Non sine wave form videos?

[Earl Weiss]

Someone recently gave me this DVD: http://www.tkangtkd.com/dvd.htm

The performer, Tae Sun Kang is quite good. The patterns are executed without the sine wave motion.

It all depends what you want to learn. For instance, from this wbsite I viewed Gae Beck and Choon Jang. He puts in extra Kihaps, misses the step over for the side Kicks in Gae Beck, doesn't seem to have the stamping motions in Choong Jang and adds extra kihaps. If your instructor reccomends this the use it. Other wise you may be just be doing the wrong stuff.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Here are a few without the sine motion: http://www.youtube.com/user/NRGMommy#p/u they're associated with the school I trained with back in the 80's, I was very glad to see they still don't do it. Their main school sells DVDs, I'd assume they wouldn't have the sine wave either. I haven't watched the DVD but I know (well, knew long ago) the people they filmed doing them, they're very good. http://www.traditionaltkdcollege.org/

Do they actually teach that the movement of the feet and hands are NOT coordinated? Meaning that the foot or stepping motion finishes and then the hands finish?

Also, in Po Eun they do a cicular motion of the hands for move #1 . Where does that comne from? (Me thinks someone confused it with Kwang Gae).

Anyway, if that is what your instructor wants, great! Otherwise, not so much.

 

[dancingalone]

It all depends what you want to learn. For instance, from this wbsite I viewed Gae Beck and Choon Jang. He puts in extra Kihaps, misses the step over for the side Kicks in Gae Beck, doesn't seem to have the stamping motions in Choong Jang and adds extra kihaps. If your instructor reccomends this the use it. Other wise you may be just be doing the wrong stuff.

Yep. One's instructor is always the final authority. Purely from my own perspective, I find Mr. Kang's execution pleasing given that this was meant to be an instructional video and would recommend the DVD if one is interested in viewing ONE interpretation of the Choi forms.

 

[Haakon]

Do they actually teach that the movement of the feet and hands are NOT coordinated? Meaning that the foot or stepping motion finishes and then the hands finish?

As I recall my instructor had me doing it essentially at the same time, the step came first but there wasn't a distinct long pause before the hand technique.

Also, in Po Eun they do a cicular motion of the hands for move #1 . Where does that comne from? (Me thinks someone confused it with Kwang Gae).

I couldn't tell you, I moved away before learning Po Eun. I would hope that at 4th dan he could do it correctly, but we all know that our expectations are often not met.

 

[Earl Weiss]

. I would hope that at 4th dan he could do it correctly, but we all know that our expectations are often not met.

Unfortuneately, people have different concepts of correctness. For me, it is to perform as the designer intended. For others it is as their instructors instruct.

If I were to play a music piece by mozart, playing as he intended would be correct. If I played differently than he intended it is one of 2 things:
A. A screwup
B. An intentional variation.

You can't do item B it you don't know what the original intention was.

Some have no clue that what the instructors teach is not what the designer intended. Some instructors have no clue that they do not teach what the designer intended. This may or may not be bad. If the designer had a reason for doing something a certain way and someone changes it for an equaly valid reason, than at least the change is justified, but they are lying by omission if they do not tell people they have made a change.

Those deviating from the original unknowingly, or deviating without a reason for doing so dilutes the art.

I learned not long ago (as posted here by Twin Fist) a book by He Il Cho makes a marked deviation in pattern Se Jong. I have been unable to determine if this was an intentional deviation or perhaps just some editing error.
An e-mail inquiry to AIMAA elicited a response from "Jasmine Cho" indicating the book conatined the pattern as originaly designed and General Choi made changes later. When I replied that this was not correct since it remained unchanged since the 1965 edition and GM Cho's book even deviates from the pattern diagram I got no further response.
(General Choi's books had errors from time to time corrected in later editions and thru technical correction bulletins and sometines simply through what he taught at courses, but those things were nominal. (All else considered)

 

[dancingalone]

Unfortuneately, people have different concepts of correctness. For me, it is to perform as the designer intended. For others it is as their instructors instruct.

