bluewaveschool

[chrispillertkd]

Well, it isn't just one man's word, but rather the word of pretty much all the pioneers who I have spoken to on the subject unanimously stating to me that General Choi's karate skill was low, perhaps the level of a green belt, that all his Taekwondo ranks were honorary, mainly and primarily because his actual skill level was low or even non-existent, but he did try to help the art. Hence, the Honorary rank and title. The bottom line is that his ranks, including the rank he requested from GM Son but denied, were honorary, and there is nothing you can argue to change that.

Hey, if you say so. Of course it's not like you've adopted the bias of the people who were upset with Gen. Choi because of his heavy handedness in trying to control the unification pricess or anything :lol: That's your prerogative, of course.

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

Try and read it again. He does say that it was voluntary, although he tries to argue around it. His autobiography even states that he joined the Japanese Army during his freshman year at Chuo. And we know it was voluntary because Dr. YOON Kwe Byung is the same age as General Choi, was in Japan attending college as well, but he never served in the Japanese Army. Instead, he was busy establishing the Kanbukan (Han Moo Kwan in Korean) while learning and studying Karate.

I'm sure you don't want to discuss what the pioneers had to say about General Choi and his skill level. After all, how could you possibly counter their personal perception, based on personal knowledge?

The only thing I have to deal with is your presentation of what they say. I don't have access to what the pioneers said, much less do I (or you) have access to what actually happened.

I don't know how good Gen. Choi was back in 1959. And neither do you. What I do know, however, is that I have never encountered anyone who thought Gen. Choi wasn't a skilled martial artist. I've met some people who went to seminars with him back in the early 70s who were very impressed with his physical ability. When I saw him in the early 1990s he was still quite impressive and very powerful. His vertical leap was pretty amazing, too, given his height and that fact that he would just jump from a standing position. I'm sure you've had the opportunity to train with him and aren't just relying on others' opinions since you're open minded and all.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Of course it's not like you've adopted the bias of the people who were upset with Gen. Choi because of his heavy handedness in trying to control the unification pricess or anything

Other people were "heavy handed" during the preunification period, such as GM SON Duk Sung. No one questioned his physical ability back then. Even GM HWANG Kee, his martial arts career had humble beginnings but he did train hard and did become quite skilled. One of my instructors did his military service under GM Hwang at the ROK Air Force Academy and he said he learned many things from GM Hwang.

As for bias, the fact that all of the Kukki Taekwondo pioneers disliked General Choi and considered him the "permanent troublemaker" in Taekwondo, when all is said and done, doesn't change the fact that they all considered General Choi's ability, at least when he was living in Korea, to be weak.

 

[puunui]

The only thing I have to deal with is your presentation of what they say. I don't have access to what the pioneers said, much less do I (or you) have access to what actually happened.

Not only my presentation, but you also have GM Son's newspaper ad for example, which straight up states that General Choi lied about his martial arts background, that he was given an Honorary 4th Dan and that his Honorary 6th Dan was ripped up and denied by GM Son.

I don't know how good Gen. Choi was back in 1959. And neither do you.

Actually I do know, because unlike you, I can and have listened to the direct words of several of the pioneers, including people like GM LEE Won Kuk who state in their unanimous opinion quite clearly. If you choose to ignore that, just like you choose to ignore GM Son's newspaper ad, then I suppose that is your business.

What I do know, however, is that I have never encountered anyone who thought Gen. Choi wasn't a skilled martial artist. I've met some people who went to seminars with him back in the early 70s who were very impressed with his physical ability. When I saw him in the early 1990s he was still quite impressive and very powerful. His vertical leap was pretty amazing, too, given his height and that fact that he would just jump from a standing position. I'm sure you've had the opportunity to train with him and aren't just relying on others' opinions since you're open minded and all.

I'm sure after he left Malaysia, left the KTA, and left Korea, General Choi had a lot of time on his hands, and perhaps he did actually train at that point. And perhaps he did become a skillful martial artist. And no, I have never trained with him, only the ones who had low opinions of him.

