Should Taekwondo be standardized?

[MichiganTKD]

You know, it occured to me years after I stopped competing (or was rendered ineligible!) that if I had done Kumgang instead of Koryo I might have won some forms competitions. Kumgang seems to fit my body a little better. Oh well, live and learn.

 

[Han-Mi]

Can you standardise an art?

 

[47MartialMan]

Can you standardise an art?

Maybe-yes, per an structured organization.

Maybe-yes, per a rank standard.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Standardization is achievable to a certain degree in a personality based system. Here a charismatic instructor leads the pack and enjoys a great deal of veneration from his acolytes. They do as he says and follow his guidlines.

On the death of that instructor, fragmentation ensues when various egos vie for for the ultimate recognition of authority over the system. They seek to be the "one true heir to the one true system of the founder." Inevitably this friction leads to various offshoots of the original system, some claiming to be doing it the way the founder intended, others claiming a more progressive bent.

Insofar as standardizing TKD, it would have to be done by committee and consensus, as no charismatic leader seems to be in the offing as a sole source of authority. Consensus of this nature is difficult to achieve. Even if the Kukkiwon decided to standardize rules, etiquette, and technique--other organizations outside the Kukkiwon and independent instructors might well reject their attempts at homogenization. Again, we see a clash of egos and inherent intellectual conflicts.

People will attempt standardization of TKD (or insert any major art here in lieu of that), indeed they have tried such a thing in the past, but it will never come about to any great degree.


Regards,


Steve

 

[MichiganTKD]

In Aikido Yoshokai, everything is standardized because all teaching comes from Kushida-sensei on down.
However, Tae Kwon Do probably will not and cannot be standardized because of its fragmentation. Each instructor and organization will teach its own variation of technique and how to apply it. This is what happens when you don't have a dominant figure at the top. It will happen with the ITF and ATA since Choi and Lee are, if it is not happening already, and is happening with the WTF. No one man is strong enough to say "Teach this way".
It even happens with styles whose founders are still alive but aged and removed from day to day decision making. As they get older and less involved in the affairs of the organization, it becomes easier to stray and make your own decisions because the founder is less involved. It is happening with our TKD organization. We have freedom we didn't have 10 years ago because as we get up in rank, the Founder lets us make more of our own decisions.

 

[Miles]

Thanks folks for all of your thoughtful posts to this thread.

Miles

 

[MichiganTKD]

Something to think about:

With standardization, there is no room for the evolutionary process and people to say "What if we do it this way and why can't it do this?"
Without standardization, there is more room for people to use their own ideas and be a little more creative. I am NOT suggesting that 1st Dans make up their own form and do what they want. However, let's say that an Instructor, because of advanced knowlege in, say, biomechanics, realizes that current technique execution is bad for your body, he has more leeway to make changes. Not everyone will accept them, but some will.
Personal example. For years, I practiced muscle bouncing during stretching because that's the way I learned. However, several years ago my wife (who has a degree in Exercise Physiology) told me that muscle bouncing is VERY bad for you. Causes microtears in tissue that build up over time. I have eliminated it from my stretching and stretching of students I have taught.
Now, if everything was standardized, I couldn't do that because the attitude would be "do it this way". You'd have many people walking around with weakened legs because "That's the way we do it." I do have the freedom to teach stretching the way I want to teach it, which might very well be different from how a fellow Instructor teaches. Some common stretches because of the common root, but his ideas and my ideas.
And that's one of the problems with standardization: no room for growth and change.

 

[Miles]

Something to think about:

With standardization, there is no room for the evolutionary process and people to say "What if we do it this way and why can't it do this?"
Without standardization, there is more room for people to use their own ideas and be a little more creative. .....Now, if everything was standardized, I couldn't do that because the attitude would be "do it this way". ....And that's one of the problems with standardization: no room for growth and change.

I respectfully disagree. I think that (only speaking about Kukki-TKD) if the "standard" is a set minimum it allows for flexibility in curriculum. (i.e. you can add to it, but can't subtract from it)

As far as actual techniques/mechanics in performing techniques, I have faith that the folks at KKW, who do nothing but think about TKD all day long (and who have advanced academic degrees BTW) would promote the evolution of TKD.

In my perception of the concept-it is where you put in the evolutionary process: I am suggesting it is or could be at the Kukkiwon level rather than at the front line instructor level (i.e. us!

Miles

 

[Shu2jack]

However, Tae Kwon Do probably will not and cannot be standardized because of its fragmentation. Each instructor and organization will teach its own variation of technique and how to apply it. This is what happens when you don't have a dominant figure at the top. It will happen with the ITF and ATA since Choi and Lee are, if it is not happening already, and is happening with the WTF. No one man is strong enough to say "Teach this way".

I have to half-way agree with you MichiganTKD. I will use ATA as an example for standardization of TKD because of it's size and growth.

