Poomse with real attackers

[TKDmel]

Everyone knows what each block, kick or punch is for doing their poomse. I was wondering if anyone has ever done a poomse using others to actually attack at the different attack points of the poomse. Don't know if I'm getting my point across or not. I want to perform my poomse with another person/s attacking when they attack in the form. And does anyone know how many attackers in each form. (palgues or taegueks)

 

[jfarnsworth]

Everyone knows what each block, kick or punch is for doing their poomse. I was wondering if anyone has ever done a poomse using others to actually attack at the different attack points of the poomse. Don't know if I'm getting my point across or not. I want to perform my poomse with another person/s attacking when they attack in the form. And does anyone know how many attackers in each form. (palgues or taegueks)

This brings the best insight into the forms. To really understand & especially get the idea behind the forms I have taught my students to use attackers. Our first form stays on the cross pattern with 2 blocks on each line. I teach them specially how to cover/transition using their minor blocks while the attacker does thier thing. It has yielded the best learning by far. Since our form faces the 4 directions I have an attacker on each line. This way they don't break the flow of the form.

 

[exile]

Everyone knows what each block, kick or punch is for doing their poomse.

I wonder if that's really the case... I for sure have plenty of questions about the realistic bunkai for the hyungs I know. In some cases I some pretty good ideas, based on what look like effective techs that have been proposed for karate kata subcomponents later recycled into TKD forms. In other cases I've done some experimenting on my own, in accordance with various rules for bunkai that people like Abernethy, Kane & Wilder, and Burgar have proposed for kata and which people like Simon O'Neil and Stuart Anslow have developed in detail in their extensions of those rules to TKD hyungs. But I am still in the dark about many aspects of hyung interpretation.

For example, typically a hyung can be decomposed into four or five subsequences, each of which depicts a `complete' fight scenario, from the attacker's original assault to a finishing strike from the defender, where on the best interpretation, all of the assailant's moves are completely forced, and where the movements in the hyung correspond to a sequence of actions—combat moves—by the defender. But not always: in some cases, movement A followed by movement B isn't optimally interpreted as "do move A' followed by move B' " (where A' is the combat app of movement A and B' the app of movement B), but rather, "at this point do move A', or, if you can't do that, do move B' ". In other words, the sequence in the hyung represents two alternative `menu choices', with the second maybe as backup if the first fails (Iain Abernethy gives a nice example of this for some Pinan Shodan movements which are incorporated, move for move, at the beginning of Palgwe Sa-Jang). So a sequences of move A-B-C-D might actually correspond to a sequence of combat movements

(i) A' - B' - C' - D'

while moves W - X - Y - Z might correspond to something like (ii) (please just pretend the dots aren't there, I can't get the spacing to come out right in the output if they're not in there):

(ii)
............X'
........../....\
.......W'.....Z'
..........\..../
............Y'

where you might follow up W' with either X', or, if that's not possible, with Y'—kind of the way the dictionary lists alternative definitions in sequence, with the most common meanings for a word ordered first, then the less common, and so on—and then a common finish Z' in both scenarios. A third possibility is (iii) (ditto about the dots):

(iii)
............X' — Z'
.........../
.......W'
...........\
............Y' — Z"

where Z' corresponds to an effective followup move, based on the movement Z, if you opted for X', and Z" corresponds to an effective followup move, again based on the movement Z, if you opted for Y'.

How is the MAist trying to figure out the combat apps concealed/encoded within the kata/hyungs supposed to know whether, for some series of four moves, we are supposed to interpret them like (i), on the one hand, or (ii), on the other hand, or (iii) on the third hand? This is what I think of as the `parsing problem' for MA pattern analysis. Sometimes it might be the case that all of (i)-(iii) yield viable interpretations. But in other cases that might not be the case. The old method of trial and error is always available, but that leaves you thrashing around experimenting with alternative interpretations that might simply not work, or might work if a certain `hidden move', commonly understood among experienced fighters to always be an option, were applied (e.g., slapping a punch to one side to the other side so the assailant's punching arm becomes vulnerable to a tech via hitike, etc.), or might work if you completely rethought the interpretations of one of the earlier (or later) movements should be.

I don't know about anyone else, but I am still a beginner at this sort of analysis, and I can see that it's going to take me a long time to get good at it.