But I would have liked to have trained or even met General Choi. He probably would have promoted me to ITF rank. There is a Shotokan practitioner here who at some point had a chance to interact with General Choi. After that meeting, General Choi promoted this person to ITF 6th Dan, without any knowledge or training in ITF Taekwon-Do or any kind of Taekwondo for that matter. General Choi just felt like promoting him, which I thought was odd given the fact that General Choi tries very hard to distinguish his Taekwon-Do from Japanese Karate.

And I tried to be open minded about General Choi, to the point where I have most of his books, including a 1st Edition set of his Encyclopedia, which I bought as soon as it came out. There are also a lot of ITF members or at least former members of the ITF who taught here and I have friends and seniors who were or are ITF members. He also has a connection to my Kwan as well. But there comes a point where the story does not fit, and you can't keep denying what is right in front of your face.

Or at least I can't. Perhaps you have a different perspective and different attitude on that.

 

[bluewaveschool]

I think Chris's problem is, and most likely a few others as well, is that you constantly talk about the pioneers and what they thought, but there is never anything solid for people to look at, just your word. Not that I necessarily think you are lying, or have any reason to lie, but at some point, could you possibly post something physical? A picture of you and GM Lee or some of the other pioneers, or perhaps the video you have of GM Lee talking about GM Choi?

 

[puunui]

I think Chris's problem is, and most likely a few others as well, is that you constantly talk about the pioneers and what they thought, but there is never anything solid for people to look at, just your word. Not that I necessarily think you are lying, or have any reason to lie, but at some point, could you possibly post something physical? A picture of you and GM Lee or some of the other pioneers, or perhaps the video you have of GM Lee talking about GM Choi?

I think Chris' (an maybe others) problem is that I post a lot of facts which he cannot refute, so he gets angry and frustrated because he wants to counter, but can't.

Or how about this: Don't just take my word for it. Go seek out a pioneer and find out for yourself. Or if you need a quicker answer, read the Modern History book, which my students and I translated so the world would have the "proof" that you are requesting. I have been saying these things before the Modern History book came out.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Other people were "heavy handed" during the preunification period, such as GM SON Duk Sung. No one questioned his physical ability back then. Even GM HWANG Kee, his martial arts career had humble beginnings but he did train hard and did become quite skilled. One of my instructors did his military service under GM Hwang at the ROK Air Force Academy and he said he learned many things from GM Hwang.

As for bias, the fact that all of the Kukki Taekwondo pioneers disliked General Choi and considered him the "permanent troublemaker" in Taekwondo, when all is said and done, doesn't change the fact that they all considered General Choi's ability, at least when he was living in Korea, to be weak.

Like I said, I personally don't know of anyone who saw Gen. Choi then nor what they thought. You only have their word, you weren't there. You can believe whatever you want to believe. What I do know is that when I saw him when he was in his 70s he was pretty awesome.

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

Not only my presentation, but you also have GM Son's newspaper ad for example, which straight up states that General Choi lied about his martial arts background, that he was given an Honorary 4th Dan and that his Honorary 6th Dan was ripped up and denied by GM Son.

Which is irrelevant since you pointed out yourself that this occured after GM Son was booted as Chung Do Kwan Kwan Jang. But even so, so what? I know there was someone around here fairly recently saying they'd give everyone 10th dans so we'd all realize how unimportant rank was. Do you remember reading a post like that?

As the head of the Oh Do Kwan Gen. Choi could've made himself a 17th dan if he wanted to do so.

Actually I do know, because unlike you, I can and have listened to the direct words of several of the pioneers, including people like GM LEE Won Kuk who state in their unanimous opinion quite clearly. If you choose to ignore that, just like you choose to ignore GM Son's newspaper ad, then I suppose that is your business.

You don't know the difference between knowledge and belief.

I'm sure after he left Malaysia, left the KTA, and left Korea, General Choi had a lot of time on his hands, and perhaps he did actually train at that point. And perhaps he did become a skillful martial artist. And no, I have never trained with him, only the ones who had low opinions of him.

Right, so you don't know what Gen. Choi was like as a martial artist. You simply believe what others have told you. There's no shame in admiting your ignorance in this matter, Glenn.

I did have the opportunity to train with Gen. Choi and see him demonstrate technique when he was in his 70s. He was impressive. I know he was great then.

