Kong Soo Do

Most were fairly minor niggles. Only two really stood out;
  • never seen jutsu translated as method; skill, art, or science. Not sure of the Japanese reading of the hanja, but in KMA method is beop, while skill/art/science is sul, which uses the Korean reading of the hanja/kanji used for jutsu.
  • There is no grading in olympic taekwondo. If she was a second dan, it would have been in Kukkiwon Taekwondo, which does include a great number of hand techniques. The girl in your article would have spared under WTF rules, which do allow punches, though only straight punches to the torso if I am correct. I believe that backfists were scored at one pont as well (if they still are, someone please correct me). Unless all those trophies were from forms competition, she would have had to have used her hands at some point.
Otherwise, as I said, I liked the spirit of the article.

Daniel

Thank you. I'll take a look at the 'Jutsu' translation. In regards to the second point, I appreciate the correction on the olympic/KKW point. In regards to the 'hands-on' comment, what I was refering to was grasping someone for a grapple or balance displacement. She did indeed use hand strikes. I'll have to make that clarification in the article. Thank you.
 
Thank you. I'll take a look at the 'Jutsu' translation. In regards to the second point, I appreciate the correction on the olympic/KKW point.
I'm no linguist, but I have done a goodly amount of research into terminology. Pretty sure about jutsu.

One consideration is that just because it has do at the end does not mean sport. Hapkido traditionally had no sporting element and went through a good number of name changes before hapkido was landed on. Likewise, Aikido does not traditionally have a sportive element either. Pretty sure that Toshihiro Obata's Shinkendo doesn't either. The more well known non-kendo based Korean sword arts have a 'do' suffix, such as Haidong Gumdo, and most of these are not sport oriented.

In regards to the 'hands-on' comment, what I was refering to was grasping someone for a grapple or balance displacement. She did indeed use hand strikes. I'll have to make that clarification in the article. Thank you.
Grappling and unbalancing is indeed a new ball game for someone who's only trained in strikes. Should have been a good eye opener for her though; you learn pretty quick that there is more to defend against than just strikes.

Daniel
 
I disagree. The general public is fairly ignorant of the sport of taekwondo and of martial arts in general. Taekwondo has no problem getting the general public in the door. If anything, taekwondo on your shingle these days will bring in way more of the general public than anything else, including karate. About the only add on naming that I see done is to get somone who can grapple and then claim MMA as an additional program, and that is not overly common from what I have seen.

I think that school owners who use names distinct from taekwondo do so because they do not feel that their curriculum is best described by that name or are trying to reach a niche market. The poster, Kong Soo Do, has basically described a karate program: he uses pinan forms coupled with an eclectic SD system and a sparring rule set that is different from that of WTF taekwondo. Historical reasons behind the choice of name aside, it makes sense for him to use a different term, and Kong Soo Do is a fitting moniker.

In other words, they didn't change the name to get people in the door, but in order to not bait and switch. Honesty in advertising.

Daniel
I can see where you're coming from Daniel and things may be different over there but I would say over here people are also quite ignorant of martial arts in general, but most people know tkd as "the one with all the fancy kicks and their hands down when they fight". I was surprised even my father described it as this when I first started and he knows very little about martial arts. People also use the internet a lot now when looking to start in a martial art and to say the general feeling on the net regarding tkd is negative is probably an understatement. I know a few people who have googled "is tkd good for real life self defence?" when looking for a martial art to start and the general cosensus was "no". Our club has had to really distance itself from this perception in recent years.
 
When I was a guep or even low dan holder, I wasn't interested in history all that much. I would scan the obligatory blurbs in books and magazine articles, but that is about it. I wasn't all that focused on kwans, dates, etc. because it didn't interest me at the time and I was focused on training and learning. Back then, there was an extreme shortage of information, unlike today, so you had to really work hard to get anywhere above mediocre. The hard part was getting the information.

When I was in college, I used to play cards with my friends Peter, whose father was Ka of Kajukenbo, and Kevin, whose father was one of the first Kajukenbo black belts. Kevin's father later switched to Shotokan after Kanazawa Sensei came. Kevin's father was my Shotokan teacher, which is how I met Kevin, who introduced me to Peter, who was his high school classmate.