I think as far as an organization goes, fragmentation can be avoided. The founder of the ATA passed away in 2000 and his brother took over without a hitch and the ATA is still experiencing growth. I think this is not only because the late Lee was a strong, charismatic leader, but because he built a vision and was able to make others believe in that vision. Before he died, he figured out how to divide the power so all the senior ranks would be satisfied. It will be interesting to see what will happen when this Grand Master passes away, but I can easily see a situation where everything continues to run smoothly because of the strong dedication many of the instructors have up the direct chain-of-command. While I have heard of schools leaving the ATA, I think the ATA has strong incentives for an instructor to stay with our program.

As far as the break down of technique, I agree to an extent. Not all ATA schools teach all the same material and teach it the same way and no one in the organization will say "DO IT THIS WAY!" I believe this is a good and bad thing. Bad for obvious reasons because the organzation can lose cohearancy, but good because it allows our techniques to continue to evolve. The ATA has been cracking down on "errant" instructors now. Every instructor must be certifed through a representative of our HQ. Every 4th degree must test before our Masters at a National event. In order to compete at our touranments, students need to do set forms and be judges by different instructors. So while instructors are allowed to teach their own material and teach it in their own way, the ATA has a base line that every instructor MUST teach and it has to be taught the way the ATA wants it taught or else you will fail your testings and you will have your instructor credientials removed. Not only that, your students will start failing at tournaments and when they start testing at higher ranks. I personally do not see the ATA fragmenting, but anything is possible.

I did not mean this as a rant to defend the ATA, but I do want to use the ATA as a possible model to standardize TKD, regardless of opinions of the organization itself. It has a strong buisness model, the organzation maintains a standardization of technique through closed tournaments, instructor certifications, and national testings, and it allows variation of technique. I believe that if we want to standardize TKD, we would need to have a dire reason to standardize everything.

I think one way to standardize TKD would be to revamp the material. Get the heads of the TKD organizations together and work out a set rank system, modified forms to be used at each ranks and basics that must be taught at that rank, including rank requirements. From there integrate the students and seniors from both sides into that ranks system and create a "Master's council" made up of the senior ranks. This way nobody gets "demoted". Slowly implement instructor camps, national testings, closed touranments for the first few years, etc. in order to get the new curriculum spread and taught. You would lose a lot of schools, but once the organization gets on it's feet and starts expanding, it would become strong and big enough to make it an attractive option for independant TKD schools.

Just my thoughts though.

 

[MichiganTKD]

Miles,

One of the problems I have with standardization is this: What if the standardization is geared toward a result I don't believe in?

Let me explain. It is no big secret that much of the way the Kukkiwon teaches technique and kicking is geared for tournament competition. Now, if I kept my technique totally in line with how the Kukkiwon wanted me to perform it, it would work great for training for tournaments and free fighting. However, a lot of what I do now and the way I train would suffer because it is not designed for tournaments. It is traditional Chung Do Kwan technique designed to make power and build up your body. Great for self defense and conditioning, not so great for winning tournaments because the mindset is different.

I realize fully that the Kukkiwon is filled with educated instructors who hold advanced degrees in biomechanics and whatnot. However, applying advanced science to Tae Kwon Do technique does me no good if it is mostly to perfect a tournament-style roundhouse or spin kick and develop better sparring training, because that is not why I train.
If you are a farmer, you can apply all the science and bioengineering you want to for that perfect glass of milk. The best way is still good food for the cow and fresh grass.

 

[JanneM]

Let me be mean mr. MichiganTKD...
There is no kwan baced taekwondo... Or at least there shouldn't be.
If you want to practise original Chun do kwan you should find someone that teaches chun do kwan as it was teached before taewkondo was establised. After taekwondo was born there were no kwans there was and in only taekwondo.

 

[MichiganTKD]

Au Contraire Janne. There is Kwan-based Tae Kwon Do, just harder to find. But it does exist. My Instructor teaches Chung Do Kwan affiliated with Woon Kyu Uhm, Chung Do Kwan President. This is more prevalent with the older Instructors. Unfortunately, as these Instructors age and retire, it will be harder for someone to find and study under them.
His 9th Dan is through the Kukkiwon, but he trained under the Chung Do Kwan, and my first Dan certificates were issued by the Chung Do Kwan. My later ones are Kukkiwon certificates.

 

[Miles]

One of the problems I have with standardization is this: What if the standardization is geared toward a result I don't believe in?.

Certainly that would be an insurmountable problem.

Let me explain. It is no big secret that much of the way the Kukkiwon teaches technique and kicking is geared for tournament competition.

I think this is a crucial point in the discussion, at least as it related to the standardization of Kukki-TKD.

The Kukkiwon's objectives are not to promote tournament competition but to educate instructors (among other things). Here is what the Kukkiwon's website says its' objectives are:
Foundation Objects
Objective

• Help people to develop their spiritual and physical strength by spreading our cultural asset, Taekwondo
• Introducing Taekwondo's philosophy and skills in order to enhance the national prestige abroad.