I know several people who trained with him when he was younger and who have described what he was like in his 50s. I believe he was great then, too.

You've told me what you've heard other people who don't like Gen. Choi have said about him from back in the 1950s. I have no idea what their skills were like then. Nor do I know if they are accurately remembering things without letting their feelings color their memories. Nor do I know, when it comes right down to it, if what you're saying is true at all. You can believe whatever you like, it's your prerogative. But you've given me no reason to change my belief about the General's martial abilities circa 1959 (which, for the record, can be summed up as being: "I don't know what they were like.")

But I would have liked to have trained or even met General Choi. He probably would have promoted me to ITF rank. There is a Shotokan practitioner here who at some point had a chance to interact with General Choi. After that meeting, General Choi promoted this person to ITF 6th Dan, without any knowledge or training in ITF Taekwon-Do or any kind of Taekwondo for that matter. General Choi just felt like promoting him, which I thought was odd given the fact that General Choi tries very hard to distinguish his Taekwon-Do from Japanese Karate.

Gen. Choi prmoted a lot of people if they joined the ITF. I'm sure you'd be no different. Maybe you'd even get a skip dan like the KKW offers.

Wait, didn't someone say recently that rank is unimportant?

And I tried to be open minded about General Choi, to the point where I have most of his books, including a 1st Edition set of his Encyclopedia, which I bought as soon as it came out. There are also a lot of ITF members or at least former members of the ITF who taught here and I have friends and seniors who were or are ITF members. He also has a connection to my Kwan as well. But there comes a point where the story does not fit, and you can't keep denying what is right in front of your face.

Or at least I can't. Perhaps you have a different perspective and different attitude on that.

:lol: Glenn you must be a fan of Mac Davis because every time you post I hear the lyrics "Lord, it's hard to be humble when you're perfect in every way."

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

I think Chris' (an maybe others) problem is that I post a lot of facts which he cannot refute, so he gets angry and frustrated because he wants to counter, but can't.

Well, no. I don't get angry at all about anything you post. I do get amused, however, when you make claims and just assume that anyone would believe them on your word here on the internet. The very idea is funny to anyone who has ever written a junior high school research paper let alone a doctoral research paper.

Or how about this: Don't just take my word for it. Go seek out a pioneer and find out for yourself.

And then I would have their opinion about what happened. Because I wasn't their myself I wouldn't have knowledge about the event(s) in question. All I could do would be to make the decision, basded on what I knoew of them, to believe or disbelieve what they said. That's different from knowledge.

Or if you need a quicker answer, read the Modern History book, which my students and I translated so the world would have the "proof" that you are requesting. I have been saying these things before the Modern History book came out.

Oh, I have read that book. A couple of times. It's interesting. It's too bad there aren't any footnotes or cited sources.

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

I think Chris's problem is, and most likely a few others as well, is that you constantly talk about the pioneers and what they thought, but there is never anything solid for people to look at, just your word. Not that I necessarily think you are lying, or have any reason to lie, but at some point, could you possibly post something physical? A picture of you and GM Lee or some of the other pioneers, or perhaps the video you have of GM Lee talking about GM Choi?

Quite.

I have no doubt that what Glenn says about what the other Kwan heads thought of Gen. Choi is true, as far as it goes. Which means, I'm sure they told him they didn't think Gen. Choi was all that skilled.

But does that make what they said true? No. And there's really no way I, or Glenn, or anyone else, can know the truth of the matter. Because we weren't there. Even if Glenn did post a video of GM Lee saying he though Gen. Choi wasn't a skillful martial artist back in 1959 all that we could know then was GM Lee's opinion of an event that happened 50 years ago.

What I do know personally is that Gen. Choi was pretty damn good in his 70s (which is an accmplishment for anyone but especially for someone who wasn't any good when he was 40 years younger). I also know that several people I know who trained with him in the 1970s said he was really good then. I can believe what they say about this, but I cannot know it for sure. From what I've seen it seems a reasonable belief to hold, but it's not knowledge.

