curious

[SahBumNimRush]

According to "Modern History of TKD" even during the first unified promotion examination under the name TKD in 1962, the forms were diverse.

The hyung portion of the examination consisted of the examinees performing two of the following forms of their choice:
Second Dan Hyung:

1. Balhan Hyung Dae
2. Chul Ki E Dan Hyung (Naihanchi E Dan)
3. Naebojin E Dan Hyung (Naihanchi E Dan)
4. Kima E Dan Hyung (Naihanchi #2)
5. Choong Moo Hyung (General Choi form)

Third Dan Hyung:

1. Ship Su Hyung
2. Pal Sae Hyung (Bassai)
3. Yon Bi Hyung (Wanshu)
4. Dan Kwon Hyung (Ch’uan Fa form)
5. No Pae Hyung (Ro Hai)
6. Ge Baek Hyung (General Choi form)
7. Ul Ji Hyung

Fourth Dan Hyung:

1. Chul Ki Sam Dan Hyung (Naihanchi #3)
2. Naebojin Sam Dan Hyung (Naihanchi #3)
3. Kima Sam Dan Hyung (Naihanchi #3)
4. Ja Un Hyung; Jin Soo Hyung
5. Am Hak Hyung (Chinto)
6. Jin Dong Hyung
7. Sam Il Hyung (ITF form)
8. Jang Kwon Hyung (Ch’uan Fa form)

Fifth Dan Hyung:

1. Kong Sang Kun Hyung
2. Kwan Kong Hyung (Kong Sang Kun)
3. Oh Ship Sa Hyung (Moo Duk Kwan form)
4. Ship Sam Hyung (ITF form)
5. Ban Wol Hyung
6. Pal Ki Kwon Hyung (Ch’uan Fa form)

 

[Earl Weiss]

. What was brought here in the 60's and 70's was mostly old school tkd/shotokan/tsd based. It does not represent what is being taught at reputable wtf/kukkiwon tkd schools all over the globe.

Would have been difficult for stuff taught in the 1960's and for most of the 1070's to resemble what is being taught at the KKW since the KKW was not formed until 1972, unless of course it went the other way being that what the KKW did / does resembles what was taught in the 1960's and 1970's.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Well, I for one do not find your statements inaccurate, in so far as they refer to General Choi.

OOPS should have said do not find the statements acurate

 

[Earl Weiss]

I didnt say thats when TKD was founded - I said, that thats when THIS System of it was Founded, or Organisation rather. I perhaps ought to have been more specific.

Color me Dense. To which System or organization do you refer?

 

[Twin Fist]

choi was, arguably one of the biggest thieves. he was a shotokan BB wasnt he?

 

[Earl Weiss]

judo is a drasticly altered JJ, so no, not theft, IMO
Same with akido, IMO

Therein lies the crux of the issue. It is a matter of opinion with regard to when something is drasticaly altered enough to be considered a new system. AFAIAC Kodokan Judo as codified by Kano contains Ju Jitsu techniques which were limited in scope and number in order to facilitate competition. It is this codification, uniformity and in some instances perhaps refinement which sets it apart. Don't see any real difference between what Kano and Funakoshi did with regard to what General Choi did. They were all forthright about the roots of their art.

 

[Cyriacus]

Color me Dense. To which System or organization do you refer?

Rhee TKD in Australia.
And that isnt Jhoon Rhee - Google, My Friend Just be mindful of some of the damn weird website layouts some people have going. I prefer to ignore them. But since Wikipedia isnt up, weird websites will have to do. If its any consolation, theyre outsourced, because we generally dont advertise, save word of mouth and fliers.

 

[Earl Weiss]

choi was, arguably one of the biggest thieves. he was a shotokan BB wasnt he?

If he was a Shotokan BB as is often reported and sometimes disputed. How does this make him any more of a Thief than Kano or Funakoshi. He explicitly disclaims inventing techniques, gives credit to former systems and even includes them in his books. How much more honest about the roots could he be?

 

[SahBumNimRush]

choi was, arguably one of the biggest thieves. he was a shotokan BB wasn't he?

I have little knowledge and no experience with ITF/ General Choi, and there are many more knowledgeable people here on MT that would be better able to answer this.. . But even if he were a bb in Shotokan, the mechanics and movements in Gae-Baek, for example look nothing like Shotokan, or at least as different as Shuri te compared with Shotokan.. .

As a side note, I've never been a fan of the Sine wave movements that General Choi advocated.. .

 

[Twin Fist]

show me where he said "we took shotokan, modified it, and created a new art from it. But at first, thats all it was, shotokan and the kata? mostly shotokan kata i rearranged"

that would be honest.

 

[Twin Fist]

that sine wave crap diodnt exist untill.....what? the last 20 years, maybe 30? it came AFTER the korean government threw choi away with the leftovers and went with the KKW version

so that isnt a good example of how they "created something new".

 

[SahBumNimRush]

that sine wave crap diodnt exist untill.....what? the last 20 years, maybe 30? it came AFTER the korean government threw choi away with the leftovers and went with the KKW version

so that isnt a good example of how they "created something new".

Like I stated before, I'm not very knowledgeable about Choi's ITF, but the sine wave still isn't the only example. The movements, albeit rearranged are still different. Altogether NEW? No, certainly not, but I would say it is as different as the various ryus of karate.

