Facts, Fiction, Lies and actual accounts

[SahBumNimRush]

Sounds like your KJN went with the unification but did not ever change his curriculum. Nothing wrong with that, but since he's not issuing KKW certs, it means that after he passes, unless he has some high ranking subordinates who are also KKW ranked, his students' link to the Kukkiwon will be effectively severed.

Again, if nobody cares and is happy going on with what they're doing, then there's nothing wrong with that.

I think that it was Puunui and yourself that had a discussion about this in a previous thread.

Yeah, it was, and I'm still not sure what is the best way to address my KJN about it (I know nothing much any of you here could offer me on the matter either). I don't want to wait until it is too late, but at the same time I do not wish to come across as disloyal or disrespectful either.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Yeah, it was, and I'm still not sure what is the best way to address my KJN about it (I know nothing much any of you here could offer me on the matter either). I don't want to wait until it is too late, but at the same time I do not wish to come across as disloyal or disrespectful either.

You could approach him about KKW certification. I'm not sure how it would work with an ohdan, but I wouldn't think he'd find it disrespectful, given that he himself has that certification. If it is simply a matter of him processing skip dan paper work, you could take your time and bring yourself up to speed on the Taegeuk pumse. Really, there isn't going to be anything revolutionary or radically different in the rest of the material, so I suspect you would be easily able to add the set to your repertoire.

There is a lot of KKW reference material available. I get my TKD reference material from www.dynamicsworld.com. They sent me their printed catalog, and unless they've changed, the catalog actually has much more in it than is on the website. Seems to me that it should be the reverse, but to each their own. Good customer service there as well.

 

[Archtkd]

Why are you calling this my interpretation? I clearly stated that this interpretation is from Mr. O'Neill's book and provided the page number where it can be found. It is a sound interpretation however. Have you read the book?

Sorry, I should have been more careful in the attribution.My thinking, though, is that you agree with Mr. O'Neill's interpretation, and you also put Kukkiwon taekwondo in the mix the minute you cited Taeguk Il Jang as a point of reference.

If your understanding of Mr. O'Neill's interpretation of Taeguk IL Jang is accurate , I will re-state that it's still based on a misunderstanding or rewriting of Kukkiwon poomsae. That issue had been argued extensively on MT threads in the past: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?67936-The-Taeguek-Cipher-Book-Review

 

[punisher73]

Nice! Where in the world did you get a copy of that thing?

Pax,

Chris

I don't have it. It is an instructor I know of that got the book while he studied TKD in Korea in the late 50's while stationed there as a translator for the Army. He is also a history/book buff and has a HUGE library. TKD is not his main art and has gone on to rank in another art, in which he teaches now. He made reference to it in a seminar he did on pressure points and joint locks etc. It made mention of how if you look at Ueshiba's book "Budo" it shows pressure point striking techniques in it, but how most schools do NOT hav that training anymore and how in the book Ueshiba states that before you throw them, hit them on a pressure point (atemi strike). It also referenced a book on jujitsu, that was reprinted and in the new edition has a preface saying that a certain chapter was removed on pressure point striking because it was "not needed in today's society". I have looked at both of those books and the information is correct. I have no reason to doubt it on the Gen. Choi book, but since I have not personally seen the copy in rea life and can't read Korean, I can't verify that with 100% accuracy.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Sorry, I should have been more careful in the attribution.My thinking, though, is that you agree with Mr. O'Neill's interpretation, and you also put Kukkiwon taekwondo in the mix the minute you cited Taeguk Il Jang as a point of reference.

If your understanding of Mr. O'Neill's interpretation of Taeguk IL Jang is accurate , I will re-state that it's still based on a misunderstanding or rewriting of Kukkiwon poomsae. That issue had been argued extensively on MT threads in the past: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?67936-The-Taeguek-Cipher-Book-Review

I feel that there are more than one correct interpretation for many movements in a form, thus I agree with any interpretation that is tactically sound.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I feel that there are more than one correct interpretation for many movements in a form, thus I agree with any interpretation that is tactically sound.

While there may be more than one application for a movement in a form, the only correct interpretation of the movements in the form is the one stated in the art's core curriculum, in the case of the Taegeuk pumse, as dictated in the KKW textbook.