Anyway, we were playing cards one day and we talked about Kajukenbo history. They both laughed and said that the standard history had serious factual errors and they started naming them off. I later met Peter's father, as well as some of the other Kajukenbo co-founders, and they painted a very different picture.

It got me thinking about Korean Martial Arts history, so I re-read more closely the magazine articles and books that I had, with the understanding that it may be completely off base. I also realized that water from as near to the source as possible was the cleanest.

For me, the study of history is a vehicle in which to meet pioneers and study with them. A lot of the time it may not involve actual technical instruction, but rather the steps they took during their journey as well as their developing philosophy. I find that history discussions is a good door opener for me. I notice that if you show an existing accurate knowledge base on history, correctly pronouncing names, etc., then the pioneers open up tremendously, in much the same way that Hattori Hanzo opened up to Uma Thurman when he realized she knew a lot.

Personally, it has been my experience that the pioneers all have a strikingly similar view of history. They all same the same thing about people, events, etc. They also experienced success in the same fashion, by cooperating with each other. Of course certain ones took the lead on certain areas, according to their interest and ability, but they all worked together to get the ball moving so to speak. For them, Taekwondo was and is a team sport and the ones who thought that it was an individual sport, were eventually shut out and excluded from the process.

There is a book out there called The Law of Success by Napoleon Hill. He was commissioned by Andrew Carnegie to research the principles of success by speaking with the movers and shakers of the day, which were his friends. Mr. Hill spoke to people such as John Rockefeller, Henry Ford, King Gillette, Theodore Roosevelt, etc. and other pioneers of the day over a twenty year period. He distilled from those discussions 15 general principles of success, which was published privately.

I tried, unknowingly, to do the same thing by meeting the pioneers. Their story is quite remarkable when you think about it, children really of a war torn country who banded together and created the beautiful thing that is Taekwondo.

But that is why I study history, not for history itself, but to gain accurate information about what exactly was involved in making the Korean Martial Arts the success that it is today, so that perhaps in the future I can or could do something to help continue that success, for at least one more generation.
I liken it to guitar. I have been a guitar teacher for years and have played guitar my whole life and spent many years playing in bands, but I wouldnt have a clue when the guitar was invented, who invented it, why it was invented, what country it was invented in etc. And I can honestly say I have never had a student of mine ask me any of these questions. For me, martial arts are the same. I am there to train and get as good as I can, but have little or no interest in the origins of my art. I used to think it was because I am a relative beginner, but since then Ive met too many high dan holders who also have no interest in these matters. In fact, I had a good talk with my instructor (7th dan) recently and was surprised I know heaps more about the history/origins/politics in tkd than he did, and all that knowledge has come from what I read here. Basically, other than the fact tkd is korean, he knew nothing at all about it. I had to explain to one of our 5th dans what the difference between ITF and WTF is. Some would say they are ignorant, but as long as they know the material, are good instructors and good martial artists I dont think it really matters whether or not they know who the kukkiwon president is or what year tkd was invented or what the kwans are etc
 
Last edited:
If your club is teaching taekwondo, then it should be called taekwondo. If you want to qualify it (traditional, practical, whatever) in order to better describe what you do, then that is fine. But if it is taekwondo, it should be called that.

What Kong Soo Do describes is definitely not taekwondo.

Daniel
 
If your club is teaching taekwondo, then it should be called taekwondo. If you want to qualify it (traditional, practical, whatever) in order to better describe what you do, then that is fine. But if it is taekwondo, it should be called that.

What Kong Soo Do describes is definitely not taekwondo.

Daniel
I agree. Clubs in my area now write SELF DEFENCE and then write tkd in small print underneath if they want to move away from the connatations associated with tkd. One tkd club in my area even sent out flyers where nowhere on the entire flyer was the word 'taekwondo' used but if you go to their premises they have tkd emblazoned on the front of the building but its in an industrial estate so you only see that once you have joined or have come along for a free lesson where they will see first hand that its not the sport stuff. I agree though, if its tkd then they should call it that.
 
I'm no linguist, but I have done a goodly amount of research into terminology. Pretty sure about jutsu.

Absolutely correct.

In Japanese the character 術 (ju·tsu, [SIZE=+1]じゅつ[/SIZE]) means art or skill.

