And there was me thinking it was "Taekwon-do: The Korean Art of Self Defence", I didnt realise there was a clause that says "only in sparring and hosinsul'! Besides, I`ve read threads that either you or someone else has said, the SD aspects starts from day 1, the rolling of a fist - implying it is inherent in all aspects! See you keep making fundamental flaws in your argument with me. I do not think you are understanding my POV. You don't have to agree with it, as I know you do not. But I am talking about something else & then you critique that, but do so from a different perspective, which in IMHO is off base. I have always said that TKD is a KMA of SD. But it is more than that. It is a system of improving one's total life. It was offered as a means to build a more peaceful world. As a result it has many things added into it & demanded as a focus that any combat school that teaches down & dirty street defense would never waste time or money on, like silly white PJs! There are so may aspects of his TKD that are not SD. Geez is a flying high kick SD related? Is integrity SD related? etc. No I mean the 65 book to the 1st edition of the 72 book, to a later edition of that same book. Well I think that the ITF-C & ITF-NK are in agreement with you. I see more exaggeration with the ITF-V as to the initial relax. No actually it isn't. But it is supplemented by additional training, but they never want to abandon the basic principles of firing a gun. They would stress you out by making you run, get out of breath, then shoot, they would add moving targets or have you shoot on the run, searching for cover etc. They even have hi-tech equipment that simulates shoot & don't shoot! (I am not familiar with the killing house, sorry) No problem at all. I see your point. As I stated he wanted his patterns to be performed with maximum power each time, with noted exceptions & some of those exceptions he used to explain realism. But you do not seem to understand or accept his basic premise for having patterns, but you still want to find fault with them, based on different assumptions. I am sorry, but I do not know how to further respond........ Yes, but again, without a more deeper understanding, you are simply forgetting to even include other basic instructions found in the 9 parts of the training secrets of TKD.
Errr, not really.. as we are comparing patterns to kata, that are not only formed 'like' them in virtually ever way, but moreso, borrowed a lot from them.. meaning we are comparing oranges to oranges IMO.. the fact that in the 1950s, certain things wernt understood, makes no difference! The only difference is, you feel they are for 'visual'.. I feel they are for more than that... and offered some reasoning as why saying they are only 'visual' doesnt work for me! :evil: Stuart
Yes I agree, I don't think he or any Korean knew the original, if there were, alternate applications. (Note: I make no argument that there weren't, as I don't know. For the purpose of the present debate I stipulate there were. I also have followed Mr. Anslow's & Mr. Oneill's work & find sound value in it) From my limited understanding, many Japanese may not have knew them either. But this point is really moot, for this debate at least, as Gen. Choi stated they were simply blocks & attacks!
Simple: Each move is a fundamental movement. One MUST "know the purpose & method of each movement clearly"! It really doesn't matter does it, whether that movement is being trained in place, on the spot, in a line exercise, against a focus target, bag or in a pattern, does it? Tuls are just fundamentals strung together, performed in the air against imaginary opponets, which IMHO is not really SD related or effective at all. I would use my time better when it comes to SD
GREAT POST! I agree with Toi Gye 100%. I like Chung Gun though. (I could give an off color joke about what someone once thought up of how to use that visual, but will refrain, but please know your post made me LOL!) Thanks
I would have little problem with essentially agreeing to your definition or concept. However I can assure you that this was not the way Gen. Choi defined it. Which then means it is an apples & oranges situation that doesn't warrant a debate, as we would be debating 2 different things!
:bang: Ok I agree with your premise in the 1st paragraph above. I also accept the difference you outline in your 2nd paragraph. But can you not see that we then debate 2 different things? Gen. Choi says he Tuls were blocking & punching. He says it is part of the ART in his MA. He gives a whole set of requirements that he insists need to be followed in performing his patterns as he conceptualized them. This debate moved to a critique of SW. Then it narrowed to it being performed in patterns. I am not sure where you are going with the above, or how it has anything to do with this? It is a given that Gen. Choi taught his Tuls as simple block & punch, with no deeper or hidden meaning. I agree that he probably didn't even know them. But it is clear that hos movements were simple blocks & strikes, etc. TKD & other mAs have long borrowed from other fighting systems. Gen. Choi based his TKD on karate & of course took moves & segments from karate to make his patterns. But his Tuls were simple attack & defense! Nothing more! You can feel free to critique that approach, but TBH it is another topic. His patterns were designed to flow & generate full power o almost every move, as well as to show that to a viewer. As part of that, he incorporated his SW.