I was wondering if anyone has ever done a poomse using others to actually attack at the different attack points of the poomse. Don't know if I'm getting my point across or not. I want to perform my poomse with another person/s attacking when they attack in the form. And does anyone know how many attackers in each form. (palgues or taegueks)

I've never yet performed or watched a poomsae which looked like it had the faintest chance against multiple attackers carried out literally. I've always believed that those defense/counterattack sequences to one side, then the other, or in front then turning to face the rear, are either `mirrors' of the movement showing how the fighting apps can be applied to a single attack scenario coming in to either side, or are parts of longer app interpretations in which the turn corresponds to a throw (there are some nice examples of this in the kichos, in Palgwe Sam-Jang and so on). In all cases, the app is based on the idea that you're fighting a single assailant who has accosted you face-to-face. If you have even one attacker who aims a kick to your groin instead of the `middle lunge punch' that the `official' interpretation of the hyung assumes you'll be defending against, it's gonna be lights out for you. And if there are two attackers, and you practice as though one throws an attack, then stands frozen still while you `block' it and advance in a front stance to punch him, while the second opponent waits dutifully behind you till you've decked his mate in the (undefended???) solar plexus and only then comes into action (which you realize is under way, maybe by telepathy, and so turn to counter as per the literal interpretation of the hyung)... you're going to very dead very quickly!

The current group of bleeding-edge kata analysts for the Okinawan/Japanese karate styles are pretty much in universal agreement that the kata were never intended to be instructions on fighting multiple opponents. And those kata are the source of the moves in TKD hyungs, even in the ITF patterns currently attributed (for the most part) to Gen. Choi. So I just don't see that trying to force them to be instructions for handling multiple attackers will yield practical applications.

 

[TKDmel]

So I just don't see that trying to force them to be instructions for handling multiple attackers will yield practical applications.

My aim for using real people, is not so much to teach practical applications for self defense, but rather to give students, esp. kids, a better understanding of how blocks, kicks, etc. should be done and to use more visualization in their forms. I see everyday the students(kids) going through the moves but not really knowing why. I am consantly going over how a proper high block is done, even putting their arm, elbow, and wrist in the proper position, just to have vacant stares and them doing it wrong 2 seconds later. I was hoping that showing them how and why might hit home better.

 

[exile]

My aim for using real people, is not so much to teach practical applications for self defense, but rather to give students, esp. kids, a better understanding of how blocks, kicks, etc. should be done and to use more visualization in their forms. I see everyday the students(kids) going through the moves but not really knowing why. I am consantly going over how a proper high block is done, even putting their arm, elbow, and wrist in the proper position, just to have vacant stares and them doing it wrong 2 seconds later. I was hoping that showing them how and why might hit home better.

OK, I see what you mean. It's the use of hyungs for teaching basic techs. Yes, a live opponent is very useful for doing that, I've come to realize. I teach a class of low-rank colored belts on Thursday nights, and one of the things I've found is that they learn the point of a four-corner block much better if you teach movements 1 and 2 by throwing low-speed turning kicks at their thighs, and moves 3 and 4 by throwing slow (but not slow-looking!) inner knife-hand strikes to their necks, than if you just stand there showing them the four blocking moves in sequence. They have no idea what the hand movements can do until they actually see the strike coming towards them and realize that the moves in the four-corner block can deflect those strikes.

The thing is, I don't want them to develop a passive, blocking
mindset. But for teaching those kinds of techs at the early stages, playing uke to their tori—I don't know what the Korean analogues are—is very useful, and I can see what you're saying about using it for teaching the full range of basic techs.

 

[Last Fearner]

Everyone knows what each block, kick or punch is for doing their poomse.)

I doubt that "everyone" knows what each technique is for in the poomse, but I do, and I teach their intended application to my students (that's not bragging - I just mean that I have been taught what these moves are for, and I understand their intended purpose - thanks to some wonderful teachers with whom I have worked).

I was wondering if anyone has ever done a poomse using others to actually attack at the different attack points of the poomse.

Live attackers is always a part of the training process at my school. It is essential, and helps bring the "imaginary opponent" into a more realistic perspective. It does help kids and adults to understand what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how it feels to actually block an attack and strike a real person during the form sequence.

And does anyone know how many attackers in each form. (palgues or taegueks)

The number of attackers can vary depending on your interpretation. Each form represents a street fight "simulation" that could be duplicated with some variation on the number of attackers. Typically, for the Palgwe and the Taekguek that follow the three line diagrams ("trigrams"), there would be one attacker in the front, one behind, and one to each end of the cross lines (both left and right) at the base, middle, and top of the form. Thus, there are a total of eight attackers. When practicing in class, you can lower that number to six, four, or even two and have the same people shift around more.