The same kanji 術 can indeed be used to mean "method" or "means". However...when it carries this meaning, it is pronounced su·be [SIZE=+1]すべ [/SIZE]

Here is an example of the kanji as jutsu:
[SIZE=+1]手術 shujutsu -- literally translates to art/skill with one's hands...it is the Japanese word for surgery. Senjutsu (war arts/skills) is the Japanese word for tactics.

[/SIZE]Here is an example of the kanji as sube:
美しい術 Utsukushii Sube (Beautiful Method) -- name of a Japanese film.
You can see in the title when the trailer starts, the hiragana [SIZE=+1]すべ [/SIZE]over the kanji show that 術 meaning "method" that is pronounced "sube" and not "jutsu"

[yt]U-ZbrtxK-fQ[/yt]

Same Kanji, two different pronunciations, two different meanings.
 
Absolutely correct.

In Japanese the character 術 (ju·tsu, [SIZE=+1]じゅつ[/SIZE]) means art or skill.

The same kanji 術 can indeed be used to mean "method" or "means". However...when it carries this meaning, it is pronounced su·be [SIZE=+1]すべ [/SIZE]

Here is an example of the kanji as jutsu:
[SIZE=+1]手術 shujutsu -- literally translates to art/skill with one's hands...it is the Japanese word for surgery. Senjutsu (war arts/skills) is the Japanese word for tactics.

[/SIZE]Here is an example of the kanji as sube:
美しい術 Utsukushii Sube (Beautiful Method) -- name of a Japanese film.
You can see in the title when the trailer starts, the hiragana [SIZE=+1]すべ [/SIZE]over the kanji show that 術 meaning "method" that is pronounced "sube" and not "jutsu"

[yt]U-ZbrtxK-fQ[/yt]

Same Kanji, two different pronunciations, two different meanings.
Why Carol, you demonstrate your linguistic-jutsu in such an effective sube!

Daniel
 
Absolutely correct.

In Japanese the character 術 (ju·tsu, [SIZE=+1]じゅつ[/SIZE]) means art or skill.

The same kanji 術 can indeed be used to mean "method" or "means". However...when it carries this meaning, it is pronounced su·be [SIZE=+1]すべ [/SIZE]

Here is an example of the kanji as jutsu:
[SIZE=+1]手術 shujutsu -- literally translates to art/skill with one's hands...it is the Japanese word for surgery. Senjutsu (war arts/skills) is the Japanese word for tactics.

[/SIZE]Here is an example of the kanji as sube:
美しい術 Utsukushii Sube (Beautiful Method) -- name of a Japanese film.
You can see in the title when the trailer starts, the hiragana [SIZE=+1]すべ [/SIZE]over the kanji show that 術 meaning "method" that is pronounced "sube" and not "jutsu"

[yt]U-ZbrtxK-fQ[/yt]

Same Kanji, two different pronunciations, two different meanings.

Thank you for this :)
 
One consideration is that just because it has do at the end does not mean sport. Hapkido traditionally had no sporting element and went through a good number of name changes before hapkido was landed on. Likewise, Aikido does not traditionally have a sportive element either. Pretty sure that Toshihiro Obata's Shinkendo doesn't either. The more well known non-kendo based Korean sword arts have a 'do' suffix, such as Haidong Gumdo, and most of these are not sport oriented.

Daniel

Thank you, and I agree. We played around with names for a while many years ago. Initially there was concern with the 'Do' but in the end we felt the same as you. I think in the past that there were profound differences between a 'Do' and a non-Do art but really not so much anymore.

And Kong Soo Do just wasn't really much in use. Oh, there were some KSD here and there, but it wasn't really 'out there' so-to-speak. We felt it would be a good niche to label what we teach, allow us to put in all the locks, throws, chokes, cavity pressing etc, respect the Okinawan/Japanese connection and not step on anyone's toes at the same time.

I mean what was the alternative? Old School TKD? Combat TKD? I dunno, KSD just seemed simpler and a better fit.

Although I did consider "Bait, Tackle and Kung Fu Emporium.
:)
 
Thank you, and I agree. We played around with names for a while many years ago. Initially there was concern with the 'Do' but in the end we felt the same as you. I think in the past that there were profound differences between a 'Do' and a non-Do art but really not so much anymore.

