Palgwe forms

ralphmcpherson

Senior Master
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
2,200
Reaction score
48
Location
australia
Im just wondering if anyone else here trains at a club that uses them. I train in australia at a very self defence related tkd club and we dont use the taeguek forms but instead use palgwe 1 through 8 as our coloured belt forms then koryo as black belt form. Is there a big difference between the palgwe and taeguek forms? If so , what are the main differnces , which ones are older/harder etc.?
 

dortiz

Black Belt
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
667
Reaction score
23
Location
Northern VA
The pawlge are older. They were the first set by the unified kwans as the new Kukkiwon. Shortly after, maybe Less then 5 years the last kwans joined. They re did the forms including their input and rolled out the Taegeuks. Funny thing is many Masters came here in the first wave during that small window and therefore kept teaching them . Remember back then it took 4 months via snail mail to communicate back home.
For a while the Kukkiwon allowed either. Now only the Tae geuks are on the site and in material. I fear some older Masters still send in the paperwork anyway but if that student visits the kukkiwon or their events it would look sad since the pawgles are obsolete. That a direct fact per top folks like Hae Man Park. I think this is why the Kukkiwons doing more poomse seminars and testing here in the US and abroad.
 

IcemanSK

El Conquistador nim!
MT Mentor
MTS Alumni
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
6,482
Reaction score
180
Location
Los Angeles, CA
First of all, welcome to Martial Talk.

I don't do the Pal Gwe's in my current school, but I did years ago in my first school. The difference, as I see them, is the Pal Gwe's have deeper stances (the Tae Guek's have a lot of walking stances in the early forms) & more complicated techniques. My preference is for the Pal Gwe's. To me, the Tae Guek's don't get interesting until TG Yuk Jang.

That's my $.02
 
OP
R

ralphmcpherson

Senior Master
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
2,200
Reaction score
48
Location
australia
Thanks for the replys. I personally really like the palgwe forms and have learnt a lot from them. My club ceased to be affiliated with the wtf years ago and that must be the reason we are still doing them. My instructor prefers the palgwe forms because of the deep stances and says there is some good preparation in them for self defence moves and we regularly relate back to the palgwe forms when doing our self defence. In saying all that , Ive never seen or done the taeguek forms so I know very little about them.
 

troubleenuf

Blue Belt
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
298
Reaction score
3
We currently do the Palgwe's but are in the process of changing to the Taeguek's.
Depending upon who you listen to and who claims to have what inside info the Palgwes were first (dosnt seem to be a conflict with this). The Taegueks were (according to my instructor and several others) introduced to teach to the children (some say to replace the palgwes). After a while some thought teaching two separate forms was to much so they started teaching Taegueks to both adults and children. Soon that became the norm. Now, this is my opinion, when you are teaching something to adults you cant tell them they are learning childrens forms so they instead told them they were learning forms ment to replace the Palqwes. Thus childrens forms with a "new theory" of replacing old forms. If that makes sense?!!!
Anyway, I still like the Palgues WAY better. But then Ive been doing them for 30 years. The "theory" in the Taegueks just dosnt make sense with allot of blocking motions going against the natural body movement. But since it is becoming the "norm" for competition to do the Taegueks we are changing over.
By the way... I have never seen anything come out of the Kukkiwon that said you couldnt use the Palgues. They do however only do seminars and teach the Taegueks anymore. But their books still have the Palgues in them!
 

goingd

Purple Belt
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
322
Reaction score
5
Location
So Cal
We do the Palgwe and the Taegeuk forms. I would prefer to keep it to one set, but they both have their advantages. They have many of the same techniques, and some that the other does not. The Taegeuk poomse were designed to be better structured.
 

Manny

Senior Master
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
2,563
Reaction score
125
Location
Veracruz,Mexico
Back in the 80's we did in Jido Kwan the palgwes, I remeber I learned the 8 palgwes and the year I have to do my black belt I was not elegible to do it, it was december 1986, sambunim told me I wasn't ready for the BB and he wanted to me to wait one year. In the first third of 1987 my dojang change the palgew patter forms to the Teaguk patters and I had top memorice the new ptters of poomsae it was hard but did it and in december of 1987 I did my BB test and passed very very good.

