General Choi's ability.

Discussion in 'Tae Kwon Do' started by Ragnarok2005, Apr 19, 2006.

  1. StuartA

    StuartA Guardian of real TKD :-)

    No, my logic was simply refering to someone who has passed away. His personal skills didnt help or hinder you starting or practicing TKD, so why would they do that now! I agree the discussion can seem interesting, I just feel its one of those things that people chat about between themselves rather than on a public forum - but, whatever floats ya boat I guess. If the post had simply said "Hss anyone seen Gen Choi fight" etc then its context and asertions are different, I just feel the threads a little negative and has little to gain.

    Tell me, how would it affect you if someone said I got video from 1950 that shows he couldnt fight - would that chnage your view of TKD or even stop you doing it?


    No, its like telling kids not to talk about thier father in a way that may be disrespectful - thats the difference IMO!

    Though I was feeling a bit sentimental when I typed that :p

    Anyway, ill leave you guys to it.

    Stuart
     
  2. Alexander

    Alexander Possibly insane.

    Don't worry, I wasn't drunk and pointing out the blatantly obvious when I posted that. But I was disputing the claim that his ability doesn't bear any relevance to what we do now. The thing is that there is quite a big 'cult' that seems to surround Hong Hi Choi: People will take what is in the Encyclopedia as gospel, regardless of the fact that his theoretical understanding was flawed. Furthermore they are so utterly convinced that the reasons he gives more certain aspects of Tae Kwon-Do are unquestionable that they leap on those who seem to question them.

    I think that the question was a good one because 'ability' does not just mean physical ability. Neither does it just mean teaching ability. It also refers to the knowledge of the techniques that are contained within Tae Kwon-Do. I do not think that Choi had an adequate understanding in this aspect - and I don't think you do either. Otherwise, if he did, the information in your book would already be standard knowledge throughout the (ITF) TKD world and, as a result, releasing your book would be pointless (as the Encyclopedia would probably give all the info there). Yet I don't think you think your book is pointless, I think you think it contains very important information that TKD practitionners should know - hence you cannot regard the information Choi left us before he died as sufficient, and therefore I think that, if only tactitly, you completely agree that his ability does matter as a knowledge of how thouough Choi's understanding was of Karate/TKD will enable us to walk through doors that have previously been closed.
     
  3. StuartA

    StuartA Guardian of real TKD :-)

    Like I said, if someone had positive proof that he wasnt much good, howm many would re-evaluate what they are doing!! Who would quit TKD because of it? Point is, his personal ability doesnt effect what is Taekwon-do, certainly not now anyway.


    This I agree with, though this is more to do with those people 'monkey see, monkey do' minds than General Chois ability! Debate of the concepts are more convincing an argument to me! How does General Chois personal abilities prove or disprove any of them!

    Again, I agree, but that is no what the initial post refered to. it very much refered to 'fighting prowness' as you well know!

    By your thoughts, every art would only ever have one book on them, so all arts are fundamentally flawed and all the founders didnt understand them as all arts have multiple books on them!! What makes you feel my understanding of TKD is inadequate? Not that I claim to be the 'be all & end all' font of TKD knowledge, but do find your judgement and ascertions interesting as you have never even met me!

    I dont think, I know its not pointless and I also know it contains useful info. Whether people want to read that info or not is entirely up to them.

    No I dont and I have commented on area in the book itself. You are judging it now on knowledge of 50 years ago, times have moved on, education has moved on, exposure to information has evolved consideribly since then, he did a great job with the tools he had then, though we can see/researh more now. How all that transends into his personal ability I still do not know. You are talking of a single man, yet discussing issues with the system!! The two are different discussions entirely!

    That would only be the case if I felt TKD was the sole invention/formation of one man.. which I dont!

    Stuart
     
  4. Alexander

    Alexander Possibly insane.

    Ah... Sorry, badly phrased. I meant to say: "I think you think Choi's understanding of the art was theoretically flawed". Not: "I think your knowledge of the art is theoretically flawed.

    Hope that makes my post clear.

    EDIT: No it doesn't, does it. Sorry, that was a god-awful post. I'll set it out clearer:

    1) Ability includes more than just physical prowess.

    2) Theoretical knowledge is also a part of ability. Hence my original argument:
    2.1) Choi may have been a good fighter and good at patterns - however he seemed to lack the theoretical knowledge to link the two coherrantly: Rag's initial post depicted this - moving the hand to the correct position but unable to give reasonable explanations as to the purpose of such movements.

    3) Should Choi's understanding have been adequate his encyclopedia would contain all the information that a Taekwon-Do practitionner would ever need.
    3.1) It is exceedingly likely that Choi wished his encyclopedia to be of this nature.
    3.2) Two alternative reasons why additional material would be released:
    3.2.1) Expository.
    3.2.2) Financial.

