Curricla old and new, anyone practice both?

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
270
Location
Olney, Maryland
Glenn brought up an interesting point in another thread today, suggesting to keep arts completely separate when teaching and training. I am curious whether there are any MTer's here that come from the older era curricula that also practice Kukki TKD. Do you keep them completely separate? Do you integrate?

I can see value in keeping them completely separate, but I'm curious if anyone here teaches both the older curriculum and modern KKW TKD and how they do so.
The big question for me, not being familiar with the MDK curriculum that you teach, is how different in execution is it from KKW taekwondo?

In other words, if common techniques, such as stances, kicks, and hand techniques, are performed in the same manner, I'm not sure that you would need to separate them. You'd definitely have more forms, but from what I've seen there are karate ryu that have more forms than KKW TKD already, and some KKW schools that teach both Palgwe and Taegeuk pumse, which essentially doubles the geub level forms.

It is your school, not the school down the road, and having both in one curriculum would be something that makes your school different from the one down the road. It also maintains a visible link to your school's kwan roots.
 

Dirty Dog

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
21,097
Reaction score
7,294
Location
Pueblo West, CO
The big question for me, not being familiar with the MDK curriculum that you teach, is how different in execution is it from KKW taekwondo?

In other words, if common techniques, such as stances, kicks, and hand techniques, are performed in the same manner, I'm not sure that you would need to separate them. You'd definitely have more forms, but from what I've seen there are karate ryu that have more forms than KKW TKD already, and some KKW schools that teach both Palgwe and Taegeuk pumse, which essentially doubles the geub level forms.

It is your school, not the school down the road, and having both in one curriculum would be something that makes your school different from the one down the road. It also maintains a visible link to your school's kwan roots.

The differences are fairly small, but still significant. As one example, ap kubi is longer, wider and deeper in the MDK curriculum.
 
OP
SahBumNimRush

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,814
Reaction score
175
Location
USA
I am not the head instructor of a school, I just learned what my instructor taught to me. To be honest, what I learned was traditional Moo Duk Kwan Taekwondo in almost every way shape and form, other than KKW forms in addition to the MDK forms. All of our stances are low to the ground, we have very long, strong chambers for our techniques. Every technique we use emphasizes power. We do not really throw multiple kicks or fancy flying kicks. We do not spar under the WTF ruleset. Hell, we don't even wear the V-neck dobak. However, my school offers rank through Kukkiwon and therefore I chose to receive rank because it allows me the ability to keep my rank if i train in different schools, which has already come in handy.

While I was us at college I trained at a pure Kukki Taekwondo school and experienced the style for the first time in its pure form. Honestly, there were a few modifications I had to make to some techniques, and the school emphasized kicks much more than my MDK school, which uses more punches. The sparring we did was under the WTF ruleset and the kicks they threw were extremely fast and always emphasized multiple kicks or being in a position to throw multiple kicks. Although the two schools were different, it was only slight changes I needed to make and the schools placed emphasis in different areas. All in all, I feel like I became a much better TKD practitioner because I was exposed to both traditional MDK and Kukki Taekwondo and I now have multiple points of view from which to view my training.

Thank you very much for your reply, this is what I was hoping to hear; that training in both were complimentary to one another and that it was possible!
 
OP
SahBumNimRush

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,814
Reaction score
175
Location
USA
In my experience, these minor differences aren't so minor in practice. If you've spent any length of time performing techniques/stances/poomse in a particular way it's a real struggle to do them differently. Things that were automatic aren't automatic any more. When I transitioned to the Kukkiwon poomse I felt like a white belt again. Even though the differences seem minor, the philosophy or reasoning behind the technique or stance is different. So when I switched, I switched. I'm sure integration can be done, but it made more sense to me to just change it and be done with it. I feel like if I had tried to practice both (especially in regard to poomse) that I would have ended up with some kind of hybrid method of my own making. At that point I would have been doing things wrong from either standpoint.

I know we have had students come from other styles of TKD and Karate, and their "minor" differences in technique were very hard to change due to muscle memory. Having practiced MDK TKD for 26 years, I'm sure it would be difficult. If I undertake learning the curriculum of Kukki TKD, I would want to invest a great deal of time learning it as a whole, my intention is not to add on my MDK TKD to it. Atleast not until I felt that I had a solid foundation in Kukki TKD.. .
 
OP
SahBumNimRush

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,814
Reaction score
175
Location
USA
P.S. I realize that the original question is in regard to old versus new curriculum in what many would consider the same art. However, if the differences are substantial, technically and/or philosophically, they could be considered different arts or different "sub-arts" (like "subcultures") and their differences would/could still pose challenges for the development of automaticity. Also, until one has developed a high level of mastery in a particular martial art (or new curriculum), he or she will be unable to fully recognize the differences between it and another art (or old curriculum). So, it is very hard for any practitioner new to the study of a second art (or to the study of a newer curriculum) to be able to gauge the wisdom/effectiveness/impact of studying the old along with the new. We don't know what we don't know. And, there may be much more to the new art (or new curriculum) than meets the eye. This is exactly what I am experiencing as I bring my Taekwondo practice into closer alignment with Kukkiwon standards.