They are for visual, but not limited to just that. Gen. Choi would say if I saw you perform patterns, I would then know your technique skill level. The basic problem as i see it, is many look at MAs for what they feel, think or conceptualize what they are or should be or how they train them. Gen. Choi gave us his TKD to build a more peaceful world. He would do this by training strong students so that they would be able to stand on the side of justice. Since he emphasized moral character, he also knew that if more people were trying to be moral, they would make the world better, by their behavior. Gen. Choi also used his TKD to teach the world about Korea, their history & culture. He also hoped that his TKD would reunite his beloved Homeland. There are may things to critique about his TKD, as there is with other styles of TKD or other MAs in general. I for one think that if it SD you wish, you may best be served by a combat focused system. However I love ITF TKD & very much appreciate the gift that Gen. Choi gave to the world. It has without a doubt made my life better! While I am confident of my SD skills, I know that I can better hone them training differently. But I rarely, in fact I don't recall when I needed to rely on SD skills. But I face life & live life everyday. His TKD helps me with life & the many challenges non-SD related, that I face constantly. (It even allows me the patience & afforded me knowledge to participate in this forum!)
My apologies if that is the case. From what you have written I thought you were saying that patterns were the art part and SD/Sparring was where the realism kicked in! Is that incorrect? Sorry, you have lost me. If the above is incorrect, please expand further and explain. My main point was that Gen Choi describes patterns as offensive/defensive techniques and if that is so, then they need to be realistic... as anything unrealistic (like artistic performance - show - above application value) renders them useless as offensive/defensive techniques IMO! Sure.. but also, with out warriorship, one cannot truely practice peace IMO! You refered earlier about the different aspects being single, yet over lapping entities.. but I see each one as a benfit to the next.. ie. Conditioning.. makes the tools of SD stronger... basics are essential to sound techniques.. patterns form the back bone of SD, Sparring forms the back-up if SD doesnt work - to me.. they are all inter-related to make the whole. And I`m sorry to say, patterns, with unrealistic down/up/down sine wave do not form part of the circle IMO! Okay, thanks. I looked in the Legacy (1983) version.. sine wave wasnt mention in the TOP there either.. but seperate.. in which edition did it finally become part of the TOP! And more to the point.. if it was such an important element.. and was there (in another chapter), why wasnt it included straight away!!! Hmmmmmm... lol Sorry.. not sure what you mean by "it isnt actually"!!! - as it refered to refining skills in 'the killing house' - yet you dont know what that is.. so how can you say it isnt!!!! The 'killing House' is a place the SAS and other Special Forces practice shooting etc. under pressure. Yes.. I do understand his premise for having patterns... and that is so TKD looked like the other martial arts - particularly Karate - like it or not, that was his premise.. the tweaks, his purposes (after the fact) etc. he made, are a seperate discussion to this.. and the fact still remains.. that he based them on 'older' stuff... old stuff which has strong SD roots!!! Nope.. I can include much, if not all of the TOP into SD techniques.. because they are based on natural laws and physics.. ie. they happen naturally... down/up/down sine wave does not and thus, it is the exception! Its not a lack of understanding of (new) sine-wave, but an understanding of real world applications and SD... I think the differences we refer to is wholey in the mold we see patterns as... but i think we both agree that (new)sine-wave doesnt really work in a realistic enviroment right? And if that is so.. in my TKD, which is for realism above showmanship, it has no place, but for others, that vaue the 'show' of patterns above realism, that is the way to go... and as everyone seems to love medals above all else.. that is why people like me seem more and more foreign to TKD people! Stuart
General Choi stated that based on what he knew at the time... we now know different and thus, that makes his statement void, wich in no way belittles his view/knowledge at that time - no one really knew! It sort of reminds me of the Jeet Kune Do split - 1 group felt to protect Bruce lee's legacy, the techniques should be continued/practiced how he left them.. whereas the other group maintain Bruce Lee's technqiues.. were based on his own principles and should evolve following that, and thus evolved their own stuff! Gen Choi said the future of the arts evolution is in the hands of the instructors.. but how can it evolve if we doggidly stick to what he said, some things that arnt as sound now as they were in the 1960's... how is that progress? Is the progress simply left to the orgs that choose to change his pattern techniques or impliment different rules for competition etc. To me, that isnt progress really! Stuart
But by using the word 'purpose', to me that defines its application.. are you saying his only 'purpose' was 'to block' something - no more, no less? If that is so... that understanding 'his' purpose is very very child-like easy! See, this is where I disgaree with the definition.. it may have been Gen Choi's way of explain patterns to people, but its not really correct.. as PASmith said, 'fundamentals' are basic moves you cannot do with out.. everything else is superflicious and thus not fundamental in nature! Stuart
Heres a point.. if the patterns of TKD are for 'visual' purposes.. then why the 6 W-Blocks in Toi-Gye.. answer: because shotokan has 6 W-Blocks!.. Who's visual are we refering to now?