But I still know nothing about Gen. Choi's ability during the 1950s. All I can do is draw conclusions based on what I know and what I believe becaise of what other people have told me. It's the same with Glenn (except in his case he has no first hand knowledge of Gen. Choi's ability to draw on when forming his conclusions).

Of course, all of this is irrelevant when it comes to the actual martial art system that Gen. Choi founded and promulgated.

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Like I said, I personally don't know of anyone who saw Gen. Choi then nor what they thought. You only have their word, you weren't there. You can believe whatever you want to believe. What I do know is that when I saw him when he was in his 70s he was pretty awesome.

You seem to think this is some sort of argument between you and me, what our perspectives are and why "mine" isn't valid (i.e. because I wasnt there, I don't have personal knowledge, you do, etc.).

But to me, this discussion is about General Choi's skill level and to that, I presented a lot of facts from the pioneers and also GM Son's newspaper ad which suggest otherwise, which you acknowledged that you assume are true. You then presented your side, which I guess is limited to your experiences with General Choi at a seminar 20 years ago as well as some comments you heard about General Choi's abilities in the 70's. My focus is on the MT members who are reading the discussion, who can decide for themselves General Choi's skill level and the truthfulness of his claims of Karate 2nd Dan (and other claims for that matter) after hearing the facts presented.

 

[puunui]

The only thing I have to deal with is your presentation of what they say. I don't have access to what the pioneers said, much less do I (or you) have access to what actually happened.

Actually I do. Or rather certainly the pioneers did. If you have a beef it is with them, not me. I am just the messenger. Please direct your anger and hostility at the proper people.

I don't know how good Gen. Choi was back in 1959. And neither do you.

Maybe not, from your perspective. But that isn't what this discussion is about, whether you or I know how good General Choi was back in 1959. What my focus is giving enough information to the MT members so they can decide for themselves how good General Choi was back in 1959.

 

[chrispillertkd]

You seem to think this is some sort of argument between you and me, what our perspectives are and why "mine" isn't valid (i.e. because I wasnt there, I don't have personal knowledge, you do, etc.).

:lol: Glenn, you're funny, brother.

But to me, this discussion is about General Choi's skill level and to that, I presented a lot of facts from the pioneers and also GM Son's newspaper ad which suggest otherwise, which you acknowledged that you assume are true.

Actually, you didn't "present" any facts regarding Gen. Choi's skills back in 1959. You told us what you say other people told you. And, like I said, you don't really have any way of knowing whether what they said was an accurate representation of anything. You've chosen to believe them, that's all. Seriously, do you know what "epistemology" is?

As for GM Son's article, I saw that quite some time ago. I don't doubt he "revoked" Gen. Choi's honorary degree. You pointing out he did so after he himself was removed as head of the Chung Do Kwan was new, however. You can put whatever weight behind that decision on GM Son's part that you want :lol:

You then presented your side, which I guess is limited to your experiences with General Choi at a seminar 20 years ago as well as some comments you heard about General Choi's abilities in the 70's.

:lol: Yes, that's generally how I draw conclusions about things, via personal experience and/or what other people tell me.

My focus is on the MT members who are reading the discussion, who can decide for themselves General Choi's skill level and the truthfulness of his claims of Karate 2nd Dan (and other claims for that matter) after hearing the facts presented.

"Which I guess is limited to [you not having any first hand experience] with General Choi [at any seminar] as well as some comments you heard about General Choi's abilities [in the 1950s]."

Peace, brother,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

The only thing I have to deal with is your presentation of what they say. I don't have access to what the pioneers said, much less do I (or you) have access to what actually happened.

Actually I do. Or rather certainly the pioneers did. If you have a beef it is with them, not me. I am just the messenger. Please direct your anger and hostility at the proper people.

See, at least here you admit your ignorance of the matter :lol: The pioneers might certainly know what Gen. Choi's abilities were like in 1959. But that doesn't mean you do :lol: I mean, seriously, do you even know what epistemology is?

As far as any "beef" I have with them, I don't have any. They're quite welcome to their opinion on matters. Your suggestion that I have "anger" or "hostility" is itself pretty humorous. Do you take all attempts at explaining to you fundamental distinctions that an undergraduate should know as "hostile"? :lol:

I don't know how good Gen. Choi was back in 1959. And neither do you.

