Kukkiwon seminar this week in Los Angeles

[Gnarlie]

It's interesting that different people call a kick by different names. On a youtube video of a Colombian tv show, they called the tornado kick "mom dolyeo chugi", which I thought was a name used for spinning hook kick. They also called the axe kick "chico chugi" which I never heard before. I thought, "that sounds like "guy kick". It's at about 5:25.

In regards to physical condition, TKD is not a good martial art IMO for the average middle age person with a gut and poor flexibility. To me, the beauty of TKD is fast and high kicks.

Chikyo Chagi is axe or chop kick (the old name for the older kick using the heel, as opposed to the sportier Naeryo Chagi, downward kick (using the sole).

The school I attend uses some interesting terminology too. I think it's because the head of our instructor is kinda old-school?

• We call the roundhouse kick is an ap dolyeo chagi rather than a dolyeo chagi. So "front turning kick" rather than just "turning kick". I've heard some people say that's to emphasize that you chamber by lifting the knee to the front before turning, and I've heard other people say it's to distinguish the kick from the kind of roundhouse where you strike with the bottom of the foot, toes bent.
• We call the skip roundhouse baleun bal. "Fast foot."
• We call the long front stance ap koopigi rather than ap koobi. When I asked why, I was told "that's the older name".
• We call the spinning back hook kick a hwe chook. No idea why. Would love to know.
• We call the jump spinning back hook kick jugo hwe chook. Again, no idea why.
• We call the jump front kick eedan ap chai. "Second-level front kick."

I think the names we use are our school are less common than the names I usually see in print.

Hwiro is a verb stem meaning crescent or arc, and chook is a word for ball or heel.

Jugo means 'momentum' or 'swing' , and is used to describe the swing leg before the kick - for example hanbal jugo bandae dollyo chagi would be a reverse turning kick with a momentum leg thrown before it. You could use the jugo term for the similar back kick hanbal jugo dwi chagi.





Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[WaterGal]

Sounds like they still need to iron some kinks out in regards to how the course is run, but I'm glad that people who aren't up to the standards are taking the course and hopefully learning something to take back to their schools. That tells me this course could actually do some good.

Since I haven't seen a clear answer from KKW or WTMU on this yet, did they say anything about the future of testing in the US? Getting a better sense of what's happening and when would be a big help.

 

[WaterGal]

Oh, also, did they talk about how to grade sparring? Are there specific things that KKW expects from students at each dan level, either in terms of logistical things like # of rounds, or in terms of technique/strategy/distancing/etc?

KKW has official books and DVDs to explain and show how to do the forms correctly. If you're motivated enough to fly to LA, you can spend $25 on the official KKW poomsae handbook, which shows every move in every form and tells you what things the judges are looking for and what they'll take points away for, if you can parse out the bad English. But I haven't seen anything like that for sparring. I mean, I've seen some good books and videos on sparring (I've been watching the "Science of Taekwondo Fighting" DVD series, which so far I'd recommend). But not official testing standards from KKW.

 

[TrueJim]

Oh, also, did they talk about how to grade sparring?...

Personally I think this is a really important and valid point. If the intent is to promote better standards, then I personally think Kukkiwon should develop more of a curriculum than just poomsae. There could be testing guidelines for:

• Sparring
• Breaking
• Techniques and combinations
• Self-defense
• Oral and written testing

In addition, there could be more than just testing guidelines...they could actually offer some curriculum guidelines. "Here are the things a 9th cup should know...", etc.

In fact - let's go nuts here - they could even advocate for a common color-belt scheme.

That's not to say that individual schools couldn't also add their own additional content, put their own spin on things, etc. I'm just saying...if you're trying to promote more uniformity in standards, then focusing on just poomsae might not be the best approach.

 

[Dirty Dog]

In addition, there could be more than just testing guidelines...they could actually offer some curriculum guidelines. "Here are the things a 9th cup should know...", etc.

There already is. It's just very minimalist, with the caveat that they are minimum requirements, and instructors can add more.

