Discussion in 'Tae-Kwon-Do' started by Gorilla, Jul 29, 2009.
I wish the new owners the best of luck with that revised policy.
I think it's a good idea to look at the person as a whole. Some 15 year olds may be more technically adept, more positive in attitude, and more constructive in their teaching than some other "adult black belt". Give me the choice betweem those 2 people, and I'd rather learn from the 15 year old.
Seemed serious to me...There are some very good 15 year old BB that know more and may have been training longer than some so called adult BB! The Key word is some!
I'm just funnin' with you guys. (I like the pic of the Joker)
I'll even support your argument.....in ANY dojo that has more than one person teaching, when we, as students, are heading to the dojo, we all think at some point, "I wonder who's teaching class tonight?" Because we all have our druthers. And when we get there, if it's who we prefer, we all give a little fist pump inside.
I don't think that will ever change. I don't think it should.
Okay, thanks for the info! I probably should spend some time studying the history of TKD in more detail at some point, so I'd know these things, haha. I honestly don't know much about different TKD kwans.
6 is really young, yeah. An adult or older kid/teen can learn a Taegeuk form pretty well in 8 weeks if they practice enough, but a 4-5 year old usually needs more like 4-8 months. I just can't see how a kid much younger than 8 could be ready to test for a 1st poom.
This is a translation in to English of the first part of a Korean book on Taekwondo's history and the kwans. It was translated by Puunui and his students, he put it out for public consumption and had no problem with me making a PDF of it.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/478290/From Google Drive/tkdhistory.pdf
That should be a little embarrasing if you are an adult Kukkiwon taekwondo blackbelt? The 10 main taekwondo Kwans didn't officially disband and unite until 1978, so all Kukkiwon taekwondoin have a fairly recent kwan lineage.
I completely disagree, it's not embarrassing it's quite normal.
A lot of the instructors are taught only that there were kwans and that they combined to form Kukkiwon and that they do Kukkiwon Taekwondo (a lot are even told they do WTF Taekwondo). They then pass this on to their students.
It's only the fact that I was interested in learning more that I found out about the kwans, asked my instructor what kwan he was from that I found I have a strong link with Changmookwan. They were only mentioned briefly on the Kukkiwon instructor course during one small part of the history lecture.
Anyway, good on you if you want to know, if you don't then as long as you know you do Kukkiwon Taekwondo, then I'm happy
I tend to agree. kwan lineage is not something taught by all instructors. Heck, I know some instructors who never even utter they're own instructor's name to their students. Out of thin air some instructors seem to have learned our Art. There are a lot of reasons for this. My first master never discussed kwan lineage (even after I asked). He was a Korean-born man who was not, by any means, a chatty person. If he talked at all, he wanted to know more about his students and what was important to us. I pieced together his kwan lineage by what masters he was connected with and then connected the dots.
As far as why some don't talk about their instructors....it's usually due to a strained relationship of some sort. I'm learned to be quite leery of folks who don't talk about their own instructors. Many have the most wonderful stories of their own exploits, but speak badly of others.
I certainly take instruction from this guy.
Jake a real knock-out in Rocky | Whitsunday Times
Because he is a veteran and champion boxer. And I am not.
OK. Maybe embarrasing is too strong a term or misplaced altogether. I often assume adults past 1st dan would want to know more about the martial art they practice and do their own independent study and find their lineage. Also, the kwan issues have been discussed on this boards for long , so I thought the more active MT taekwondo forum members would develop a curiosity to investigate what the fuss is all about.
Here are some references if you're interested:
Taekwondo History - Taekwondo Wiki
Nine Kwans - Taekwondo Wiki
My TKD instructor didn't go into the history of the art. He did speak at great lengths about his instructor, Jong Soo Park. I always loved the stories. Now, though, I kind of wish he had gone more into the history.
Both of my instructors were always very clear about the kwan system, but never really brought up or talked much about kwans. The answer was always effectively "just worry about Kukkiwon and WTF".
Now I have a stronger relationship with my kwan, I spoke to my grandmaster about it, and even arranged for him to sit his 9th Dan at our kwan (and when he was there, the kwanjang showed him some early pictures from the kwan and my grandmaster was in them - with much more hair so they hadn't recognised him).
My opinion on this topic has evolved a lot since I first came to this forum roughly eight years ago.
I view a chodan/ildan as a beginner's degree (in fact, in a chodan, a term used by more than a few TKD schools) literally means 'beginning dan.'
The following does not apply to belt-mills (schools that promote students on a time track in order to maximize the money they make during the students' contract period).
The awarding of a first dan means (or should mean) that the student has attained proficiency in the basic skills of the art and that they have now learned how to learn.
A first dan should not indicate that the individual is a teacher or a junior instructor, though a first dan should be able to lead a partner in drills and should be able to explain things to newer students, regardless of the differences in age between them.
Since children are most often in a childrens class, the dynamic of an eight year old instructing an adult should not come up. Fifteen year olds are generally in adult classes, and a newer adult student should not have any problem being led in a drill or receiving explanation from a fifteen year old black belt.
At the same time, the fifteen year old should not be expected to be able to pulverize an adult just because he or she wears a belt. A class of freshly minted black belts who are all adult ex-military (which is what many of the black belts were in the seventies when TKD was being grown in the US) are going to look like hard edged tough guys/gals because they're adults who are ex military, not because of their belt.
So in short, "no" on one and two (what the professional demeanor of a blackbelt anyway?), yes/no on three (yes, a youth black belt should be able to drill and perform pumse with adults, and should be able to do controlled sparring, but no, a youth black belt should not be expected to go full contact in an adult class for the same reason that flyweight women aren't expected to fight heavyweight men in TKD competitions), "yes" on four and five.
Best post so far on this thread! Well done sir!
That doesn't mean that teachers talk about kwans, even the Korean ones that were training before 1978. I think they generally assume that Americans don't care about that kind of stuff, or their English is poor enough that they don't know how to explain it. The Korean master that I got my 1st and 2nd dans with seemed to feel that way (probably some of each), and he's old enough and been training long enough that he would've probably been at least a 1st poom by 1978. He never said much of anything about TKD history or his own lineage.
As much as anything, it's likely because you're (from what I have seen) pretty much pure KKW TKD. As far as the KKW is concerned, the Kwans are gone, and of no further importance. They've gone so far as to "officially" disband the kwans a few years back.
Separate names with a comma.