Maybe not, from your perspective. But that isn't what this discussion is about, whether you or I know how good General Choi was back in 1959.

It was the point I was making and, in that sense, it certainly was what part of this discussion was about :lol:

What my focus is giving enough information to the MT members so they can decide for themselves how good General Choi was back in 1959.

But you haven't given anyone any information beyond your claim of what someone else told you. That means the only thing you've told anyone in this thread is your opinion. As I stated before, even if you posted a video of GM Lee talking about Gen. Choi's abilities that would only demonstrate what he said about something 50 years after the fact. It wouldn't actually prove the truth (or falsify) of his claim.

Now, if you posted video of Gen. Choi practicing from 1959 then you would at least be doing something constructive since people could draw their own conclusions on the matter. This would be especially true of you also posted video of other Kwan founders at the same time period so we could make a judgement about his abilities compared to other people. That would actually be helpful!

Pax,

Chris

 

[puunui]

Which is irrelevant since you pointed out yourself that this occured after GM Son was booted as Chung Do Kwan Kwan Jang. But even so, so what? I know there was someone around here fairly recently saying they'd give everyone 10th dans so we'd all realize how unimportant rank was. Do you remember reading a post like that?

Actually, GM Son gave General Choi his Honorary 4th Dan in 1955, and tore up the Honorary 6th Dan in 1957, when he was still Kwan Jang. He didn't leave until 1959. As for rank being unimportant, that is true, but apparently rank was very important to General Choi, even Honorary rank.

As the head of the Oh Do Kwan Gen. Choi could've made himself a 17th dan if he wanted to do so.

General Choi was never the head of the Oh Do Kwan. The first Oh Do Kwan Jang was GM NAM Tae Hi and the second was GM HYUN Jong Myung. In fact, if I am not mistaken, it was GM Nam who chose the name Oh Do Kwan. General Choi did help to establish the Oh Do Kwan by I believe making Taekwondo training mandatory in the ROK military, and for that GM Nam asked GM Son to issue General Choi an Honorary 4th Dan.

You don't know the difference between knowledge and belief.

Either that or you don't know what the discussion is really about, which is to give MT readers enough information so they can decide for themselves. You seem to think that this is an opportunity to vent frustration and anger by attacking me personally. Again. That is a typical DD member pattern, remember? They run out of facts, or have their facts pointed out as erroneous, they get mad, and they attack me.

Right, so you don't know what Gen. Choi was like as a martial artist. You simply believe what others have told you. There's no shame in admiting your ignorance in this matter, Glenn.

No additional facts to add or support your position, except another personal attack.

I did have the opportunity to train with Gen. Choi and see him demonstrate technique when he was in his 70s. He was impressive. I know he was great then.

Yes, but using the logic that you used on the pioneers when they were assessing General Choi's lack of skill in the 1950's. Your point of view, twenty years ago when you were a kid (were you even a dan holder back then?) might have been colored by the fact that you were seeing "the founder". Who is to say that your childhood perception of General Choi's skill was in fact a valid one? One more point, again going with your logic, YOU may know how terrific General Choi was, back in 1991, but that doesn't translate into the MT readers knowing, because like you say, they weren't there.

I know several people who trained with him when he was younger and who have described what he was like in his 50s. I believe he was great then, too.

Great. Have you spoken to anyone who trained with General Choi in the 1950's? If so, what was their opinion of his skill level back then?

You've told me what you've heard other people who don't like Gen. Choi have said about him from back in the 1950s. I have no idea what their skills were like then. Nor do I know if they are accurately remembering things without letting their feelings color their memories. Nor do I know, when it comes right down to it, if what you're saying is true at all. You can believe whatever you like, it's your prerogative. But you've given me no reason to change my belief about the General's martial abilities circa 1959 (which, for the record, can be summed up as being: "I don't know what they were like.")

Same thing can be said about you twenty years ago and the people that you spoke to who saw General Choi in the 70's. But we are talking about pioneers here, so if you have a problem with their skill level when assessing General Choi or their evaluation of General Choi's skill, then your issue is with them, not me.