 

[Twin Fist]

it is amazing to me how many people get butthurt over differeing opinions about martial arts. we are supposedly tough guys and gals, and the amount of preperation H flying around here is either sad or funny, i am not sure which

 

[Twin Fist]

Like I stated before, I'm not very knowledgeable about Choi's ITF, but the sine wave still isn't the only example. The movements, albeit rearranged are still different. Altogether NEW? No, certainly not, but I would say it is as different as the various ryus of karate.

i dont disagree

it is differnt

NOW

in 1958? nope

 

[Earl Weiss]

show me where he said "we took shotokan, modified it, and created a new art from it. But at first, thats all it was, shotokan and the kata? mostly shotokan kata i rearranged"

that would be honest.

I will pull out the 1965 Book when I get a chance and get the quote vis a vis the Shorin and Shorei systems which are the roots of Shotokan. He also has the patterns which I believe are in part Shotokan. IS that good enough?

 

[Earl Weiss]

that sine wave crap diodnt exist untill.....what? the last 20 years, maybe 30? it came AFTER the korean government threw choi away with the leftovers and went with the KKW version

so that isnt a good example of how they "created something new".

How about 40 years? The term "Sine Wave" first appears in the 1980 text, but before then we were doing much the same thing whcih involved flexing the knees. In the 1970's we called it "Spring Style" FWIW Mr. Suska from Poland shown in the above video is a tremendous athlete. However, as perofrmed by many from what I call Eastern European countries the sine wave motion is overly exagerated. However, many pattern motions are overly exagerated like pulling the opposite hand all the way to the hip.

 

[Earl Weiss]

i dont disagree

it is differnt

NOW

in 1958? nope

I think you (generic you, not specific you) need to think about how things were performed by many and how they should have been performed for a specific system. . To spread TKD General Choi recruited top talent. Specificaly good athletes who could impress people with their physical skills. Those people had been training in various systems for years or longer before converting to the new system. As one would expect they carried their habits over from those systems. For progeny of Nam Tae Hi, Han Cha Kyo, or Jhoon Rhee you can see the Chung Do Kwan habits which were never changed. In some cases things were purley the invention of a particular instructor that dispursed to their students.

When I had Nam Tae Hi teacgh at my gym he still used Japanese names forsome techniques. A polite inquiry about some of the differences between what he and Han Cha Kyo were doing eleicted a respons about "That was in their brain." or "That was his technique".

 

[Earl Weiss]

it is amazing to me how many people get butthurt over differeing opinions about martial arts. we are supposedly tough guys and gals, and the amount of preperation H flying around here is either sad or funny, i am not sure which

I think it's been an enlightening discussion on many levels. It shows how even today we debate what is or what is not TKD. Some define it very broadly as a Generic term that can apply to anyone who has a link to a Korean who was kicking and punching. Others think it's a specific system. Some might have ideas that fall in between. If you subscribe to the first. Basicaly any Korean Kicking and Punching art, then heck it would be claimed to be 200o years old since I am sure there were some Koreans kicking and punching back then. If you consider it to have been born in 1955 or so, then not so much.

 

[Twin Fist]

as long as they quote the source....

I will pull out the 1965 Book when I get a chance and get the quote vis a vis the Shorin and Shorei systems which are the roots of Shotokan. He also has the patterns which I believe are in part Shotokan. IS that good enough?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

...as I understand it, Shotokan cannot take all of the credit for the 1940's-1960's TSD (precurser to TKD). A few of the pioneers had expertise and rank in Shudokan. Some had training in CMA's as well. Which is why the original kwans practiced forms not found in Shotokan, although many Shotokan forms were practiced.

Master Rush is correct. Shotokan may, or may not take the lion's share as far as foundational principles but other arts such as Shutokan, Shito Ryu etc were in the mix as well. A few Koreans had even earned relatively high Dan ranks in them as well. Since all but two of the modern Ryu in Okinawa trace their lineage back through Anko Itosu Sensei, much of the information would have been similar.

TKD is not, of course a 2000 year old indigenous Korean martial art. The bulk of it is Okinawan/Japanese influenced Karate. Whether or not it was then infused with Taekyon etc is a matter for debate. Regardless, it has over the years retained a bulk of the foundational influences while at the same time it has become a unique art. I see no issue with this as martial arts evolve. Itosu's Shuri Te evolved into Shotokan, Shudokan, Shuri Ryu, Wado Ryu, Shito Ryu etc which in turn evolved (or had a part to play in the formations) into TKD. Nationalistic pride also had a part to play in TKD becoming its own unique entity, and I see no issue with this either. TKD should not be portrayed as something that it is not i.e. it is not a 2000 year old indigenous Korean martial art. If one feels like they can link parts of TKD to older Korean arts then that is fine and it should be stated as such but not used to cover the whole of the art. And I see nothing wrong with proudly stating the roots of TKD through Japan, Okinawa and China as that is factual and historical. Yes, I realize the climate of the times during the formation but politics and martial arts should be kept separate. Karate has a proud and researched lineage, TKD is one of the latest 'children' of that lineage and should be proud of what came before it...went into its development...and what steps it has taken to forge its own identity.

That is my thoughts on it.