This one could be interesting, have a look on Amazon...it's a new book on pattern applications in both ITF and WTF. Practical Taekwondo: Back to the Roots: Matthew Sylvester: Amazon.co.uk: Books
I'm curious about the title and it’s reflected in the contents of the book, comparing the name to the blurb seems to bring up a contradiction. The name suggests taking things back to their original applications, while the blurb suggests that it’s more focused on the authors own interpretations and inspiring reads to create their own. On the amazon blub: "Practical Taekwondo: Back to the Roots" offers a wealth of interpretations of ITF and WTF taekwondo patterns.
Below is the full Amazon synopsis of the book; Review 'A true 21st century martial artist. His research into keeping them relevant to the modern world should serve as an inspiration to all' --Iain Abernethy 5th Dan" Product Description Packed with over 500 photos and clear, step-by-step instructions, "Practical Taekwondo: Back to the Roots" offers a wealth of interpretations of ITF and WTF taekwondo patterns. Using the techniques that the author has discovered and tested, it shows readers how they can find their own applications. ITF and WTF practitioners alike will find this book to be invaluable. No matter what level you are in your study of taekwondo, this book will help you look at patterns in a completely different way. Whether you are a white belt or a black belt, this book is packed with information that will make your training practical and relevant to the social challenges of the twenty-first century.
Taekwondo by Marc Tedeschi is perhaps the most concise catalogue of ITF and WTF material I have ever read.
Hiya, Sorry, all only just spotted this as I was doing a google for Practical Taekwondo Thanks for the heads-up Bootneck6. Saves me having to shout from the rooftops Martin, the book should be in shops on May 5th. It's available on Amazon, WHSmiths, Waterstones etc for pre-order too. Superfoot. Tedeschi's book is an amazing encyclopedia and the photography is awesome. Liam - No contradiction per se. By 'back to the roots' I mean taking what you do back to the more 'classical' roots of Taekwondo (as opposed to the 'traditional taekwondo' that is currently taught), making it a 'combat' art (with less emphasis on patterns being seperate from self-defence, sport sparring etc) and yes, finding your own applications, testing them and doing with them what you will Alexander, rather than stick bits here and there, http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/pages/Back-to-the-Roots-Volume-1/19238939654 is the facebook page and I'll be putting up more images etc as and when it gets closer to publication. Final stages of editing the manuscript right now, then it's off to pdf, then it's off to the printers. Must admit that from being 'something I'd like to do' about 6 years ago, to sitting down and writing it properly last January, it's very quickly come around. I can't wait to do more books both on this and other subjects.
What I hope it does not do: Use the Japanese forms as a blueprint for how forms application "should" be interpreted. I respect Japanese/Okinawan karate, but karate is karate and Taekwondo is Taekwondo. Using Japanese forms upon which to base Taekwondo forms application would be like asking a judo person how Taekwondo works. If I want to know how the WTF forms should be applied, there are numerous Korean grandmasters who, I'm sure, could give concise answers.
Hi Youngman, I'm very careful in how I approach this subject. Because martial arts are such a personal thing I'd never say 'this is the official/real/only application' or 'patterns should be interpreted like this' for example. What works/worked for me won't necessarily work for others. What I've attempted to do is give people applications that I've found, how I found them in the first place and short summaries for all of the applications. That way people can find their own and rate them. I've also looked at all of the different techniques in the patterns covered, and how they can then be applied in different ways (not how they should be applied). For the rating system I've used Bill Burgar's as, to be quite honest, it's the best there is and the most concise way of putting it down on paper. I've aimed this book at a broad range of people and it's a snapshot of the things I was working on. The next volumes are going to cover both more patterns but also a lot of theory and teaching/training methods that I think can bring a lot of added value to classes etc.
Hi Matt, As long as that type of open ended interpretation is used, I don't have a problem with it-and it sounds like an interesting read. Again, the danger is when you get into "this is what this form is doing". Based on what?
Hi Youngman What I can't understand is when people say 'this is what it's doing' and then won't accept any other interpretation. Even worse is when they say, 'Well, it's a defence against a staff attack'
Very true. Any technique can easily have 2-3 applications. And a move designed for use against a staff, numchucks, or 3-sectional staff would be so useful these days
If I want to know how the WTF forms should be applied, there are numerous Korean grandmasters who, I'm sure, could give concise answers. I'm glad you're sure of it because I'm not. I have a sneaking suspicion that there are a great many TKD "grandmasters" that can't give reality-based and logical applications for the patterns they practice/teach. You only need look at a picture of Gen Choi (ITF I know) doing a W-shaped block to two flying kicks to see that poor applications lie at the very heart of TKD.
Paul Donnelly (TAGB 8th Dan, who toured with Gen. Choi in the 80s) said that Gen. Choi himself admitted he made some of the movements appear in patterns simply because he thought it was the right thing to do, or because it looked good. Apparently, when asked why there are 6 W-shaped blocks in Toi Gye, the general replied: "Because I said so." The self-defence theories behind patterns are over-rated.
Can you do me a favour, PASmith? Can you please just draw a big line on the floor, just so I can be completely sure that I'm standing firmly on your side.
I doubt it. Here's my take. Okinawans developed Karate (tode or whatever). They codified their teaching by way of kata. Karate was only partially passed on to successive students. By the time it got to mainland Japan many of the real meanings and principles of Karate/kata had been watered down and lost. Karate competition took influence from Judo and so the ippon long-range type system of sparring took hold. This sort of Karate was taught to Gen. Choi. I don't believe Choi ever truly knew what he was dealing with. Yeah I said it. TKD was developed by combining a superficial understanding of Japanese Karate and a Korean love of high kicks and athletic types of technique. Because of this step by step removal from the origin much of what passes for applications in TKD today (although it's better than it was) is quite bad. Even amongst people that have been elevated to Grandmaster status. Arguably WTF TKD is even another step removed again. For example I know their walking stance is now quite high. Literally a walking step long. Now my understanding of walking/front stance is that it is about projecting your body-weight forward. So making it shorter removes that important part of it. It's no longer projecting body weight forward. Vis a vis the people that decided to shorten the WTF walking stance didn't know what they were dealing with or they would have kept it long.
Yes you have good points & imo valid concerns. We have to remember that the early TKD or Kwan founders were mostly just junior ranks in karate, ie 1st or 2nd dans, with little independent verification of even that. I believe I have found just 1 Korean who returned to orea with a 4th dan. Possibly a 5th dan & only 1 that had a 7th Dan. I mean even GM Jhoon Rhee was a 1st Dan & he comes to the States as a college studeny & gets bowed to & refered to as a master. Now GM Rhee is an icon, but really what or how much did he really know in the 1950s that would qualify him as a 20 something year old master? So for the most part these original founders, Choi included, may not have know many more in-depth applications. I know that Choi taught very straight forward applications & basically said if it works, its a good application. I am not even sure he knew the hidden applications that Mr. S. Anslow goes over in his very fine book. I also know that many of the Korean froms come from or have a basis in karate, shaped by those who studied karate & devised the forms