Cynthia

Yes, I agree. I would have to commit to learning the new curriculum with as clean of a slate and as open of a mind as I possibly could.
 
OP
SahBumNimRush

SahBumNimRush

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
1,814
Reaction score
175
Location
USA
The big question for me, not being familiar with the MDK curriculum that you teach, is how different in execution is it from KKW taekwondo?

In other words, if common techniques, such as stances, kicks, and hand techniques, are performed in the same manner, I'm not sure that you would need to separate them. You'd definitely have more forms, but from what I've seen there are karate ryu that have more forms than KKW TKD already, and some KKW schools that teach both Palgwe and Taegeuk pumse, which essentially doubles the geub level forms.

It is your school, not the school down the road, and having both in one curriculum would be something that makes your school different from the one down the road. It also maintains a visible link to your school's kwan roots.

Having very little knowledge of what the exact Kukki standard of technique is, I'll offer a recent video (highlight reel of my school competing at my KJN's tournament) so you could be the judge:

the first minute and a half is me performing Kang Song Kun.

I agree that providing both would certainly set me apart from the school down the road. Especially since there is no KKW school in our area.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Daniel Sullivan

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
6,472
Reaction score
270
Location
Olney, Maryland
Having very little knowledge of what the exact Kukki standard of technique is, I'll offer a recent video (highlight reel of my school competing at my KJN's tournament) so you could be the judge:

the first minute and a half is me performing Kang Song Kun.

I agree that providing both would certainly set me apart from the school down the road. Especially since there is no KKW school in our area.
Edit again; it comes up with a still but will not play.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dirty Dog

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
21,097
Reaction score
7,294
Location
Pueblo West, CO
Thank you very much for your reply, this is what I was hoping to hear; that training in both were complimentary to one another and that it was possible!

Of course it's possible. But it's not easy. In some ways, I think it's easier to practice totally different arts, as opposed to closely related arts. Shifting from the "L" backstance of TKD to the "T" of Aikdo is easier, to my mind, than shifting between the wide, long, low MDK ap kubi to the KKW standard.
 

MAist25

Blue Belt
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
294
Reaction score
19
Location
Long Island, NY
Of course it's possible. But it's not easy. In some ways, I think it's easier to practice totally different arts, as opposed to closely related arts. Shifting from the "L" backstance of TKD to the "T" of Aikdo is easier, to my mind, than shifting between the wide, long, low MDK ap kubi to the KKW standard.

Ehh I don't really think so. In my opinion, you aren't really learning too many "new" techniques if you train in MDK and switch to Kukki TKD for example, you just learn different ways of doing the same technique. Just my opinion though. I also felt in my experience that it helped me a lot as a primarily stand-up fighter to train in both "styles". I felt myself using a lot of my more traditional MDK techniques and stances at my Kukki TKD school and using a lot of my Kukki TKD techniques at my MDK school when we sparred because I was able to modify my style to something that confused my opponents who weren't used to seeing a different "style" of fighting.
 

Dirty Dog

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
21,097
Reaction score
7,294
Location
Pueblo West, CO
Ehh I don't really think so. In my opinion, you aren't really learning too many "new" techniques if you train in MDK and switch to Kukki TKD for example, you just learn different ways of doing the same technique. Just my opinion though. I also felt in my experience that it helped me a lot as a primarily stand-up fighter to train in both "styles". I felt myself using a lot of my more traditional MDK techniques and stances at my Kukki TKD school and using a lot of my Kukki TKD techniques at my MDK school when we sparred because I was able to modify my style to something that confused my opponents who weren't used to seeing a different "style" of fighting.

I don't disagree at all with what you're saying. I don't think there are any new techniques when swapping MDK and KKW standards. But the mindset is equally similar, which makes it more difficult (for me) to keep the standards straight. If I don't stay focused, I'll swap between Palgwe 8 and Taegeuk 5, simply because the opening moves are identical.
Switching to a totally different system (for me) also changes my mindset. Likewise, if the ruleset allows joint locks/throws/pressure points then it's certainly going to confuse an opponent who is accustomed strictly to the too sul techniques taught in some TKD schools.

For me, it's as much the mindset as the physical change.
 

MAist25

Blue Belt
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
294
Reaction score
19
Location
Long Island, NY
Ok yea, I definitely agree that things like forms get confusing when you are training in 2 very similar styles. Thats why the 2 systems of TKD I practice at my main school aren't separated. If they were separated I feel like I would lose out on the overall experience of training. I am not trying to get good at 2 separate systems of martial arts, I am trying to get good at Taekwondo. Whether it is MDK TKD or Kukki TKD or if I ever train in another variation of Taekwondo, its still Taekwondo. I do not believe in keeping things separate because it limits you as a martial artist, I just mold everything together into my own personal style of fighting. I need my techniques to flow naturally in case I ever really need to use them. I can't think, "hmm should I use my MDK roundhouse kick or my KKW roundhouse kick?", I just need to be able to throw it fast and hard.

However, although I believe in taking what is useful and making it your own, I do think it is important to understand where the technique came from. I know how to throw the traditional MDK roundhouse kick and I know how to throw the KKW roundhouse kick. I know which is which, but I make them both mine. It's all Taekwondo, and it's all my own style. I use what works best for me, regardless of where it comes from.
 
Top