And I'm not trying to change your belief, what I am trying to do is give MT readers information so they can make their own decisions.

Gen. Choi prmoted a lot of people if they joined the ITF. I'm sure you'd be no different. Maybe you'd even get a skip dan like the KKW offers. Wait, didn't someone say recently that rank is unimportant?

I did say it was unimportant. But the point is that General Choi has spent alot of energy attempting to explain that his Taekwon-Do is different from Japanese karate. And yet he promoted a Shotokan practitioner to ITF 6th Dan. It seems that General Choi's words are different from his actions, which is yet another example of a lie that he has told. If you have an explanation about why General Choi would argue on one hand tk-d is different than karate and then on the other hand promote a shotokan practitioner to ITF 6th Dan, then we are all listening.

Glenn you must be a fan of Mac Davis because every time you post I hear the lyrics "Lord, it's hard to be humble when you're perfect in every way."

Actually, no I am not a Mac Davis fan and have no idea what song you are talking about. But I guess I can thank you for your complement, even though I don't consider myself perfect. I'm still learning like everyone else.

 

[puunui]

Well, no. I don't get angry at all about anything you post.

Well you sure seem angry. Or at least that is what people tell me.

I do get amused, however, when you make claims and just assume that anyone would believe them on your word here on the internet. The very idea is funny to anyone who has ever written a junior high school research paper let alone a doctoral research paper.

You or anyone else doesn't have to believe me. They can read what I write and make their own decisions. As for a doctoral research paper, I just read one this year by GM PARK Hyun Sup, who was WTF Referee Committee Chair and most recently Kukkiwon Vice President in charge of the Kukkiwon Academy. His doctoral thesis I don't believe had any cite, but he did take data from people and used that data as the basis for his Ph.D thesis. I think I was one of the first to receive a copy of it. And I do have citations for my stuff, you just choose not to acknowledge the pioneers.

And then I would have their opinion about what happened. Because I wasn't their myself I wouldn't have knowledge about the event(s) in question. All I could do would be to make the decision, basded on what I knoew of them, to believe or disbelieve what they said. That's different from knowledge.

Whatever. We know that you question it, without bringing any facts with you to dispute it. In fact you constantly say that you have no evidence or knowledge to dispute what the pioneers have stated about General Choi in the 1950s. Instead, you bring in a lot of argument and personal attacks. Do you have any other facts or information for people to process? If not, then

Oh, I have read that book [A Modern History of Taekwondo]. A couple of times. It's interesting. It's too bad there aren't any footnotes or cited sources.

There are cited sources in the form of newspaper ads, quotes from pioneers and so forth. There are no footnotes though. But if you wish to disbelieve the authors for the same reasons that you wish to dispute me, then I guess that is up to you.

By the way, no need to thank me for translating that book, or for posting any of the other information on here that you find "interesting". Dale Carnegie says that we should expect ingratitude.

 

[puunui]

But you haven't given anyone any information beyond your claim of what someone else told you. That means the only thing you've told anyone in this thread is your opinion.

I posted what the pioneers felt about General Choi. There is also the newspaper article by GM Son which you seem to be ignoring at this point. But if you think that me doing that is somehow telling people my opinion, then I guess you can argue that.

Now, if you posted video of Gen. Choi practicing from 1959 then you would at least be doing something constructive since people could draw their own conclusions on the matter.

There is no video of General Choi from 1959 practicing Taekwondo or any other martial art because General Choi wasn't practicing in the 1950s or the 40's for that matter. He only started trying to get actively involved after he left the ROK Army and was exiled to Malaysia. Before that he was busy being a General in the ROK Army.

We never finished the translation, and there is a section in the book on General Choi and the ITF. But from what I remember, it wasn't favorable to General Choi.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Actually, GM Son gave General Choi his Honorary 4th Dan in 1955, and tore up the Honorary 6th Dan in 1957, when he was still Kwan Jang. He didn't leave until 1959. As for rank being unimportant, that is true, but apparently rank was very important to General Choi, even Honorary rank.