I haven't did palgwes since 1986 but as I recall I love them more than taeguks, why? very simple palgwes for me are more martial art oriented, the stances were depper and the movements very beautiful, Teaguks are more simpler and not as tasty as palgwes.

Manny
 

Dirty Dog

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
21,673
Reaction score
7,601
Location
Pueblo West, CO
It's all a matter of evolution. When I first trained it was in ITF using the Chang Hon forms. In the early-mid 70's, those got changed to use the sine wave technique. I quit training in the erly 80's.

Now I train in a dojang that is WTF affiliated. You might expect that being a WTF school, we would do the taegeuk forms. We do not. Sabumnim trained under Master Bobby Kim and learned the palgwe forms and thus that is what he teaches. The senior student, who passed his 4th dan test last summer, does teach the taegeuk forms to any who are interested in learning them, but that is a fairly small group.

Since I've started over, I set myself the goal of relearning the Chang Hon forms at the same time that I learn both the palgwe and taegeuk forms. The taegeuk forms do seem the simplest of the three. I find the idea that they were developed as childrens forms credible, as well as the idea that they were an effort to distance the 'style' of TKD forms from those of karate.

Personally, I prefer the palgwe and Chang Hon forms over the taegeuk.
 

dortiz

Black Belt
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
667
Reaction score
23
Location
Northern VA
" I have never seen anything come out of the Kukkiwon that said you couldnt use the Palgues. They do however only do seminars and teach the Taegueks anymore. But their books still have the Palgues in them! "

Actually, the new two book version of the Kukkiwon text book has removed them. So has the official DVD set and the website. The Kukkiwon requirements for poomse are on the website as well and do not include them as an alternate. Can you do them sure, are they part of the official program today, no. If you use an old reference guide and dont look at updated resources then yes, evertime you open your book they will still be there ; )

Dave O.
 

Miles

Senior Master
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
2,254
Reaction score
55
Location
Metro-Detroit
First I learned the Chang Hon, then the Palgwe series, then the Taegueks series. Along the way, I learned the Pyung-ahns, Bassai, and Naihanchi too.

I teach only the Taegueks since that is what is required by the KKW. I've thought about teaching the Palgwe series since I require my black belts to referee and you see a Palgwe poomsae every once in awhile.

Around here there are not too many folks who teach both sets. All of the old-timers did the Palgwe series, but most everyone has dropped them in favor of the Taegueks.

I find the Taeguek poomsae challenging in a different manner than the Palgwe series. For instance, in TG4, you have to kick and then return your kicking leg to the original stance (back stance/dwi kubi). That concept is not present in the Palgwes. There is a lot of thought in the Taegueks but many look at them as simple poomsae. I guess it just depends on how hard you look.
 

KELLYG

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
717
Reaction score
21
Location
North Carolina
We practice both palgwe and taeguek forms. The taeguek forms are taught to colored belts after black belt you learn palgwe forms. I like both sets of forms but the palgwe forms seem to be more complicated but there seem to be more variation in stances with taeguek.
 

ATC

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
2,664
Reaction score
70
Location
San Jose
Like Kellyg, we do them both. As a ref and judge at local tournaments we have to know both because both are performed. But we don't learn the Palgwes until BB. However Palgwe forms are not used at USAT events.
 
OP
R

ralphmcpherson

Senior Master
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
2,200
Reaction score
48
Location
australia
Thanks for the feedback guys. I havent seen much of the taeguek forms but it does seem to me that the palgwe forms seem a bit more difficult , but that may be that I had to learn them all as a coloured belt and there are some tricky bits. Im thinking of possibly trying to learn the taeguek forms (even though my club doesnt require that I know them) and was wondering weather you guys think that as a black belt I could teach them to myself or weather I would need the advice and instruction from someone who knows them well.
 