If I told you the car sitting on my driveway was a piece of metal, to collect rays from the sun, to warm up my food.. as I didnt know what a car was.. would that make me correct?
Yes.. I have already mentoioned that. But also.. the two different things are also the same thing but from different persectives! And yet he missed the fundament aspect of tul/kata.. because he didnt know it.. and that 9to me) over-rides the later purposes! Apart from basics.. is it performed else ware then? I think you do.. i am simply placing patterns in their proper place in elation to MA's practice dating back hundreds of years! If he didnt know.. then the only thing that is cler is that he didnt know, not that they were not more than he knew!! No.. it is the topic we are discussing. You cannot 'link' the technqiues and refute their heritage IMO! Gen Choi's lack of knowledge of such things at the time, though understandable, is not an excuse for not acknowledging their roots and what they were meant for IMO! No.. they were designed to be similar to kata, with a Korean twist. Most other things came later as he attempted to stamp his/TKD's indentity on them.. sadly he missed a fundamental part (no fault of his own) that IMO, would have excelled TKD as a martial art. Stuart
And yet Ive seen great fighters with lower than average pattetns and vice-versa.. but I`m not gen Choi of course! I actually think the basic problem is - putting a label on something because you dont have the fukll undersatnding of them - this was right at Choi's time.. its not now IMO! Actually, wasnt it to bolster Korean pride.. the rest came later! According to his own auto-biography, it was so they would be the cream of the Korean forces! Sure. So did Funakoshi! This I dont refute. thanks to this, i have learnt more about Korea and his people and legends than i would have ever done as a English school child... many of which are inspirational in their own right - to me, this was a great thing to do for his country. I agree that all MA's can be critqued. but I don't do all MA's, I do TKD and by my critiques, I only serve to make it better.. that is my wish. I am not an outsider bashing it.. its the art I love and have dedicated my life to.. would I be better off leaving TKD do you think? SD is a big focus for me, sure.. but I still try to maintain many traditions of the art and hand it down 'as is'.. just better See.. now I love TKD.. not ITF TKD.. to me, ITF has had much political influence on the art of Ch'ang Hon and still does.. much of which is (IMO) in detriment to it! Knowledge yes.. patience you were probibly born with! Stuart
Ok this thread started as a poster felt that they would have preferred to see ITF TKD in the Olympics. Someone mentioned the nasty SINE WAVE term & now we are off on that same long road to nowhere. This road is a difficult one to take, as it really requires explanations, examples etc. that this communication venue simply can't provide. When I use terms like people don't fully understand a concept, it can be viewed as a slag or copout on my part. That is not my intention, nor do I wish to escape from any good debate, as it helps me to think, rethink & grow. With that in mind, there is simply to many things fort me to respond to, to people who simply are not on the same page. We must define terms if we are to have a rational debate. But then we even differ on the definitions! So one more time: My understanding of Gen. Choi's Tuls is that they were series of mostly offensive & defensive movements strung together in a sequence. They have little to nothing to do with SD. They were the Art of his MA. He insisted that almost every move be done with full power, hence he applied his 6 factors of his ToP to the patterns, along with other criteria that he outlined in the Encyclopedia of TKD he authored that contains 15 volumes & is available on the web for free download for anyone to check on the exact details, directions, instructions & scoring criteria. He said they were something that should be pleasing to the eye. That being said, I have no idea why alternative applications have entered into the debate. I stated I didn't even think Gen. Choi knew of the lost or hidden applications. I conceded for purposes of advancing the debate that he didn't know them. But so what? I am telling you that his patterns were mostly just offensive & defensive fundamental movements that he put together in a sequence. So that is the definition I am using & trying to explain. I respect the work Mr. Anslow & others have done in this area, bringing these wonderful applications to light. I also agree that anyone who