Study Groups

[skribs]

I find myself in this quandary more and more. Do I do a form the way I was taught or try to conform to the new ways? I lean hard toward the former. Especially when I can make a valid argument as to why one way works better or has more purpose than the other.

Create your own form, which takes the elements of Koryo that you like, and has a couple of your own things thrown in. Then train the Kukkiwon version of the current form. Train one for compliance* and train one for functionality.

*When I say "compliance", I mean compliance in the bureaucratic sense, not compliance in the martial sense.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I find myself in this quandary more and more. Do I do a form the way I was taught or try to conform to the new ways? I lean hard toward the former. Especially when I can make a valid argument as to why one way works better or has more purpose than the other.

My solution was to do both. I trained and taught the for as it was taught, but I also train my interpretation of what's really going on. I add application movement to my version of the form, but I don't teach it outside my family.

 

[Deleted member 34973]

For those students who have organized study groups to meet outside of normal class times, did you have a practice routine? Just pick things to drill? How did that work for you?

I'm starting a study group with the other 3rd degree black belts at my school, and we have a few ideas for a study plan, but I'm curious to hear other opinions.

I belonged to one once, a lot of times we would really fine tune the basics. Whether they were drills, kata or combat.

It also involved, experimenting with those within the group, interpretation of the techniques. The differing views and discussing them, along with trying to apply the various, viewpoints, was always one of my favorite workouts within the group.

 

[KenpoMaster805]

I didnt have no study group i practice by my self

 

[wooden man]

My study group consists of two, me and my dummy - always ready and never too tired to train !

 

[Dirty Dog]

I find myself in this quandary more and more. Do I do a form the way I was taught or try to conform to the new ways? I lean hard toward the former. Especially when I can make a valid argument as to why one way works better or has more purpose than the other.

The Kukkiwon will tell you that there is no "old way" or "new way" but rather it's simply a case of people learning the forms incorrectly and passing on those "mistakes" to their own students.
The elbow strike as shown could target anything from the solar plexus to the temple, depending. Hell, if your target is really tall and you're short, it could be aimed at the groin. The point of the technique in poomsae is to teach you how to deliver the strike, not to target a specific point.

 

[skribs]

The Kukkiwon will tell you that there is no "old way" or "new way" but rather it's simply a case of people learning the forms incorrectly and passing on those "mistakes" to their own students.
The elbow strike as shown could target anything from the solar plexus to the temple, depending. Hell, if your target is really tall and you're short, it could be aimed at the groin. The point of the technique in poomsae is to teach you how to deliver the strike, not to target a specific point.

Is that propoganda or what actually happened?

 

[Jaeimseu]

Is that propoganda or what actually happened?

It depends, but in my personal experience that’s very often the case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dvcochran]

The Kukkiwon will tell you that there is no "old way" or "new way" but rather it's simply a case of people learning the forms incorrectly and passing on those "mistakes" to their own students.
The elbow strike as shown could target anything from the solar plexus to the temple, depending. Hell, if your target is really tall and you're short, it could be aimed at the groin. The point of the technique in poomsae is to teach you how to deliver the strike, not to target a specific point.

True enough, but I have a hard time seeing any elbow delivered from a horse stance as a head level strike. The differences in a palm down front stance elbow, either with the lead or reverse hand, and a palm up horse stance elbow are many. Very different strikes using a different part of the elbow. The best example I can think of is a solar plexus strike (palm down) vs. a kidney strike (palm up).
I watched several videos of the Kukkiwon "version" and you are correct, there is no consistency in the target area.
I was taught the top line of Koryo as very long/wide stances. The back stance on the pressing block before the elbow is very deep and the press is out over the knee.
I am not video friendly but will try to find some TSD/MDK references to the way I learned it when I get back in TN.

 

[skribs]

It depends, but in my personal experience that’s very often the case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which one?

True enough, but I have a hard time seeing any elbow delivered from a horse stance as a head level strike. The differences in a palm down front stance elbow, either with the lead or reverse hand, and a palm up horse stance elbow are many. Very different strikes using a different part of the elbow. The best example I can think of is a solar plexus strike (palm down) vs. a kidney strike (palm up).
I watched several videos of the Kukkiwon "version" and you are correct, there is no consistency in the target area.
I was taught the top line of Koryo as very long/wide stances. The back stance on the pressing block before the elbow is very deep and the press is out over the knee.
I am not video friendly but will try to find some TSD/MDK references to the way I learned it when I get back in TN.

Depends on your height and the height of your target.

The Koryo elbow you are referring to is palm-down. That elbow is going to be higher.

 

[dvcochran]

Which one?



Depends on your height and the height of your target.

The Koryo elbow you are referring to is palm-down. That elbow is going to be higher.

Ok. But I have a hard time in a form with specific movements not being specific about a striking area. Ah the joys of the "31onderful flavors" TKD.
My OCD kicking in I suppose. No I am not really.

 

[Jaeimseu]

Which one?

I’ve seen lots of people who were taught incorrectly and were told, “Oh, Kukkiwon keeps changing things.”




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[skribs]

Ok. But I have a hard time in a form with specific movements not being specific about a striking area. Ah the joys of TKD. My OCD kicking in I suppose. No I am not really.

Have you seen my threads on the subject in the TKD forum?