 

[Gnarlie]

While there may be more than one application for a movement in a form, the only correct interpretation of the movements in the form is the one stated in the art's core curriculum, in the case of the Taegeuk pumse, as dictated in the KKW textbook.

Do you believe that everything that the Kukkiwon masters know and teach is in that book?

Seems to me that many of them know more, even if they don't always teach it.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[miguksaram]

Do you believe that everything that the Kukkiwon masters know and teach is in that book?

Seems to me that many of them know more, even if they don't always teach it.

You are right that they may not always teach it, but then again if they documented every possible scenario from one specific move book would read like War & Peace. They give a basic foundation on which the student can work with and then allow the student the freedom to take off from there.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Do you believe that everything that the Kukkiwon masters know and teach is in that book?

Seems to me that many of them know more, even if they don't always teach it.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

More applications or more interpretations? Not the same thing.

The first movement in Taegeuk iljang is turning left and executing arae makki. The block is very carefully detailed in both the text book and in every class I've ever been in. The same goes for the rest of both that form and the rest of the Taegeuk pumse.

If you're intimating that there are different interpretations of what the movements of each form actually are, then you are incorrect.

If you are saying that there are applications (bunhae/bunkai) for each form that are not listed in the textbook, such as throws, grabs, etc., then yes, I would certainly agree with you, though I would consider such things to be sourced from outside of the core curriculum of KKW taekwondo.

Just to be clear, I don't dismiss such things as being of no value; I learned tons of cool stuff from my GM, and when I asked where he learned it, much of it was from either hapkido or from whatever SD he was doing in the ROK. Some of it was just stuff that he came up with on the fly.

I also feel that this is an area where each school will be more individualized. Lots of instructors will teach added 'stuff' but they won't all add the same stuff.

So, no, I don't believe that everything that they know is in the book. But I do believe that what is in the book is detailed to an extent that it leaves little room for interpretation, such as what parts of the arm are used for arae makki.

 

[punisher73]

Originally Posted by dancingalone Do we know the exact timeline of the creation of the Pinan kata as well as which students started as adults and learned the Pinan as their primary formative kata? I ask because all the sources I've read state that Itosu did in fact intend the Pinan to be an introductory vehicle for youth. The adults at the time already had the Naihanchi kata to serve the same purpose.

Funakoshi would have been well into his thirties before I think the Pinan were taught. Chibana and Mabuni would have been in their teens I believe relative to the same event.

In any case, I don't doubt the Pinan eventually evolved to be goods for the adults too. That is the current reality with the forms taught in many different karate ryu. This was a natural consequence over time as the children that learned them grew up and begin teaching themselves. But if you can point me to any source material about Itosu's original intentions towards adults with the Pinan, I'd appreciate the cite.

Ok, here are the bits of the interview with Sensei Pat Nakata (long time student of Chibana Sensei). The interview is taken from Classifcal Fighting Arts #21.

CFA: Where did Chibana learn from Itosu? Where was Itosu teacing at that time?
Nakata: Chibana sensei started learning from Itosu Sensei about the time Itosu Sensei was introducing karate into public schools. Since Chibana had dropped out of school to learn karate from Itosu (notice, while Nakata is speaking formal titles are used, for brevity in typing I will use last name only), his training was at the residence of Itosu.

CFA: How many days each week did Chibana train with Itosu
Nakata: The training was 7 days a week.
CFA: How long would he train each day?
Nakata: Training was 8 to 10 hours a day.
CFA: How many years did Chibana train with Itosu?
Nakata: Chibana trained with Itosu until Itosu passed away, which was about 15 to 16 years.
CFA: Who were some of Itosu's other students?
Nakata: Itosu's two most senior students were Kentsu Yabu and Chomo Hanashiro. Funakoshi could also be counted as one of Itosu's students, but he seemed to have been busy with other school activities. There were about 10 others who trained with Itosu.

CFA: What kata did Itosu teach to his students
Nakata: Itosu taught numerous kata, but his core kata were: Naihanchi Shodan, Nidan, Sandan, Pinan Shodan thru Godan, Patsai, Kusanku Sho and Dai, Chinto etc. I believe that Itosu taught about 25 kata.

CFA: We all know that Itosu created the Pinan Shodan kata. you have previously said that he created Pinan Shodan kata the first year that karate was taught in the okinawan school system. The next year, since students already knew the first kata, he created Pinan nidan. this went on until he created 5 kata.
Nakata: Yes, that is correct.