And Kong Soo Do just wasn't really much in use. Oh, there were some KSD here and there, but it wasn't really 'out there' so-to-speak. We felt it would be a good niche to label what we teach, allow us to put in all the locks, throws, chokes, cavity pressing etc, respect the Okinawan/Japanese connection and not step on anyone's toes at the same time.

I mean what was the alternative? Old School TKD? Combat TKD? I dunno, KSD just seemed simpler and a better fit.

Although I did consider "Bait, Tackle and Kung Fu Emporium.
:)
As I said before, I think that it is appropriate regardless of your choice of forms; empty hand way is nicely generic and covers strikes, grapples, locks, etc.

Daniel
 
What Kong Soo Do describes is definitely not taekwondo.

I am curious why you think that. To me, TKD has become as generic of a term as karate has given the wide range of what it encompasses, ranging from modern Olympic sparring competitions to old school Japanese kata practitioners.

If Kong Soo Do had wanted to call his system Tae Kwon Do instead, I wouldn't bat an eyelid over it.
 
I am curious why you think that. To me, TKD has become as generic of a term as karate has given the wide range of what it encompasses, ranging from modern Olympic sparring competitions to old school Japanese kata practitioners.

If Kong Soo Do had wanted to call his system Tae Kwon Do instead, I wouldn't bat an eyelid over it.
Nor would I, though I disagree that taekwondo has become as generic a term as Karate.

Taekwondo is much more monolithic than karate, at least at this point in time. Really, there are four main styles; Kukki taekwondo, Chang Hon taekwondo, Jhoon Rhee, and Songahm taekwondo. The rest are spin offs of one of these. Of the four, two (Jhoon Rhee and Songahm) are spin offs from Chang Hon.

Now, it could become as generic a term as karate, but at this point, it would be very hard to make a strong case that it is now.

But if he chose to call it taekwondo, that would be his choice, though he'd have to explain himself to any students who might already be familiar with TKD, perhaps already practicing and looking for a new place to train, and to people who see 'TKD' on the door and expect the typical TKD school environment.

Though I suppose that the addition of the catch phrase, "Stike fast, strike hard, no mercy!" under your taekwondo sign would give people a clue that it isn't the usual fare.:D

Daniel
 
Taekwondo is much more monolithic than karate, at least at this point in time. Really, there are four main styles; Kukki taekwondo, Chang Hon taekwondo, Jhoon Rhee, and Songahm taekwondo. The rest are spin offs of one of these. Of the four, two (Jhoon Rhee and Songahm) are spin offs from Chang Hon.

There are *many* more styles of TKD than four, and with quite a few claiming a lineage other than KKW, ITF, Jhoon Rhee, or ATA. Example: Chayon-ryu which is rather interesting in that 1) the GM was a member of a couple of the kwans that merged to form TKD 2) the GM has KKW rank yet teaches the karate forms along with the Palgwe series and a few kwon bup forms too. The Chayon-ryu people actually wear patches that say something like College of Tae Kwon Karate(?) on them.

I've also run in small clusters here and there of "Chung Do Kwan" TKD schools unaffiliated with the KKW that still also practice the Japanese forms.

Now, it could become as generic a term as karate, but at this point, it would be very hard to make a strong case that it is now.

I think it depends on your perspective. I think you might be too focused on the groups you establish as the main ones. I like to look in the margins myself. I think the small groups with less than a hundred members can be as viable as the KKW with its millions.

The blandness of TKD as a descriptor will get there in time. You see this manifestation right now on the board with people mixing kenpo into TKD. Or with me, adding ideas from Okinawan karate and aikido into a nominally TKD class with the usual expectations of sparring and one steps and the Chang Hon hyung.

But if he chose to call it taekwondo, that would be his choice, though he'd have to explain himself to any students who might already be familiar with TKD, perhaps already practicing and looking for a new place to train, and to people who see 'TKD' on the door and expect the typical TKD school environment.

I would say that the so-called typical TKD school environment does not exist. What does that phrase mean anyway? Is Mr. Weiss' program in the Chicago rec system the same thing as a Jean Lopez US team training situation? Is the local ATA Tiny Tiger program the same as an adult Texas Texkwondo program? Obviously not.