Red Menace

Yellow Belt
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
24
Reaction score
1
Yes you can pick them up. At my school we learn Palgwe forms as colored belts and then we start learning Taeguks at black belt so that we are up on what other schools are doing at tournaments etc. I know the first 5 Taeguk forms and in my very biased opinion the first few are pretty lame. I really hate the walking stances. I'm assuming those walking stances are there for newer students to have an easier time doing their forms, but I really dislike them after years of forward stances and such.
 

sadantkd

Orange Belt
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
88
Reaction score
1
I don't know why people think walking stances are there just to make it easier. If that were the case, there wouldn't be any front stances at all. The walking stance is there because it's a natural position from whic you would execute techniques in a real self defense scenario. I know all the palgwes and all the taegeuks, and when I learned the taegeuks, I thought they were much more practical than the palgwes I had been doing for years.
 

Miles

Senior Master
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
2,254
Reaction score
55
Location
Metro-Detroit
I don't know why people think walking stances are there just to make it easier. If that were the case, there wouldn't be any front stances at all. The walking stance is there because it's a natural position from whic you would execute techniques in a real self defense scenario.

This is off-topic but it seems to come up all the time when the Taeguek series is discussed, the dreaded walking stance.....

The walking stance is actually the more traditional stance (compared to the front/forward inflection stance-ahp kubi seogi). Take a look at Shoshin Nagamine's book, "The Essence of Okinawan Karate." GM Nagamine is seen doing the Pinan/Pyung-Ahn series utilizing the dreaded walking stance. As Sadantkd points out, it is not just to make things easier (I personally think this is where the idea that the Taegueks were children's poomsae), but to be very practical.
 

rmclain

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
538
Reaction score
17
Location
Arlington, Texas
I've always heard that the Okinawan stances were actually more like walking stance. In 2006, I spent a month living in Okinawa to specifically research karate in Okinawa. While I didn't even come close to visiting all of the dojos, I never witnessed anyone doing a walking stance when training. So, I don't quite know what to think now.

R. McLain


This is off-topic but it seems to come up all the time when the Taeguek series is discussed, the dreaded walking stance.....

The walking stance is actually the more traditional stance (compared to the front/forward inflection stance-ahp kubi seogi). Take a look at Shoshin Nagamine's book, "The Essence of Okinawan Karate." GM Nagamine is seen doing the Pinan/Pyung-Ahn series utilizing the dreaded walking stance. As Sadantkd points out, it is not just to make things easier (I personally think this is where the idea that the Taegueks were children's poomsae), but to be very practical.
 

dancingalone

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
5,322
Reaction score
280
This is off-topic but it seems to come up all the time when the Taeguek series is discussed, the dreaded walking stance.....

The walking stance is actually the more traditional stance (compared to the front/forward inflection stance-ahp kubi seogi). Take a look at Shoshin Nagamine's book, "The Essence of Okinawan Karate." GM Nagamine is seen doing the Pinan/Pyung-Ahn series utilizing the dreaded walking stance. As Sadantkd points out, it is not just to make things easier (I personally think this is where the idea that the Taegueks were children's poomsae), but to be very practical.

Not much point in claiming the connection to Okinawan karate if you don't practice the characteristic 'lean' forward on those short stances...Just my opinion, but I don't believe the TKD walking stance is influenced by Okinawan systems at all. It's just that kicking is quicker and easier to perform from a high stance, so there you have it.
 

d1jinx

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
1,390
Reaction score
17
Location
all-ova
The walking stance was used because it came from a "natural" position. Had no bearing on adaptation from another style. It is a common/natural stance. all human kind does it (in some sort of effect or not)...

TKD tries to be more practicle, no one walks around in long forward stances or deep back stances. I think you guys re looking TOO deeply into it. It was designed that way to be more natural.
 

Red Menace

Yellow Belt
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
24
Reaction score
1
I appreciate what everyone is saying, and certainly a walking stance is more natural than a long forward forward stance but if the goal was practicality, wouldn't the best choice be a more natural fighting stance? Walking stances as I have been taught them actually feel kind of akward to me, with one leg out a little bit and both feet pointed foward. I wouldn't stand that way naturally and I wouldn't fight that way naturally either.
 
Top