Well I can explain my perspective on this. I'm more of a karate man and it's generally known that kata were never meant to be immutable and unchanging. Rather they are adapted and modified as needed. For example, Anko Itosu, the teacher of many prominent karate-ka, include Gichin Funakoshi of Shotokan fame, is thought to have taught the kata Bassai differently according to the student he was instructing. It's a logical idea. Different people have different bodies and different needs.

Looking to the Choi forms, I accept that the ITF(s) does them one way, likely closest to the way General Choi wanted them performed and practiced. I also accept and even support that these hyung have been altered over time with various groups, sometimes due to mistake or ignorance, other times intentionally. I myself teach bunkai to the Choi forms based on my understanding of ideas from shorin-ryu karate. From my perspective, I am adding to the body of what can be considered tae kwon do, as I am imparting my vision of what it can be.

The forms are a vehicle to an end. Nothing more. If one's vision of TKD means following the Encyclopedia to the letter, good. If one's teachers show you something different, fine too.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I have no problem with this. The problem comes in when people learn the forms and:
1. Instructors never tell the people that they are not doing what is a widely accepted statndard which often results in rude awakening when people relocate and find this out.
2. Instructors not knowing that what they are doing is not a widely accepted standard.
3. Instructors making changes but never memorializing them in writing and retiring or expiring so their students are often left with confusion.
4. Instructors who make changes yet neverexplain what, if or whether their was a reason for the change.

With regard to applications, to be brief Gneral choi often taught that if someone suggested an application different than what was in the book, the acid test was to have them show how the application worked. If it seemed practical, it was a good application even if different than what the book said. He also states (i believe it's #5 fo the training secrets) that pattern teach distance and direction so as long as the application doesn't make the motion unrecognizeable as to distance in direction and it's practical General l Choi would not think to exclude it.

 

[dancingalone]

The problem comes in when people learn the forms and:
1. Instructors never tell the people that they are not doing what is a widely accepted statndard which often results in rude awakening when people relocate and find this out.
2. Instructors not knowing that what they are doing is not a widely accepted standard.

I understand what you are saying. I would argue though that this isn't a real problem at all from my viewpoint. Consider the kata Bassai/Passai I mentioned above. It's used in MANY karate systems. Shotokan, Shudokan, Seibuken, Matsumura, Kyokushin, and countless more styles. And virtually every style performs it differently, some more closely than others, but some depart in a great fashion.

There's no understanding that when students move and switch schools across styles that they WON'T have to adjust their Bassai to match their new situation. I believe the same is true in tae kwon do. If you do official ITF tae kwon do and you move to another ITF-org school, sure you should reasonably expect to perform the Choi forms the same way. But for an independent to go to an ITF school or vice versa, there can and should be no such expectation.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I believe the same is true in tae kwon do. If you do official ITF tae kwon do and you move to another ITF-org school, sure you should reasonably expect to perform the Choi forms the same way. But for an independent to go to an ITF school or vice versa, there can and should be no such expectation.

Well, as with many things, "What should be" and "What is" are not always the same.

Have been with people from certain ITF lineages. One group asked me to teach for a while. Asked them to assume the ready position for a form. I thought perhaps they did not understand what I said since my Korean may not be up to par and asked again. No one looked at a book for a while to see they were not doing the stated ready position.

Another pattern added something which was (as I later found out from another instructor but they did not know this) was a unique addittion by their now deceased instructor.

On this very board Twin Fist posted something about "Friggin' Se Jong" or something like that. A huge part of the reason for his issue was a goofy turn that appears only in the He Il Cho book. Not knowing that perhaps this is nothing more than an editing error he was struggling to perform as stated being loyal of course to what he believes the standard is. Yet, if he found this was the only publication having the form go off in that direction he could have made an informed decision.

So, my issue is far from performance of minute details in accordance with a certain standard. It is a lack or change of details without any rationale or indication that it is a deviation from printed standards (since the variations often are not accompanied by written parameters) that dilutes the art is where I have a problem.

 

[dancingalone]

So, my issue is far from performance of minute details in accordance with a certain standard. It is a lack or change of details without any rationale or indication that it is a deviation from printed standards (since the variations often are not accompanied by written parameters) that dilutes the art is where I have a problem.

I never learned Se Jong so I don't understand for myself what the real impact is of adding that turn, but I do recall the thread you refer to.