This is why people place a premium on transferability (too much IMO, but that's another discussion we've already had) and certifications. It's so they can match up what they've been training in before with possibly a new school if they move. In fact, the very idea of certification acknowledges that there is variation, sometimes greatly so, in what is called "tae kwon do/taekwondo".

Though I suppose that the addition of the catch phrase, "Stike fast, strike hard, no mercy!" under your taekwondo sign would give people a clue that it isn't the usual fare.:D

The saying wouldn't have been out of place in the JR dojang I grew up in. No, we weren't bullies like Kreese, but we did beat the heck out of each other.
 
I would say that the so-called typical TKD school environment does not exist. What does that phrase mean anyway? Is Mr. Weiss' program in the Chicago rec system the same thing as a Jean Lopez US team training situation? Is the local ATA Tiny Tiger program the same as an adult Texas Texkwondo program? Obviously not.
By typical, I mean the environment that seems to pervade the majority of commericial schools, regardless of style or organization. I've been in enough TKD schools around the country that I have been able to pick out enough common threads to establish a typical school (typical is neither good nor bad). Seen a good many atypical schools too, though.

Daniel
 
By typical, I mean the environment that seems to pervade the majority of commericial schools, regardless of style or organization. I've been in enough TKD schools around the country that I have been able to pick out enough common threads to establish a typical school (typical is neither good nor bad). Seen a good many atypical schools too, though.

Ah. Well, I would argue that commercial schools actually display more tightly connected characteristics than any discussion of styles or substyles. I bet you can show a so-called typical children's class from commercial Shaolindo, karate, and taekwondo studios to a lay person, and the lay person wouldn't be able to tell them apart.
 
The genericness or lack thereof of taekwondo would be an interesting topic of discussion on its own. T'would be interesting to see the responses.

Daniel
 
Ah. Well, I would argue that commercial schools actually display more tightly connected characteristics than any discussion of styles or substyles. I bet you can show a so-called typical children's class from commercial Shaolindo, karate, and taekwondo studios to a lay person, and the lay person wouldn't be able to tell them apart.
Absolutely, and that is what I meant.

Daniel
 
...
Taekwondo is much more monolithic than karate, at least at this point in time. Really, there are four main styles; Kukki taekwondo, Chang Hon taekwondo, Jhoon Rhee, and Songahm taekwondo. The rest are spin offs of one of these. Of the four, two (Jhoon Rhee and Songahm) are spin offs from Chang Hon.
...
Daniel

Is Chang Hon the older form of TKD, or did he change to that for his current teaching?

I studied under Jhoon Goo Rhee in the mid 60s, not advancing far. I didn't really follow any MA until the mid-80s, when I took up Hapkido. When I was sent to the N. VA area, one day I saw that Jhoon Goo Rhee was opening a new school and he would be present. I decided to go to meet him again and see if he remembered me. Not too surprisingly, he did not, but invited me to get back in his school. ;-)

I then stayed to see demonstrations of some of the students. To say I was surprised would be an understatement. He sure didn't teach that when I went. It was pretty traditional then, and pretty exacting. He spent two or three nights teaching me how to walk by having me go up and down the studio keeping my feet lined up with the outside of two different tile lines. That was interesting. ;-)
 
Is Chang Hon the older form of TKD, or did he change to that for his current teaching?

I studied under Jhoon Goo Rhee in the mid 60s, not advancing far. I didn't really follow any MA until the mid-80s, when I took up Hapkido. When I was sent to the N. VA area, one day I saw that Jhoon Goo Rhee was opening a new school and he would be present. I decided to go to meet him again and see if he remembered me. Not too surprisingly, he did not, but invited me to get back in his school. ;-)

I then stayed to see demonstrations of some of the students. To say I was surprised would be an understatement. He sure didn't teach that when I went. It was pretty traditional then, and pretty exacting. He spent two or three nights teaching me how to walk by having me go up and down the studio keeping my feet lined up with the outside of two different tile lines. That was interesting. ;-)
I'm pretty sure that Jhoon Rhee was using Chang hon forms early on. I have an old Jhoon Rhee book that details some of the forms and I recognize the names as Chang Hon. The system itself predates Jhoon Rhee taekwondo, and was developed by General Choi and his contemporaries in the ITF.

Daniel
 
Back
Top