Would you like to see 1 unified ITF with a council of the three current ITF Presidents and around ten other Grandmasters and Senior Masters as a circle of TaeKwon-Do Elders? Who would you have as your council? First Grandmaster Rhee Ki Ha originally of the UKTA? Master Donato Nardizzi? Master Dave Oliver of TAGB? Master Roy Oldham of GTUK? Grandmaster Van Binh of ITF USA? Or would you perhaps have another set up? Surely a democratically elected board would be better than a single overlord trying to impose his own way? While Korean's squabble, the art is spoilt for the rest of the world, no? Remember the tenets? Now apply them instead of just reciting them. How would you like to see One Unified ITF?
Actually joking aside, I think its something a lot of us would like to see. I was speaking to SM Williamson about this last night, at least in our local area. All though it is quite splintered, the art is still taught in the same way, its just the association that your club is affiliated with is probably different some way to another guy. I put in the paper work for UKTA membership last night as thats the club im joining, but I would prefer if there was one UK association. Like "British TaeKwon-Do" or something similliar. Not the 14 or so thats on the go at the moment, and thats just from the BTC website. This would clamp down on McDojo's. You will never however resolve the difference between the DRPK and South Korea, in a TKD sense that is. Sorry im blabbering ha, its 5am. Well on a final note I think the "majority" agree it would be better if there was one ITF. "Politics have no relation to morals." NM K , work time, Raz
There already is an association "British Taekwondo" (www.britishtaekwondo.org.uk), it might involve some tweaks to your techniques though ;-)
I think TKD should fracture further so that individual clubs and instructors can go their own way and make TKD the martial art it can really be rather than what's dictated from on high.
Does this not cause further "dilution" of the martial art? By that I mean reducing the authenticity because with so many little fractures doing things their own way, it becomes a mess.
I absolutely disagree with this. One of the benefits of Kukkiwon Taekwondo is the aims towards standardisation and unification. It's bad enough that there are splinter groups called ITF without them splitting up further. Personally I'd like to see the ITF join the Kukkiwon/WTF as the Ohdokwan did...
Depends what the standardisation you're aiming at is IMHO. I still see TKD people ingnoring grappling and more holistic training in favour of increasingly abstract sparring and self introspection based on aethestic and other atrbitrary criteria. It's still all basically patterns with no real applications. It beggars belief that someone like Stu Anslow is still a relative TKD outsider plowing his own furrow. What he advocates as TKD should be mainstream and if TKD orgs were standardising and unifiying something similar to how he trains I'd be all for it. But they aren't.
Sometimes I think it's guys and gals with honest intentions of loyalty forming new organisations that cause most of the problems in TKD. They're like, "My master taught the true TKD. What your master taught is wrong." It's a 'my dad can beat your dad' argument. Childish and pointless. People need to understand it's not about whose master or style is 'right' or 'the best.' The most important people in TKD, or any art, are the students. Also known as the customer base. Like it or not, TKD is a service industry.
Just for clarification, am I right in saying ITF is the closest to General Choi's teachings, not WTF/KTA?
That's like saying that the ITF should merge in to my Taekwondo club; the larger group has the power regardless of closeness to the "source"*. The KTA is far bigger than the ITF (even just considering the KTA and ignoring every other MNA in the WTF). * And this hinges on you believing that General Choi is the source of Taekwondo. He suggested the name and forced the KTA to use it. Ahhhh, I can feel myself getting sucked in to this old debate again...
Regardless of whether you like WTF/Kukkiwon Taekwondo, they have certainly aimed towards standardisation and unification, combining multiple different styles of similar martial arts in to a single style with everyone aiming to perform them the same way. ITF started off unified and is splintering (ITF-V, ITF-C, ITF-NK, etc). WTF/KKW started off splintered (the Kwans) and has unified. That's a benefit of Kukkiwon.
Im not arrogant to enough to say "Im right because I am" And I am just going off what I was taught and read, is there another thread explaining what you mentioned "He suggested the name and forced the KTA to use it." Had not really heard of this, perhaps my own ignorance. Thanks in Advance Raz
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/478290/tkdhistory.pdf This is a translation of a Korean book and the translation was put in the public domain (I just reformatted it). "CHOI Hong Hi put much effort in the sports (Che Yuk) community and also Taekwondo so he could become the 3rd President of the Korea Taesoodo Association in January 1965...After much discussion and argument back and forth over the issue, CHOI Hong Hi changed the name of the art from Taesoodo to Taekwondo, which led to great hostility from LEE Chong Woo and LEE Nam Suk. CHOI Hong Hi attempted to establish his authoritarian dictator style but he could not continue to lead because no one would follow him. After one year, CHOI Hong Hi was forced to resign the KTA presidency by LEE Chong Woo and UHM Woon Kyu."
There are some (on both sides of the "aisle") that think it would be simpler if he hadn't done this. The ITF would have their Taekwon-do, the WTF would be called Taesoodo and there would be no confusion between the two sides. My opinion is that I don't really care what my art was named, if it was called Taesoodo then I'd have "grown up" with that name it would just be what it is.