    4) Should Choi's understanding have been inadequate then the encyclopedia contains critical flaws.
    4.1) This gives rise to another 'evangelical' reason as to why material regarding Taekwon-Do should be published: You regard the information as important for people to know.

    5) A book on pattern applications presupposes official information on pattern applications is flawed.

    6) You are releasing a book on pattern applications.
    6.1) It does not seem to me that the primary reason for you too be publishing is (3.2.1) or (3.2.2) as:
    6.1.1) The book does not appear to be an exposition of an existing paradigm.
    6.1.2) You undoubtedly wish to make money on it due to your advertising and reluctance to let slip bits of its content online; however the fact that you are the founder of IAOMAS and testaments (and I have no reason to think that these are forged) state that you are the sort of person who would prioritise martial art over naked profit. Another thing that seems to support this is the passion with which your website expounds your theories and methods (creating conviction).
    6.2) Disgarding other motives draws to the conclusion that, as you said, you regard the information contained in your book as important and necessary.

    7) You regard Choi's ability as not perfect.
    7.1) Acceptance of (6.2) leads to (3) being rejected and (4) being validated.
    7.2) If (1) and (2) are accepted then - and you posts lead me to believe you do accept them - then, with (7.1), conclusion (7) is drawn.

    8) It seems an inconsistency that you release a book on pattern applications and hold that Choi's ability does not matter: Releasing a book on pattern applications pre-supposes conclusion (7).
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2006
  5. StuartA

    StuartA Guardian of real TKD :-)

    8.1) Unless you include the word "Now" as I did in my original post :)

    Stuart
     
  6. FredQ

    FredQ New Member

    Interesting


    Fred
     
  7. kwang gae

    kwang gae 광개 Sidekick Specialist

    Who's ability is/was "perfect"?

    Gen. Choi had his interpretation of the pattern applications based on his experiences, etc. Many people have said that they're flawed, either inadvertantly or intentionally, and people like Stuart, and Master Willie Lim have tackled them again and tried to re-interpret the applications.

    Their re-intrepretations in no way reflect on whether Gen. Choi could do a pattern, throw a side kick, or anything else.

    Einstein's math did not refute Newtons.
     
  8. Alexander

    Alexander Possibly insane.

    Mine!!!! AH HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!

    I think you miss the point.
     
  9. kwang gae

    kwang gae 광개 Sidekick Specialist

    Ok, I'll admit that's a possibility. Can you dumb it down for me? ;)
     
  10. Alexander

    Alexander Possibly insane.

    The thing I was getting at was that Choi was probably unaware of the theoretical side of the Karate that he learned.

    This is reflected in the fact that Taekwon-do fighters tend to be taught mobility on their feet in sparring, yet the total opposite in patterns. I'm sure Choi believed that patterns were beneficial, but I think the reason why he believed was that he was told they were beneficial by the person who taught him Karate. I don't think it was anything to do with an advanced historical analysis of the patterns themselves. This led, in essence to a martial art with a kind of split personality - characterised by the conflict between the features of patterns and sparring.

    As you say, now people are reinterpreting them and making Taekwon-do's syllabus unified rather than in conflict. That was why I held that I didn't think Choi knew what he was doing - because he was dabbling in something he did not understand. Nevertheless, earlier in this thread I gave the vase analogy and Mathew Sylvester pointed out that because of the fact that there is nothing, if anything new, in Taekwon-do patterns the theory behind Karate can be bought into the system (N.B. not bought back into the system). Which is of course what myself, Mathew Sylvester, Stuart Anslow, Ragnarok, Rag's instructor (the list could go on) are doing.

    Yet all of us, as a pre-requisite to thinking the way we do, must agree that Choi's conception of TKD is flawed. Otherwise 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'.

    Since ability, at least how I define it, does consist in knowing why you do something rather than just doing it 'because', Choi was not as good as a lot of people make him out to be. With regard to practical ability I've never met, seen or sparred with the guy so, as I said previously, I don't know how good he was in those terms.
     
  11. aaron_mag

    aaron_mag New Member Supporter

    Interesting and well thought out post. Yes TKD does have a split personality. Any instructor realizes this as they explain the hyungs (teaching all the formal blocks and very rigid stances) and then you yell at them if they try to use those moves in sparring. We, at least, say: "Keep your hands up, use footwork as your first line of defense, and DON'T BLOCK!!! Because the moment you start to do that I'm going to start throwing fakes and combos that will have you wondering which way is up..."

    In other words for sparring we advocate more of a boxing style defense. And I know it is confusing for the students.

    What I've always told them is that the formal blocks and hyungs are to teach us how to control our body in very specific ways and that control transfers over into sparring.

    And I personally think that is true. Because I've seen sparring matches from styles that don't have hyungs or any formal traditional style technique. Definitely some good fighters in there...but most of it descends into 'slap fighting' (where technique goes right out the window).
     