In fact - let's go nuts here - they could even advocate for a common color-belt scheme.

There already is. White-yellow-green-blue-red-black, with stripes used to indicate odd-numbered geup ranks.

 

[IcemanSK]

Personally I think this is a really important and valid point. If the intent is to promote better standards, then I personally think Kukkiwon should develop more of a curriculum than just poomsae. There could be testing guidelines for:

• Sparring
• Breaking
• Techniques and combinations
• Self-defense
• Oral and written testing

In addition, there could be more than just testing guidelines...they could actually offer some curriculum guidelines. "Here are the things a 9th cup should know...", etc.

In fact - let's go nuts here - they could even advocate for a common color-belt scheme.

That's not to say that individual schools couldn't also add their own additional content, put their own spin on things, etc. I'm just saying...if you're trying to promote more uniformity in standards, then focusing on just poomsae might not be the best approach.

I agree completely that they should talk about more than just poomsae. My guess is that the emphasis was on sparring in a big way for so long, to the detriment of poomsae, that it was felt that the pendulum needed to swing toward poomsae. In reality, poomsae is more multi-layered and more accessible than sparring for many TKD students. When I went to the Kukkiwon Foreign Instructors Course (with the Awesome msmitht & others here on MT) the gentleman who taught the sparring said something that surprised me.

Master Sammy Pejo, a former US Taekwondo team member, said that he no longer requires his students to compete in sparring in tournaments as prerequisite for BB testing. He said that his reasoning for the change was that students were getting hurt or getting their egos bruised to the point that they quit training. He pointed out that many students, from his & other schools, focus on sparring training much more than the average student who needs it for their test. When I began training in the 80's sparring was everything & poomsae was an afterthought.

The whole Kukkiwon curriculum needs to be talked about & taught from Kukkiwon itself. However, poomsae can teach a broader understanding of Taekwondo than a course on breaking or SD can. I'd still love to sit in on a course on SD taught by Kukkiwon instructors. As I'm sure most of us would.

 

[msmitht]

Oh, also, did they talk about how to grade sparring? Are there specific things that KKW expects from students at each dan level, either in terms of logistical things like # of rounds, or in terms of technique/strategy/distancing/etc?

KKW has official books and DVDs to explain and show how to do the forms correctly. If you're motivated enough to fly to LA, you can spend $25 on the official KKW poomsae handbook, which shows every move in every form and tells you what things the judges are looking for and what they'll take points away for, if you can parse out the bad English. But I haven't seen anything like that for sparring. I mean, I've seen some good books and videos on sparring (I've been watching the "Science of Taekwondo Fighting" DVD series, which so far I'd recommend). But not official testing standards from KKW.

Judging for Kyorugi is based on offense, defense and variety of techniques. Suggested things to observe: Eyes, distance, posture, yell, speed, balance and accuracy.

 

[Earl Weiss]

It is well known that I am not a KKW guy, but I see a flaw here similar to the ITF "Instructor Course" . Mainly, it seems the courses teach the standards and practices for one or more aspects of the syllabus. (FWIW the ITF course is mostly involved with patterns. There are seperate Referreee courses, and the UST F Instructor course also focuses on patterns and fundamental techniques with seperate referree, Ho Sin Sul , Ground and weapons course)

The limited focus is not the flaw. The flaw is structure in that the focus is on teaching material. That is what teachers teach students. There seems to be a total lack of focus on teaching how to instruct. There is a group called PPCT which focuses on teaching LEOs. There structure is the courses for students, courses to teach people to be instructors, and courses to teach people to teach instructors (Instructor trainers) Curious that TMAs have not embraced a similar structure.

 

[Miles]

I was very interested in taking the Examiner's Class and the Instructor Course (for 2nd Class) but couldn't do the West Coast trip on such short notice. I am hopeful that it will be offered once again in Chicago (Detroit would be better, but I can't have everything). I also hope some of the problems with checking in/credentials/space for training, etc. have been worked out.

BTW, Tom, Matt, and Patrick, you guys are awesome!