Oh, I'm sure rank was important to Gen. Choi. If only you'd been around to explain to him that it is unimportant. You could've made him a 10th dan, too

General Choi was never the head of the Oh Do Kwan. The first Oh Do Kwan Jang was GM NAM Tae Hi and the second was GM HYUN Jong Myung. In fact, if I am not mistaken, it was GM Nam who chose the name Oh Do Kwan. General Choi did help to establish the Oh Do Kwan by I believe making Taekwondo training mandatory in the ROK military, and for that GM Nam asked GM Son to issue General Choi an Honorary 4th Dan.

Well, that's weird. A Modern History of Taekwondo says Gen. Choi founded the Oh Do Kwan in the 3rd Army base.

Either that or you don't know what the discussion is really about, which is to give MT readers enough information so they can decide for themselves.

Which you haven't done. But I digress... :lol:

You seem to think that this is an opportunity to vent frustration and anger by attacking me personally. Again. That is a typical DD member pattern, remember? They run out of facts, or have their facts pointed out as erroneous, they get mad, and they attack me.

:lol: Hardly. I find you amusing more than anything else. So far, your behavior here has been tame compared to that shown in the DD archives. But then, I guess when you're posting on a board you don't run you don't want to get banned yourself :lol:

I do find it interesting that you apparently think I've "attacked" you since all I've done is point out all you offer are your opinions.

No additional facts to add or support your position, except another personal attack.

This is what I said: "Right, so you don't know what Gen. Choi was like as a martial artist. You simply believe what others have told you. There's no shame in admiting your ignorance in this matter, Glenn."

If pointing out that you don't know something and there's no shame in admitting that is taken as an attack on you, well then I got nothing :lol:

Yes, but using the logic that you used on the pioneers when they were assessing General Choi's lack of skill in the 1950's. Your point of view, twenty years ago when you were a kid (were you even a dan holder back then?) might have been colored by the fact that you were seeing "the founder". Who is to say that your childhood perception of General Choi's skill was in fact a valid one?

:lol:

I was a kid 20 years ago? That's news to me :lol: You already said someone told you I was 29 but as I replied that is incorrect :lol:

Yes, I was a dan holder when I attended the seminar with Gen. Choi. As for my perception being "colored" by seeing "the founder" to be honest when I first saw him I was somewhat disappointed. He looked very small, slight of build, tired from travelling and I remember thinking "I wonder how he's going to do on the floor..." But he got out there and it was all business. Very impressive.

One more point, again going with your logic, YOU may know how terrific General Choi was, back in 1991, but that doesn't translate into the MT readers knowing, because like you say, they weren't there.

Oh, I know. And I haven't asked anyone to take my word as Gospel. Still less have I asked anyone to accept what someone else told me 50 years after the fact. I simply was giving an example of why I don't really think your comments are worth assenting to.

Great. Have you spoken to anyone who trained with General Choi in the 1950's? If so, what was their opinion of his skill level back then?

No, I haven't. Have you spoken with someone who trained under him then?

But even if I did talk to someone who directly trained under Gen. Choi in 1959 I wouldn't have knowledge about anything because I'd be taking their word for something I could in no way see. That's belief. There's nothing wrong with believing things you don't know. People do it all the time. But if you then go around and present your belief as knowledge then you can run into trouble.

Same thing can be said about you twenty years ago and the people that you spoke to who saw General Choi in the 70's.

Sure. But the reason why I brought them up is not only because of that but also because their experience coincides with my own. Since that was the case they are witnesses worthy of belief for me. I see no reason to doubt them.

But we are talking about pioneers here, so if you have a problem with their skill level when assessing General Choi or their evaluation of General Choi's skill, then your issue is with them, not me.

I don't have any problem with the pioneers. But then, strictly speaking, no one has heard anything from them in this thread. All we've heard is what you say they said. That's not hearing from them.

And I'm not trying to change your belief, what I am trying to do is give MT readers information so they can make their own decisions.

If you say so :lol:

I did say it was unimportant. But the point is that General Choi has spent alot of energy attempting to explain that his Taekwon-Do is different from Japanese karate. And yet he promoted a Shotokan practitioner to ITF 6th Dan. It seems that General Choi's words are different from his actions, which is yet another example of a lie that he has told. If you have an explanation about why General Choi would argue on one hand tk-d is different than karate and then on the other hand promote a shotokan practitioner to ITF 6th Dan, then we are all listening.