CFA: Do you know what the source material was for the Pinan kata? Did Itosu draw from other kata?
Nakata: Itosu meant to create only one Pinan with the source being Kusanku (Dai) from Tudi Sakugawa and Sokon Matsumura. The first kata was simply called Pinan, not Pinan Shodan.
CFA: Do the various Pinan kata draw from the same sources or do they differ?
Nakata: The various Pinan do draw from different sources. It is my understanding that Itosu incorporated many old techniques from his early ti training in Shuri.
CFA: Did Itosu have different goals or objectives for the various Pinan kata? For example, was he trying to teach different things in Pinan Shodan than Pinan Godan?
Nakata: As I understand it, after Itosu realized that he needed to make more Pinan kata, he tried to make the Pinan kata series into a complete fighting system.
CFA: I have always been struck by how difficult the Pinan kata are. I cannot see how a school student who had not previously learned any kata, could start out with the Pinan. Do you know if Itosu tuaght a curriculum of kihon first?
Nakata: Naihanchi Sho/Ni/Sandan were taught as kihon kata. After the Naihanchi kata, they were taught Kusanku, which was too long and too difficult for the young students. He created Pinan (Shodan) which was shorter, so it would be easier to learn.

CFA: When Itosu (and his senior students)began to teach in the okinawan school system, they were already training together privately. How did the two forms of karate-the private training and the public school training differ?
Nakata: The kata performance in appearance did not seem to differ privately or publicly, but the application publicly was less dangerous, yet effective. Privately, the application was for more deadly.

CFA: Can you please describe the three different application levels of each karate technique?
Nakata: There are three levels of application that were taught. Level one was for beginners and the very young students, which was punch, strike, kick, block, and cocking-pulling the hand back to the side in the chambered position for the transitional moves. Level two was for the intermediate and older students and emphasized body mechanics for more powerful punching, striking, kicking and blocking. What originally appeared to be cocking, now became throws and/or locking techniques. Level three as mentioned earlier was viscious and deadly. The punch, strike, kick and block were now executed to destroy the opponent with a single technique. The throws and locks were fatal if applied correctly. Level three was only taught to trusted senior students.

There is alot more, but that is what is relevant to this discussion about the kata and applications. The spaces between items designate break in the interview where other questions were being asked. The interview itself was conducted by Mr. Walter Goodin.

 

[stoneheart]

That was interesting. Thanks.

 

[Archtkd]

I feel that there are more than one correct interpretation for many movements in a form, thus I agree with any interpretation that is tactically sound.

Do you think or believe it's possible to correctly perform Taeguk Il Jang or any Kukki taekwondo poomsae, using any "tactically sound" interpretation that was not conceived by the creators or Kukkiwon teachers of the poomsae?

 

[Gnarlie]

Do you think or believe it's possible to correctly perform Taeguk Il Jang or any Kukki taekwondo poomsae, using any "tactically sound" interpretation that was not conceived by the creators or Kukkiwon teachers of the poomsae?

Two points, one for the above and one general.

In regard to the above, I use applications other than those stated in the Kukkiwon Textbook. They come from my instructors, one of whom picked them up through experience of TKD since 1972, the other of whom is a Kukkiwon certified trainer and Yong-In graduate. I know applications, I use applications, bit that doesn't change the way I perform the patterns. The poomsae are what they are.

Secondly, pertaining to the thread: Kukkiwon literature says poomsae is the essence of TKD and that sparring is the application of poomsae. We all spar in some form so we all practice applications. Is all of our sparring punch, kick, block?

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Do you think or believe it's possible to correctly perform Taeguk Il Jang or any Kukki taekwondo poomsae, using any "tactically sound" interpretation that was not conceived by the creators or Kukkiwon teachers of the poomsae?

I cant speak on behalf of the tegek forms as I dont know them, but we regularly break down the palgwe forms and find applications all through them.

 

[Jaeimseu]

While there may be more than one application for a movement in a form, the only correct interpretation of the movements in the form is the one stated in the art's core curriculum, in the case of the Taegeuk pumse, as dictated in the KKW textbook.