Using either of your examples though does it matter? As long as the new 'fork' of the pattern is performed well and with understanding on what the movements mean, I don't see any real downside to the changes. Documentation such as books are invaluable to transmitting an image of the system as it existed at one point in time. One can learn a lot from reading a book or viewing a martial arts video after all. But all they are is a resource and they come after live instruction with one's teacher.

I don't see it as dilution. There are entire generations of TKD instructors who have learned the Choi forms perhaps in a different form than described in General Choi's books. They're doing their own thing and I don't necessarily believe their system suffers for it.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I never learned Se Jong so I don't understand for myself what the real impact is of adding that turn, but I do recall the thread you refer to.

Using either of your examples though does it matter? As long as the new 'fork' of the pattern is performed well and with understanding on what the movements mean,.

You have highlighted the issue.
1. People do stuff without understanding what they are doing. How do i know, I ask them! That's the real impact.
2. Does it matter? Certainly, because although they may know what they are doing they have no idea what they left out.

This is like saying well, they learn 20 letters of the alphabet and seem to be doing great because tey can communicate their intent just fine phoneticaly. Yet, this dilutes the language.

Further, when I have visitors and see them doing things differently (And I am not referring to sine wave or lack thereof) I ask why they do things a certain way. (Note: I only ask this typicaly of first Dans or higher) The answers are often as follows:
A. Because the instructor said so.
B. They have no idea
C. The reason is.... and a simple demonstration shows the reason makes no sense.
I do not consider this as being done well irrespective of power, balance, speed etc.
Further, I do not presume to tell them what to think, I am telling them to think.
Now, if they followed the text, (any text) I could simply say they need to look at the book. Certainly reasoneable minds could agree that they may not like particular applications shown as examples by General Choi, but at least he has them.
Further, I agree with him that the most important training secret is knowing the purpose and application of the technique.

 

[Attitude]

John Chung - Nephew of Jhoon Rhee and world champion Tae Kwon Do forms and fighting competitor.

TKD Dragon on youtube Tkd Dragon

Eric San Jose - National forms champion MasterEricSanJose

 

[skribs]

Holy necro post, batman!

 

[Alan Smithee]

Wasn't too hard to find

 

[RTKDCMB]

Old post: https://notesonaspanishvalley.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/old-post3-15-3-13.jpg

 

[Earl Weiss]

Wasn't too hard to find

The video highlights an issue when the practitioner (apparently) does not follow the standards set forth by General Choi. The observer has no way of knowing, without more information whether the practitioner knows any standard, is following that standard or is simply not performing to the standard. In this example the top of Fist level in the middle inner forearm block is specified by General Choi is even with the top of the shoulder. Do they know a different standard? Are they following that standard? No way to tell.

 

[Attitude]

The video highlights an issue when the practitioner (apparently) does not follow the standards set forth by General Choi. The observer has no way of knowing, without more information whether the practitioner knows any standard, is following that standard or is simply not performing to the standard. In this example the top of Fist level in the middle inner forearm block is specified by General Choi is even with the top of the shoulder. Do they know a different standard? Are they following that standard? No way to tell.

The standard set by General Choi's teacher: Gichin Funakoshi - No Sine Wave.

 

[Earl Weiss]

The standard set by General Choi's teacher: Gichin Funakoshi - No Sine Wave.

.

Funakoshi was but one of the people from whom General Choi learned and ignores the development of TKD as a system. When he recruited top Martial Art Talent for the 29th infantry division and used them to develop and later teach his system he drew upon their collective knowledge as well. The Chinese invented rockets. But the Germans took rocketry to new level, and the USA put a man on the moon. Thank heaven they didn't feel obliged to follow the Chinese standard, but built upon it and progressed

 

[Dirty Dog]

The Chinese invented rockets. But the Germans took rocketry to new level, and the USA put a man on the moon. Thank heaven they didn't feel obliged to follow the Chinese standard, but built upon it and progressed

I dunno... there have been a few launches that resembled Chinese rockets..... Unintentionally, to be sure, but still...

 

[Attitude]

Tae Kwon Do forms developed and standardized by Jhoon Rhee (Korean military veteran), God Bless America - No sine wave.