dancingalone
Grandmaster
Those of you who have studied both of these form sets, do you believe the physical lessons taught in them are similar or different? Just starting some conversation...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Those of you who have studied both of these form sets, do you believe the physical lessons taught in them are similar or different? Just starting some conversation...
Those of you who have studied both of these form sets, do you believe the physical lessons taught in them are similar or different? Just starting some conversation...
The part in your second paragraph regarding rigidity and power in stances sounds like my GM talking. He refused to change to the taegeuks and always goes on about long, deep stances and the strength they build in the legs and his students all fight in longer stances more similar to the tkd from the 50's and 60's you spoke of. In regards to power, we are taught that EVERY strike is to cause maximum damage to the opponent even if its part of a combo and the palgwe forms do resemble this I feel. Scoring points, or talking of scoring points is pretty much taboo where I train. He is not happy when he sees students in shorter stances which is probably why he kept on teaching the palgwes. Im not sure what year they were phased out but he moved to australia in 1974 and has not changed anything from the way he was taught in korea at the time so it may have been later that they phased them out but Im not sure.Forms should be a bit of a guide for the style you're doing. They should include the basics, but from the way the form is performed, you should also see stances and movement. I only did Taekwondo for four years as a competitive collegiate player, but I did learn both Palgwe and Taeguk poomse.
The Palgwe poomse are still practiced by some, but were supposed to be phased out in what, 1971? Someone who is more of a historian on poomse will have to correct me if I'm wrong. I know that officially, the Kukkiwon only recognizes the Taeguk poomse. In the Palgwe poomse, I see more power generated. The focus on technique and rigidity, especially in stances, tells me that the poomse are used to develop strength, technique, and discipline. Strength is the key here. Deeper stances will make your legs stronger. Ask anyone who has done strict JKA Shotokan. This tells me that the strength of a single technique is extremely important. Strong punches, kicks, and blocks are a focus of the style. Dig up really old footage of TKD sparring from the 50s and 60s and you'll see that they fight from deeper stances, and they're trying to knock each other out, not score points.
Now, look at the modern Taeguk poomse. The more popular Olympic TKD got, and the more electronic scoring, and scoring in general started to matter, the higher the walking stance got. The current iteration has you nearly standing straight up. Now, look at the way TKD players fight these days. They fight in higher stances, using mobility and speed rather than strength (not that their kicks aren't strong, that's not what I'm saying at all), and they rely on movement. The Taeguk poomse reflect this. Higher stances for mobility is a big check. You fight the way you practice, and if you do a lot of forms standing in a higher stance, you are sure going to rely on that kind of stance when you fight.
That's just my opinion. Like I said, I only did Taekwondo for four years, which means I'm definitely no expert, and I definitely wasn't alive when they decided to make the change haha.
Well, I know that the taegeuk poomsae each trace out a Chinese character. If I am not mistaken, however, the Palgwe forms do the same.Does anyone think either form set (or individual hyung for that matter) suggest a certain fighting method or philosophy? Or are they just basics strung together? If the first, please explain further.
I agree, but there are certainly schools that do have more of a karate flavor that consider themselves taekwondo and not TSD."If I were going for more of a Korean Karate feel to my studio"
I would go Tang Soo Do since they at least kept the Korean forms. Now that would be Korean Karate.
; )
palgwe forms do incorporate front stance, back stance, horse riding stance and a short front stance (such as in the first line of palgwe 8), so they still do have a good range of stances throughout.Well, I know that the taegeuk poomsae each trace out a Chinese character. If I am not mistaken, however, the Palgwe forms do the same.
1. Kion (Heaven; Beginning of creation of all things in the universe)
2. Tae (lake; Inner hardness and outer gentleness)
3. Yi (fire; Hot & Bright, sense of Justice and ardor for training)
4. Jin (thunder; Great power and dignity)
5. Sohn (wind; Mighty force and calmness according to strength and weakness)
6. Kahm (water; Incessant flow and softness)
7. Kahn (mountain; Pondersity and firmness, wisdom and stability)
8. Kohn (earth; The root and settlement, and also, the beginning and end)
I think that the major difference is that Palgwe forms are more hands oriented, and as has been noted, performed mostly in a long stance and have no walking stances.
Taegeuk forms have more kicks and a greater variety of stances, so they do have a greater dynamism to them in that there is more transition.
I have the Palgwe forms on video and have watched them. I like them, but I also like the Taegeuk poomsae as well. I'm generally not of the opinion that one is superior to the other so much as it is the effective practice of the forms that is more important (to refrain DOrtiz).
If I were going for more of a Korean Karate feel to my studio, I would be more inclined to use the Palgwe forms.
Daniel
I see the substance in what you're saying, in fact I tend to think the same. Why waste the effort of creating the palgwe's if nobody learns them?! They should be reinstatet to official curriculum, just for the History's sake. It's silly how they were the official set only so many years.I'm not of high enough rank nor do I possess the appropriate amount of experience to expertly comment on this particular topic, but at a glance....here's where I come down on it: I say learn and practice both styles of poomse. Could it not be reckoned that there is something to be learned from both? The Palgwe forms seem a bit richer in content....the Taeguk forms seem to be a bit more to the point....and I agree easier to learn. We are taught the Taeguk forms and I love them....but I learn the Palgwe equivalent on my own in order to increase my curriculum.....and perhaps to help preserve that which came before.
Now....am I full of crap or can anyone see something of substance in my thoughts on this matter?
Lots of people learn them.I see the substance in what you're saying, in fact I tend to think the same. Why waste the effort of creating the palgwe's if nobody learns them?!
I see the problem. You think the Kukkiwon is the sum total of Taekwondo, is that right?They should be reinstatet to official curriculum, just for the History's sake.
Because the Kukkiwon considers 1st Dan to be a beginner rank, which is commonly awarded after as little as one year of training. That's their stance, and that is what the Taegeuk poomsae were designed for.I feel also that I get some actual technical learning out of the palgwe. The taegeuks are way too simple. Why everything has to be easy?
Uhh....you know that he "said" that 13 years ago right?I see the substance in what you're saying....