doesn't consider them is hurting their ability to expand. But what does this have to do with his Tuls & how he wanted them taught, performed & judged? Does this approach limit his followers? Of course they can! But that is not the issue I am debating & as such, they have no place in the argument, as it confuses the issue of SW & the ToP within the Tuls! Gen. Choi simply created patterns for his system for a purpose that he had in mind. You may critique his purpose, the time he spent on them, how they look, feel etc. You can say others are better. You can insist that they contain hidden or alternate applications beyond block & strike & would agree. But he taught them as block & strike! He wanted them performed as such & judged on criteria that he established. Critique that if you want. I probably wouldn't argue. But the point is, that his patterns were fundamental movements & he wanted them performed (with some exceptions) with full power. Telegraphing, slow etc. are moot, as they are not fighting! if they were, they would be a waste of time! In fact there are many combat systems that decry all form sets as a waste of time for SD. But ITF TKD is not a combat only system. Patterns are part of the Art, history, philosophy & culture. They are designed to be visually pleasing. You can say they are not pretty to look at & that is fine, as I would respect that opinion. One can say that the ITFers spend way too much time on Tuls & the fanatical attention to all those minor details & I would tend to agree. It is funny that a car analogy was offered, as I was about to offer my own car analogy. If you used your car as metal to soak up the sun's rays & warm your food, so be it. No that would not be the reason the car was invented, nor would it be the best way to soak up sunrays & warm food, but it would be what you wanted. I couldn't then critique you for not moving the car to drive, as a car was intended, as it is your metal car & you can use it as you wish! I was going to say that if I kept a car in my driveway to use as a place to sit & read, so be it. Could I build a sunroom addition to my house that would be better? Could I find better or more comfortable chairs to sit in then a car seat? But I am happy to sit in that car & read! The world knows football as the sport that no one but the goal keeper can use their hands on the ball. In the USA they call that soccer. They have American football where you can use your hands & must, to advance the ball. Seldom does the foot connect with the ball & I believe only certain players can actually kick the ball. So if you wish to critique those Yanks & some Canadians for holding the ball in their hands, when it is supposed to be football, you would be wasting your time, as they are operating under a different set of rules. Gen. Choi set the rules for his TKD. The decisions & emphasis that he decided upon are free to be critiqued. But please don't critique what he wanted done, by what you think should be done. It is apples & oranges. The critique should be are people following what he wanted? Or are people wasting their time doing it the way he wanted? But here, you can't do it from a SD standpoint, as his Tuls are not offered for SD. You can then say, well too much time is spent on non-SD aspects & I would agree. So when you watch someone perform the ITF Tuls, do they look graceful & powerful? If not, do you know of others that accomplish that better? Or can you make suggestions on how to make them look more powerful & graceful?
Yes, you are correct. This road does go round and round, especially as we both view patterns as different things. I think I, you and others have all given their POV's, so I will respectfully back off and not repeat myself. As always, it was a good dicussion though :love: Stuart
<<holds hand up meekily>> "yes!" No.. I dont think so anymore TBH... I think in the 'sine-wave' quest.. they lack grace, as they no longer 'flow'! Its just one move, then the next move etc. etc. I feel the lack of 'flow' makes them look less graceful (not to mention a bit boring for the longer patterns).. and though students try (or do) add the (new) sine-wave to each move.. it interupts that flow. And they look no more powerful than they did before. In fact, the clip I`m gonna post below (IMO) shows more power (or looks more powerful). Feel free to compare to TKD tul clips from top performers if you are comparing power! [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQKJ4Dqlyqs"]Jion - Enoeda Sensei - YouTube[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZKsYV22ryM&feature=related"]Unsu by Michael Milon - YouTube[/ame]
