New anti Sine Wave pattern deliveries on Youtube

[Earl Weiss100]

I would really encourage you to email Mr Yeo Chin Huat and tell him he's doing it wrong.

.

Sir, Since I have no idea what he's doing other than what you state and it seems there are some definite perception and terminology issues I would never consider doing any such thing. Further, if what you say is accurate it seems he has "Deemphasized" the hip twist / turn /jerk, so I might consider that he is correct , and you of course were simply mistaken.

 

[Earl Weiss100]

Then how do you know that he created them?

I just gave an example of Choi rewording Shotokan principles from one punch, one "kill" to one strike, one "victory".

Once again you misstate what I said. I never claimed he "Created" something- only what he applies. General Choi himself clearly states that for any person or country to claim they created Martial Art techniques would be like claiming to have invented the wheel or discovered fire.

 

[Earl Weiss100]

thought perhaps Acronym would like this photo pictured along with General Cho are 2 of the people he posted videos of.

 

[Gerry Seymour10]

His definitions and principles were copy and pasted from Shotokan Karate, including "one punch, one kill" which he changed to "one punch, one victory". The first encyclopedia has him punching a makiwara, etc.

OK, that seems unsurprising. Was there a point to that post?

 

[Gerry Seymour10]

Jerk is not in the punching principles. You are conflating "attack techniques" parameters with punching principles page.

Wait, a punch isn't an attack?

 

[Gerry Seymour10]

Then how do you know that he created them?

I just gave an example of Choi rewording Shotokan principles from one punch, one "kill" to one strike, one "victory".

Very little needs to be created. Mostly, when a new style is codified, it's a reframing and change of emphasis among the principles.

 

[Acronym]

Sir, they were your words - not mine. You change the argument from "Eliminated" to Deemphasizing" which had have put you on the right path - for the wrong reason - but the right path. As I have stated before lots of people (including me) did lots of stuff due to their lineage and when they learned the Chang Hon standard felt it was a change, when in fact it was a correction.

I have not changed my position. Yeo Chin Huat does not take the view that SW should incorporate hip twisting punches at all, but will accept a fraction of it nonetheless.

I will simply refer back to him twisting his hip when replying how he punched before SW. Clearly indicating that he does not twist it anymore.

GM Yeo did not do many demonstrations in the years I trained under him, in case people are wondering why this hasn't been settled.

I do know however that he never mentioned anything about hip twisting my punches when covering SW.

 

[Acronym]

Wait, a punch isn't an attack?

Punching principles had a separate page devoted to kata mechanics(SW) to the one entitled attack techniques.

Mr Weiss chooses to ignore this since it conflicts with his viewpoint.

 

[Acronym]

thought perhaps Acronym would like this photo pictured along with General Cho are 2 of the people he posted videos of.

Sad thing is that Choi might have very well told you one day to hip twist your punches in SW, and another day reject it out loud, just like he did with retracting your hand after punching. Just like he would say that the KKW are imposters one day, and part of the family another day....

 

[Acronym]

Once again you misstate what I said. I never claimed he "Created" something- only what he applies. .

You did use the word "create". I would use the term "implement" . At least until I can identify something not copy and pasted from another system, or at most reworded

Of course none of this really matters to the discussion since you seem to feel your knowledge and ability better qualifies you to define First Degree than General Choi who created the criteria for his system.

 

[Earl Weiss100]

Punching principles had a separate page devoted to kata mechanics(SW) to the one entitled attack techniques.

Mr Weiss chooses to ignore this since it conflicts with his viewpoint.

Sir, Again, you misstate my position. I have ignored nothing . You mistakenly claim the general principles stated for attacks are not part of the principles for punching. It is not one or the other it is all the principles together. Puzzling that you cannot accept this.

 

[Earl Weiss100]

You did use the word "create". I would use the term "implement" . At least until I can identify something not copy and pasted from another system, or at most reworded

Sir, I see your confusion now. . What I said and as you quoted "Once again you misstate what I said. I never claimed he "Created" something- only what he applies. ."

He created the criteria for his system which is what would be a First degree in his system, and how he classified the First Degree. Somehow you feel you can ignore this and classify a first Degree in his system as something else. That Criteria, which at the most basic level includes the patterns required for that rank, the fundamental techniques included therein are his alone, unique to his system along with other aspects defined in what he called "The Cycle of TK-D".

Again it's the criteria, not the techniques that he created and applied. When you create your system you will get to define how you classify first degree.

 

[Acronym]

Sir, Again, you misstate my position. I have ignored nothing . You mistakenly claim the general principles stated for attacks are not part of the principles for punching. It is not one or the other it is all the principles together. Puzzling that you cannot accept this.

You run a rather unique ITF-affiliated school if your students punch mitts the same way they punch in forms. Stance is different, hand position, and yes, rotation,.....

 

[Earl Weiss100]

You run a rather unique ITF-affiliated school if your students punch mitts the same way they punch in forms. Stance is different, hand position, and yes, rotation,.....

Sir, not unique at all . Mitt punching is a free sparring exercise. ITF competitors do not punch in sparring as they do in patterns. Or do you think they do?

 

[Acronym]

Sir, not unique at all . Mitt punching is a free sparring exercise. ITF competitors do not punch in sparring as they do in patterns. Or do you think they do?

That is my point. Attack techniques MAY apply to the punching principle section, and they may not. Punching principles clearly denotes patterns.

 

[Earl Weiss100]

That is my point. Attack techniques MAY apply to the punching principle section, and they may not. Punching principles clearly denotes patterns.

Sir, everyone has a right to an opinion - even erroneous ones.

 

[Tez3]

Wait, a punch isn't an attack?

Probably not when he punches........

 

[Acronym]

Sir, everyone has a right to an opinion - even erroneous ones.

You agree with me that pattern mechanics are distinct from mitts practice. Punching principles is clearly pattern mechanics. This is your problem to solve, not mine.

 

[Gerry Seymour10]

Punching principles had a separate page devoted to kata mechanics(SW) to the one entitled attack techniques.

Mr Weiss chooses to ignore this since it conflicts with his viewpoint.

Many things are in categories that are covered differently. I spend entire classes on concepts and entire other classes on techniques that use those concepts. Them being on different days doesn't at all imply they aren't linked. You're looking for anything that might shore up your position, rather than examining the position to see if it's sound. Can't learn that way.

 

[Gerry Seymour10]

You did use the word "create". I would use the term "implement" . At least until I can identify something not copy and pasted from another system, or at most reworded

He would, in fact, have been the one who determined the criteria. And if he was a smart guy, he'd mostly use the criteria he'd experienced in his own training, adjusting them only where he felt there was an advantage to doing so. You seem to see he willingness to do the smart thing as some sort of lacking.