  12. paulol

    paulol Valued Member

    Blocks can be used in sparring, just not in the way that they are traditionally taught in Hyung/Tul. (and thats a whole other thread :D )

    I try to have students learning block-strike drills early on, so that they get a strike in as they block/cover!! Also I'm talking about natural blocking motions not the full retract and swing out one in TMA.
     
  13. aaron_mag

    aaron_mag New Member Supporter

    Totally agree with you. When I say 'don't block' I'm usually referring to someone throwing a full on low block at a kick. Because, as I'm sure you know, we TKDist love it when people throw that because we can fake low and go high very easily.

    When you say block/cover you are more talking about 'strategic hand placemnt' and, like you said, that is another thread in itself!!! :D

    But it can be a bit confusing to the students because they are like, "But you just taught me low block in Chon-gi! Why shouldn't I use it in sparring..."
     
  14. MaverickZ

    MaverickZ Guest

    typical misinterpretation by both students and instructors. there are no blocks in forms.
     
  15. paulol

    paulol Valued Member

    I am! But also passing off attacks in motion towards you!! Kind like Filipino MA or Wing Chun type of actions.
    It's been something I've seen for years and what turns people off doing patterns "Cause it has nothing to do with fighting!". But this is due to...
    ...and this has been touched on in the thread on Gen. Choi.

    I teach simple drills using the opening movement in Won Hyo for defending against head height punches while attacking or entering the guard of the attacker, and an equal drill to defend against low gut punches that are based on the low block or the middle and low block near the end of Hwa Rang or it's also found in Po Eun!!
     
  16. aaron_mag

    aaron_mag New Member Supporter

    I know what you are talking about and I've discussed this with fellow instructors (and had their 'Wing Chun' type actions explained to me. And the guys who really delve into the forms and find these things are very dedicated and good at sparring as well (because good techinque typically equals good sparring anyway).

    But I've never been sold on the idea. I think of hyungs as a stylized dance that emphasizes body control. To me it is 'active meditation' when you get into a yoga like state. I've solved many a problem subconsciously while doing my hyungs. This doesn't diminish their meaning to me in the least. I practice them every class.

    Others believing differently is cool. That is the great thing about martial arts is that there IS room for interpretation and making it 'your own'.
     
  17. StuartA

    StuartA Guardian of real TKD :-)

    well, if you think that, obviously everything will seem inferior to you :rolleyes:

    Actually, I think he found another one, as you state that what General choi did was flawed, but it could just aseasily be argued that what he learnt was flawed to begin with (and what they learnt etc), but none of it identifies his ability or lack of, just what we can see with 'hindsight' and better all round knowledge available today.

    Quite agree, as was the person who taught him (Funakoshi or not), so who's flawed!!


    Well IMO, thats because they have different objectives, but both can compliment each other.


    So based on that quote, you already know all the answers or else you wouldnt be doing TKD correct? :rolleyes:

    Which as I said previously was what this thread really insigated.. full circle!!


    Aaron
    I agree with Paulo that blocks can be used in sparring depending on two things:

    1. the type of sparring - unfortunatly the word "sparring" makes 99% of students think of competition, where speed is prime and takes precedent. Most blocks are ineffective ina tournament setting, but can be effective in traditional sparring - see point 2. The book speaks of bridging this divide.

    2. Depending on the application. In traditional sparring, grabbing is allowed, so apps that utilize this work well.


    With reference to point one, Gen Choi was opposed to competition sparring and its a pretty well known fact.

    Stuart
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2006
  18. aaron_mag

    aaron_mag New Member Supporter

    You've caught my curiosity with this book. For my 4th dan I had to write a 25 page paper on TKD and, believe it or not, that was my first exposure to the scholarly side of TKD (doing research, etc) rather than just working out. And I'd been doing it for 20 or so years (off and on to do various sports), but I was blissfully ignorant to all the various TKD organizations, etc until I started doing that research. The martial arts world can be very insular where you only know the way your federation does things. Maybe this is why Master Kim forces us to write that damnable paper!!! ;)

    My wife's favorite part of TKD is the patterns. So I think I'm going to buy your book for her for Christmas. And I'll be wanting to read it as well. Plus it will come in handy when I need to expand my paper to 50 pages for my 5th dan!!!
     
  19. paulol

    paulol Valued Member

    Cool!! I'm not on my own then :D
    Hey man if thats what it means to you then cool!! But I'm sure that if you went to have a session with any of the guys that apply stuff from hyungs and tuls to real SD, and sometimes sparring! You would see the connection!!
    Indeed there is!! ;)
     
  20. paulol

    paulol Valued Member

    Indeed he was!!

    As was Funa(K)oshi ( :D )!

    Choi only allowed it when Joon Rhee came out with his first version of the common pads we use today!!

    But sparring is the best way to test yourself and techniques!!
     

Share This Page