I think I would agree with this. Poomse techniques, much like works of literature, can be interpreted in many ways. Some may appear more valid than others, but I would think that the "correct" interpretation would come from the source (creators of the poomse). Some people will argue that the actual source is somewhere else and that the "original" application was different, but I think the fact is that these types of statements are just opinions.

 

[Gnarlie]

I think I would agree with this. Poomse techniques, much like works of literature, can be interpreted in many ways. Some may appear more valid than others, but I would think that the "correct" interpretation would come from the source (creators of the poomse). Some people will argue that the actual source is somewhere else and that the "original" application was different, but I think the fact is that these types of statements are just opinions.

I agree. I would only ever consider applications as 'possibilities'. It's up to the individual how they choose to employ a movement. But the right way to perform the pattern comes from KKW.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Do you think or believe it's possible to correctly perform Taeguk Il Jang or any Kukki taekwondo poomsae, using any "tactically sound" interpretation that was not conceived by the creators or Kukkiwon teachers of the poomsae?

Yes sir I do. One of the longest running threads on Martial Warrior several years ago was about different applications in forms. That discussion incuded several KKW TKD members with master rank. If you look at the dedication of Mr. O'Neill's book you'll find many of us listed as a result of those discussion. Master Anslow and I have talked briefly over the years on this as well. I have a different application than Mr. O'Neill for the opening movements of Il Jang. However, both use the same movements, both demonstrate different yet practical principles in in-fighting and both would work well in an altercation.

While the KKW has an application assigned to the movement, it cannot be considered the only 'correct' one. It is the one they've chosen to assign to the movement. To clarify, it may be the official KKW application, but it doesn't mean that it is the only application or even the best. It is the application they've assigned based upon the either the form designers experience and/or goal for the form. Nothing wrong with that.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, it would appear the KKW encourages exploration in the art. I can applaud them for that stance. Many in TKD, some of who are masters have done this and it has worked out well.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I cant speak on behalf of the tegek forms as I dont know them, but we regularly break down the palgwe forms and find applications all through them.

Breaking them down to find applications is not the same as reinterpreting what movements are in the form.

In other words, you finding a hip toss in one of the movements is not the same thing as saying that the movement, which is proscribed as arae makki is actually something else.

So in taegeuk iljang, arae makki will always be arae makki. If you pull a grab of the foot out of it, segueing into some kind of leg lock take down (I'm sure that a grappler has a better technical term), then arae makki is still arae makki.

Thus the form is not reinterpreted, but a different application is found. So if what Kongsoodo means is that the bunhae one can mine from the Taegeuk pumse are quantitatively greater than the bunhae found in the textbook, I agree with him.

However, if somebody is reinterpreting the movements of the form to either be something other than what is in the form or to be executed in a way contrary to the way that the moves are taught in the system, be it Kukki taekwondo, Shotokan karate, or any other system that has a codified set of forms, then their understanding of the form is flawed.

In other words, if you do your Taegeuk pumse 'Shotokan style' because you feel that it has some benefit, then you are performing the form incorrectly and likely do not have the foundation to understand why.... and should probably be at a Shotokan school if that is what you are after.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

In regard to the above, I use applications other than those stated in the Kukkiwon Textbook. They come from my instructors, one of whom picked them up through experience of TKD since 1972, the other of whom is a Kukkiwon certified trainer and Yong-In graduate. I know applications, I use applications, bit that doesn't change the way I perform the patterns. The poomsae are what they are.

This is what I have been saying. The patterns are what the patterns are. When you punch, you use a proscribed portion of your fist as the striking surface. When you block, you use a proscribed portion of the arm/hand as the striking surface. When you kick, you use a proscribed portion of the foot as the striking surface. You take specific stances and move in a proscribed method.

When you draw applications from or import applications from another art to the pumse, you are finding your own expression of the pumse.

Secondly, pertaining to the thread: Kukkiwon literature says poomsae is the essence of TKD and that sparring is the application of poomsae. We all spar in some form so we all practice applications. Is all of our sparring punch, kick, block?

It is the application of the pumse inasmuch as can be applied within that rule set. There are some applications in the textbook (not many) that go beyond blocking, punching, and kicking. Those cannot be applied in sparring because they do not fall within the WTF rule set.

 

[Gnarlie]

But there are quite a few other types of sparring within the KKW syllabus, where those techniques can be and are used.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2