Each segment of a form is designed to duplicate a particular portion of a real fight. The entire form is not an exact replica of a fight as a whole. Also, it is designed to demonstrate the same abilities on the left hand side as well as the right. One does not typically move directly into a low front stance when attacked, but the isolated segments of a fight where these moves are used is the purpose of practicing them separately from sparring skills. Some fight sequences in real life will be very similar to these forms, as well as to one-step sparring, while other types of fights will resemble a sparring match, or a grappling contest.

If you can, try to imagine a street fight against a group of not very aggressive attackers, or highly skilled Martial Artists, but against intoxicated individuals, or a group of angry guys who are a bit intimidated by your aggressive counter techniques. The reality of the poomsae, as applied to real-life street defense, then becomes a mixture of interchangeable puzzle pieces where you do one or two moves from one form, then turn to the next opponent with two or three moves from a different form. In real-life defense, you never know which opponent is going to attack next, which way you will turn, or which techniques you will use, but in many cases you can extract the exact movements from various portions of each form.

In that regard, the fight progresses in an impromptu fashion of adaptation - moving whichever direction that the next opponent attacks from, and using the particular techniques appropriate to defend and counter. Needless to say, if the opponents move in too quickly, attack at the same time, or are too aggressive, your defensive tactics would switch to more of a rapid strike, move, and counter fashion similar to sparring, hapkido, or other aspects of combat training.

I have typically done well when performing my forms at testings or tournaments, and one reason is because I make the execution of my techniques appear as realistic responses to live attackers. Using quick head turns, eye focus, and a more energetic explosion of movement gives the audience (and judges) the sense that I am actually fighting a group of people. They can actually "see" the imaginary attackers. I visualize the attackers there, and then I convince my audience that they really are there. Practicing with live opponents helps to bring about that sense of reality.

In my opinion, nothing we ever do in the classroom is going to duplicate the exact performance in real-life self defense, and no one part of training will stand on its own for self defense in every situation. It is eventually a blend of everything we have learned, and practiced on a daily basis.

CM D.J. Eisenhart

 

[TKDmel]

I have typically done well when performing my forms at testings or tournaments, and one reason is because I make the execution of my techniques appear as realistic responses to live attackers. Using quick head turns, eye focus, and a more energetic explosion of movement gives the audience (and judges) the sense that I am actually fighting a group of people. They can actually "see" the imaginary attackers. I visualize the attackers there, and then I convince my audience that they really are there. Practicing with live opponents helps to bring about that sense of reality.

In my opinion, nothing we ever do in the classroom is going to duplicate the exact performance in real-life self defense, and no one part of training will stand on its own for self defense in every situation. It is eventually a blend of everything we have learned, and practiced on a daily basis.

CM D.J. Eisenhart

Thank you, thank you, and thank you! I was beginning to think that I was the only one to do my forms like this. I too (not trying to brag) have done very well at tourneys at my forms. I have tried to teach others to "make the form theirs". To feel each attack, and to make those watching feel the form as well. I have been able to do this just visualizing it but others may need to see it in action before they "get" it. Thanks for the insightful post, as usual, and for the info on the number of attackers.

 

[Laurentkd]

We also practice forms with real attackers. Just like Last Fearner said it gives the student the understanding of the application of each piece of the form (it is understood that one form does not equal one fight). Generally I've found that 3 attackers is "ideal" (IMO) for Tae Gueks and Pal Gwes. Basically (from the defenders's view point) one for all the left side movements, one for the right side, and one for the movements to the front and those returning at the end. So in TG 1, attacker A would be moves 1-2, B would be 3-4, C would be 5-6 then B again for 7-8, A for 9-10, etc.

 

[zDom]

When I was coming up through the ranks, my instructor did a demo in which he did Chung Moo to attacking black belts.

Chung Moo is a great poomse for this sort of demo as it isn't symmetrical, thus it looks more realistic.

 

[Renshi I]

It's not really possible to be proficient in any kata; poomse; hyong without the practical application. Many good instructors teach the poomse in a manner that incorporates the movments in a "step by step" manner. This gives you, as a student, a chance to precieve yourself in a situation where you are applying it. Many of my students don't "get it" til I show them in this manner. The ITF performs their movements in what is called a "sine wave" where every movement is a deliberate movement desgined to show accuracy to the form[technique], and power in the movement. One two and three step sparring will give the proper application against another person.

 

[bluemtn]

My instructor has shown us the various blocks and strikes used in the forms, using an attacker. It really does cause you to think about what you're doing. It helps a block or a strike to be more powerful when you see it in "action" so to speak...

 

[TKDmel]

Thank you to all who replied to this post. Your input was very welcome and has given me much to think about. I definately want to try using real attackers to demonstrate the proper positioning for blocks, punches, and kicks.