imaginary opponents in front and behind..

Funny, I don't really imagine any opponents at all when I'm doing forms. I pay more attention to the mechanics of the motions, body alignment and kinetic linking. I guess that's why I started this thread. We go through the motions, why not try to find a link to the technques inside them?

So, do we hit twice, or hit once and see what happens, then hit again? If forms are choreographed self defence sequences, then we would be blocking with that other hand rather than having them nicely tucked at the hip, wouldn't we?

Don't get me started on this. I think forms should ingrain muscle memory of good defense habits, like striking and bringing the hands back up to guard the face, not the hips. I understand kuk sool is a traditional martial art, but change is inevitable, and some aspects of the art should evolve to reflect contemporary combat methods. I read that the punch from the hip was to generate power for finishing blows, the whole one strike, one kill philosophy adheared to during battle field hand to hand combat. I can buy that to some degree, but spar a boxer now and see how quick he takes advantage when the hand falls down by the hip out of habit.

I think of forms more as a dance than a choreographed self defence sequence. Actually, I think of them as interconnected positions designed to strengthen the body; to teach our body how to move in a martial arts way. I guess dance covers that well enough.

It covers it to an extend, except I think forms should be executed with power and intent. I don't just go through the motions, but I push my body to execute those motions as powerfully as possible.

Try hitting both at the same time during class and tell us what your instructor says. :)

I'm going to ask him his opinion this week and I'll post it up.

[Bahng Uh Ki]

I think your idea is good. We do that motion a bit different. We turn into the long stance with the left hand extended, no strike, followed immediately by the ridge hand. This would support your idea of a parry.

I don't think it is the original intent of the form but I like to think of this motion as ridge hand that turns into a flesh grab.You do a long stance in KCH #1 in the middle? I thought we were talking about the moves just prior to the ones I think you are describing. In a horse stance, after the inside kick.
We go through the motions, why not try to find a link to the technques inside them?Why not indeed?It covers it to an extend, except I think forms should be executed with power and intent. I don't just go through the motions, but I push my body to execute those motions as powerfully as possible."4. Feet: Slow and Precise
5. Hands: Fast and Controlled"

I think there is a reason why hands fast is mentioned last.

I think how fast different part of the body move in form is more complicated than just "feet slow hands fast" though. There is a flow that doesn't seem to be easily taught.

[JSun]

You do a long stance in KCH #1 in the middle? I thought we were talking about the moves just prior to the ones I think you are describing. In a horse stance, after the inside kick...

...I think how fast different part of the body move in form is more complicated than just "feet slow hands fast" though. There is a flow that doesn't seem to be easily taught.

Actually, I'm talking about the moves after the one you are describing. After the horse stance and the soo do with the left hand, you turn into a left front stance and backhand, then ridgehand strike with the right.

[Bahng Uh Ki]

Actually, I'm talking about the moves after the one you are describing. After the horse stance and the soo do with the left hand, you turn into a left front stance and backhand, then ridgehand strike with the right.ah, ok. revisualizing....

[ember]

Jsun -

I usually start the right-hand euk soo do while the left backhand is still moving, nearly the same time. The right hand's travelling farther and takes longer, so it still finishes second. Not sure if it's right, but it seems to work.

I think how fast different part of the body move in form is more complicated than just "feet slow hands fast" though. There is a flow that doesn't seem to be easily taught.

In music, it's called "phrasing". Partly because it's a lot like punctuation - sometimes there's short stops, sometimes longer pauses. Sometimes faster, sometimes slower. It's bad form for a musician to take a breath in the middle of the phrase... although in a larger band, if the phrases are TOO long, the musicians in the section can alternate who breathes when.

That's sure the word that came to mind when SBN was working with me on cleaning up the Gum Mool Hyung pace...

[KSW_123]

Don't get me started on this. I think forms should ingrain muscle memory of good defense habits, like striking and bringing the hands back up to guard the face, not the hips. I understand kuk sool is a traditional martial art, but change is inevitable, and some aspects of the art should evolve to reflect contemporary combat methods. I read that the punch from the hip was to generate power for finishing blows, the whole one strike, one kill philosophy adheared to during battle field hand to hand combat. I can buy that to some degree, but spar a boxer now and see how quick he takes advantage when the hand falls down by the hip out of habit.

This doesn't really bug me. No matter what the hand placement is there is a scenerio it fails under. I prefer to think of punching from where-ever my hand is as opposed to, it is coming from my waist. If you think about the forms this way you see a bunch of places where the hand does not come back to the waist. It just strikes from where ever it happens to be.

Having said that, it does drive my batty when practicing techniques with someone and they let their arms dangle. It is a waste of my time.

[Choiyoungwoo]

I've got another question to add under this thread. During Ki Cho Hyung Part 1, posture 13 and 14 (back palm strike with the left hand, switch into a left front stance and ridgehand strike with the right), how connected are those movements? Does anyone swing both arms at once? It appears to me to almost resemble an outside parry against a straight cross or jab, followed by a ridgehand to the neck at Hohn Soo Hyul. I think swinging both hands at once generates more power through the hips when switching from horse into front stance. Any ideas?
if there must be an appication then i guess that it would be similar to kbs 11. application of hyung likely requires additional movements that are absent in the hyung but are added for application. consider bong hyung vs bong dae ryun. almost all of the hyung is in the dae ryun but it requires some tweaking and to make it work in the dae ryun.........same idea with empty hand hyung, and just as complex.. of course there is much more to hyung than sd skills

[kswflip]

I can remember KUK SA NIM saying at a semina that KUK SOOL forms are not fighting forms the movements are abstract

[KSW_123]

I can remember KUK SA NIM saying at a semina that KUK SOOL forms are not fighting forms the movements are abstract

The real question is what does he mean by adstract. Here are two possible alternatives.

1. The motion in the form is incomplete, requiring more information to be translated into a martial movement.

2. There is no opponent present hence body position is defined by self as opposed to being defined by opponent.

I suscribe to 2.

[kswflip]

I suscribe to 2.
thats my thinking too

[hwarang cl]

Sometimes a transition is nothing more than a transition from one position to another. Dont worry about it, when the time is right you will be told if its more than a transition. Now, I think its a good thing that you are analying your hyung, but dont let that get in the way of training.