...Grandmaster H. U. Lee was somewhat of a Korean martial arts historian, and he wanted to go back to the classical kicking styles of the earlier arts. As a result, he developed the Songahm (Pine Tree) style, which has an increased emphasis on kicking from White Belt onward.
I know gross generalizations are rarely accurate, but sometimes they're useful. So would you say that ATA-style taekwondo is kinda like Kukkiwon-style taekwondo because of its emphasis on kicking, but alo kinda like ITF-style taekwondo because of its emphasis on self-defense (as opposed to the Kukkiwon-emphasis on sport).
If that's true, I think it's a really useful generalization (IF it's true) because (at least to my mind) it explains why ATA-style is interesting.
I say *if* it's true because I would have though that as General Choi evolved the ITF-style away from being karate-like, ITF would have already picked up a lot more kicking than karate. So I guess the new question in my mind is: is ATA-style more kick-oriented than ITF-style, or are they both about equally kick-oriented nowadays?
Maybe my generalization is too simplistic to be useful. I'm only a Kukkiwon-style person but I find the history and differences between styles interesting. (I read A Killing Art etc. to learn more, for example.)