Oh, the reason is obvious, if what you say is true. He was hoping the man in question could help him spread Taekwon-Do.

Actually, no I am not a Mac Davis fan and have no idea what song you are talking about. But I guess I can thank you for your complement, even though I don't consider myself perfect. I'm still learning like everyone else.

:lol: if you say so, brother

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

Well you sure seem angry. Or at least that is what people tell me.

:lol: I'm sure. And who are all these people who tell you I'm angry? No one has mentioned it to me.

At least when you offer opinions about Gen. Choi you invoke the names of the pioneers :lol:

You or anyone else doesn't have to believe me. They can read what I write and make their own decisions.

Sure. And you could actually point out that all you're doing is offering your opinion based on what someone else told you and that you can't actually verify. That would be helpful for them whenmaking their decision.

As for a doctoral research paper, I just read one this year by GM PARK Hyun Sup, who was WTF Referee Committee Chair and most recently Kukkiwon Vice President in charge of the Kukkiwon Academy. His doctoral thesis I don't believe had any cite, but he did take data from people and used that data as the basis for his Ph.D thesis. I think I was one of the first to receive a copy of it. And I do have citations for my stuff, you just choose not to acknowledge the pioneers.

If any paper takes data form another source and uses it it's found in the list of citations, this is especially true of a thesis or dissertation.

As for your stuff, there's no citations. It's just your word that you talked to these people. And, sadly, the stuff you've reported GM Lee as saying is now unverifiable

But, if you go back and reread what I said, you'll see that my position here isn't exactly what you make it out to be. I said I didn't doubt GM Son revoked Gen. Choi's honorary degree. I also said: "I have no doubt that what Glenn says about what the other Kwan heads thought of Gen. Choi is true, as far as it goes. Which means, I'm sure they told him they didn't think Gen. Choi was all that skilled."

Whatever. We know that you question it, without bringing any facts with you to dispute it.

There you go confusing belief and knowledge again, Glenn.

In fact you constantly say that you have no evidence or knowledge to dispute what the pioneers have stated about General Choi in the 1950s. Instead, you bring in a lot of argument and personal attacks. Do you have any other facts or information for people to process? If not, then

I have simply pointed out that even you don't have knowledge in this area. You're simply taking someone else's word that soemthing is true. That's belief. We all have faith in people and things there's certainly no shame in that. I don't know why you're getting so touchy about me pointing out that while GM Lee may've known what Gen. Chopi's skills were like in 1959 the only thing you can do is believe what he tells you.

There are cited sources in the form of newspaper ads, quotes from pioneers and so forth. There are no footnotes though. But if you wish to disbelieve the authors for the same reasons that you wish to dispute me, then I guess that is up to you.

The only citation in the book that I recall seeing is the newspaper ad. All the other comments are not cited, they are just reported. If you don't get that difference, or think it's important, that's your business.

By the way, no need to thank me for translating that book, or for posting any of the other information on here that you find "interesting". Dale Carnegie says that we should expect ingratitude.

No wonder you feel the need to toot your own horn all them time :lol:

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

I posted what the pioneers felt about General Choi. There is also the newspaper article by GM Son which you seem to be ignoring at this point. But if you think that me doing that is somehow telling people my opinion, then I guess you can argue that.

Um, have you read what I posted in my previous replies? I haven't ignored the newspaper article at all.

What I've done is point out that you claim to know things that you don't. It doesn't mean you can't believe them. It doesn't mean anyone else here can't believe them. It means you don't know them. That's all.

There is no video of General Choi from 1959 practicing Taekwondo or any other martial art because General Choi wasn't practicing in the 1950s or the 40's for that matter. He only started trying to get actively involved after he left the ROK Army and was exiled to Malaysia. Before that he was busy being a General in the ROK Army.

No video of him then? Bummer.

We never finished the translation, and there is a section in the book on General Choi and the ITF. But from what I remember, it wasn't favorable to General Choi.

Of that I have no doubt :lol: He really pissed a lot of people off in South Korea!

Pax,

Chris