I've come to the conclusion that the TKD forms are more about aesthetics and exercise, than direct practical application. Not that they're useless, but that sometimes you need to smudge up the movements from how they work in the forms to how they would work in a real fight.

 

[skribs]

I’ve seen lots of people who were taught incorrectly and were told, “Oh, Kukkiwon keeps changing things.”

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think this may be a "little of column A, little of column B" type of thing. Because I've heard in the past (before I got to my school) that our students would go to tournaments, and one year they'd do the forms the same as all the other schools, and then year by year the other schools would do them slightly different, to the point where we would get disqualified for doing outdated versions.

The two conclusions I can draw from that are:

1. All of the schools in the area learned it wrong the same way on their own
2. Kukkiwon is changing things

But there are people at my school who say "he changed it" regarding some of the test requirements of my Master, when really they just remembered wrong. So I do see both sides of it.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Is that propoganda or what actually happened?

I don't see any reason to think the people who developed the forms are lying.
The new forms were developed. They would then be taught to literally thousands of people at seminars and such. Those people would inevitably make small errors (like palm up vs palm down on an elbow strike) and pass those things on.

True enough, but I have a hard time seeing any elbow delivered from a horse stance as a head level strike.

Depends how tall the other person is, and where their head is currently situated. A low kick can target the head, if you've knocked your opponent down.
But, again, the point is to practice the strike and the stance. You really shouldn't even be linking the strike and stance in your head. Because you're learning how to do a horizontal elbow strike. Not a horizontal elbow strike in horse stance. If it makes you happy to imagine striking a specific target, feel free. But the form itself doesn't specify a target on any strike.

I was taught the top line of Koryo as very long/wide stances.

And that should be a BIG hint that you were taught incorrectly (by KKW standards, and since they're the ones who developed the form...). The KKW doesn't do very long/wide stances. That's a holdover from the MDK influence.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I don't see any reason to think the people who developed the forms are lying.
The new forms were developed. They would then be taught to literally thousands of people at seminars and such. Those people would inevitably make small errors (like palm up vs palm down on an elbow strike) and pass those things on.

Beyond errors, some of them likely just plain didn't like certain parts of the forms. One of the things @skribs said was that they made their stances less deep. I would not be surprised if some instructors learned their stances properly, but decided that they preferred them deeper and changed it on their own.

 

[JowGaWolf]

True enough, but I have a hard time seeing any elbow delivered from a horse stance as a head level strike

It depends on the position of your opponent. An opponent getting off the ground, or one trying to grab for your waist will have their head at elbow level.

Here are some examples. The guy grabbing people around the waist at :29 has his head at elbow height. You can actually see the guy that he grabs take a wider stance. similar to horse stance as he tries to maintain his balance.

Here are some actual strikes

 

[dvcochran]

I don't see any reason to think the people who developed the forms are lying.
The new forms were developed. They would then be taught to literally thousands of people at seminars and such. Those people would inevitably make small errors (like palm up vs palm down on an elbow strike) and pass those things on.



Depends how tall the other person is, and where their head is currently situated. A low kick can target the head, if you've knocked your opponent down.
But, again, the point is to practice the strike and the stance. You really shouldn't even be linking the strike and stance in your head. Because you're learning how to do a horizontal elbow strike. Not a horizontal elbow strike in horse stance. If it makes you happy to imagine striking a specific target, feel free. But the form itself doesn't specify a target on any strike.



And that should be a BIG hint that you were taught incorrectly (by KKW standards, and since they're the ones who developed the form...). The KKW doesn't do very long/wide stances. That's a holdover from the MDK influence.

There were at least three confirmed variants of the form Koryo before the Kukkiwon unification. It is know fact that Kukkiwon did not develop the form, rather made it an amalgamation after agreement for the Kwan leaders. In a word compromise. That is not said to take a stand on which is original or "correct" since it is a meaningless argument.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Beyond errors, some of them likely just plain didn't like certain parts of the forms. One of the things @skribs said was that they made their stances less deep. I would not be surprised if some instructors learned their stances properly, but decided that they preferred them deeper and changed it on their own.

Oh, certainly. Our MDK school uses the longer, wider stances even though we know they're not what the KKW wants. Because we're not doing it for the KKW. For that matter, since this has become about Koryo in particular, I'll say that we've also changed the kiap so that its done on the low arc hand strike, rather than on the last high arc hand.

 

[Dirty Dog]

There were at least three confirmed variants of the form Koryo before the Kukkiwon unification. It is know fact that Kukkiwon did not develop the form, rather made it an amalgamation after agreement for the Kwan leaders. In a word compromise. That is not said to take a stand on which is original or "correct" since it is a meaningless argument.

I'd like to see documentation for this claim. Prior to the unification, the various kwan all taught their own system with their own forms. Since these systems were derived from Shotokan, they were mostly taught using the pinan forms. Those forms were Okinawan-originated. None of the Korean form sets (palgwae, taegeuk, etc) existed until after the unification.
The Palgwae and Yudanja forms were introduced in 1969 (if memory serves - the late-60's at any rate). Koryo was different, and was replaced by the current version 3-4 years later. I believe these were the only two versions of Koryo. Neither existed prior to the unification. Like the palgwae and taegeuk poomsae, the yudanja forms were designed by a committee. It wouldn't be correct to say they were developed by the Kukkiwon, since the KKW didn't exist yet. It would be more accurate to say they were developed by the same people who eventually formed the KKW.