Business

• Maintain Taekwondo's original philosophy while deciding on basic policy about spreading Taekwondo
• Educational Business, Dan Certification Business, International Business
• Taekwondo Skills Research and Guidance Business
• Collect research materials about Taekwondo, statistical research, publicity, publishing business
• Supporting World Taekwondo Federation and the Korea Taekwondo Association
• Management of corporate property
• Management of Training Institute
• Miscellaneous

I realize fully that the Kukkiwon is filled with educated instructors who hold advanced degrees in biomechanics and whatnot. However, applying advanced science to Tae Kwon Do technique does me no good if it is mostly to perfect a tournament-style roundhouse or spin kick and develop better sparring training, because that is not why I train.

For the sake of discussion, if you agreed with me that the Kukkiwon was applying advanced science to TKD technique to make a person more powerful physically (which as you can see is a stated objective) and to promote self-defense, would you then still object to standardization?

Miles

 

[terryl965]

miles that was one interesting post, if the Kukkiwon was applying the science to evolve TKD then they should standelize there respected finds and make it available to all that wishes this type of proceedure, in the end it will be diffulcult to do since so many big headed individuals are already the so called bosses

 

[Miles]

Thanks Terry!

I am unabashedly pro-Kukkiwon. My experiences there were nothing less than super. I found everyone to be extremely helpful and really wanting the entire group to do their best, learn what they could, and become the best possible instructors.

I think Kukkiwon is doing what it can by having the instructor courses, publishing the textbook and having its website, etc. But, you are right, people have to "empty their cup" and give it a try. I am very encouraged though-MichiganTKD mentions GM UHM, Woon Kyu as Chung Do Kwan president, but he also wears another hat-that of Kukkiwon President. Taekwondo is in excellent hands!

Miles

 

[JanneM]

Au Contraire Janne. There is Kwan-based Tae Kwon Do, just harder to find. But it does exist. My Instructor teaches Chung Do Kwan affiliated with Woon Kyu Uhm, Chung Do Kwan President. This is more prevalent with the older Instructors. Unfortunately, as these Instructors age and retire, it will be harder for someone to find and study under them.
His 9th Dan is through the Kukkiwon, but he trained under the Chung Do Kwan, and my first Dan certificates were issued by the Chung Do Kwan. My later ones are Kukkiwon certificates.

But when taekwondo was established KTA and kukkiwon did not reprisent any of the kwans anymore. There should not be a kwan-based taekwondo there should be only taekwondo or kwan-based martial art (usually more or less karate).
I do not wish to put you down or anything but it is just a fact that kukkiwon does not recognise any of the kwans anymore.

Anywho I am wery interested about your training and it being kwan based and roots it self very mouch in chun do kwan.
Can you tell me what are the major differences with kukki-taekwondo? And what are the training methods in your school?
And why don't you just say that you practise Chun do kwan AND taekwondo..?

 

[MichiganTKD]

Good questions Janne.

Believe it or not, there still is Kwan-based Tae Kwon Do, it is just not as widespread as the TKD you are familiar with. The Tae Kwon Do I practice and teach is Chung Do Kwan based, meaning it comes from the teachings of Won Kuk Lee and his students. I did not study under him, as he was a little before my time. However, my Instructor's teacher is GM Woon Kyu Uhm, current Chung Do Kwan Head in Korea.

There are several differences between the TKD we do and the "official" TKD of the Kukkiwon, although I am certified through the Kukkiwon:

1. Much of the Kukkiwon technique is geared to free fighting, which means its technique is geared to making points. Chung Do Kwan and traditional technique is designed for power, self defense, and building up your body. In fact, Chung Do Kwan was used to train the Korean police and military.

2. Chung Do Kwan (and almost all traditional TKD) is built around the traditional manners, customs, etiquette, and philosophy of Korea and whatever philosophy the other Kwans used. Unfortunately, as the WTF embraces competitive sparring as its primary goal, much of this tradition is lost as more Western practices are followed. I see it happening now-traditional Tae Kwon Do manners are lost as Western philosophy is practiced. Respect, bowing, and traditional philosophy become seen as outdated.

3. The "official" forms of the WTF are the Taegeuk forms. We practice the Palgue forms, which immediately predate the Taegeuk. In my opinion, the Palgue forms are more difficult but make your body stronger.

Keep in mind, these are just my thoughts on the differnces. Other traditional Tae Kwon Do students, especially those from Kwan-based schools will have their own. In general, their opinions tend to be similar. Zepp comes from a Chung Do Kwan-based school as well. He might have some valuable input too.

 

[JanneM]

I also know my kwan based root to Jidokwan but I don't say I practise Jidokwan taekwondo.

Palgues are made after the kwans was brought together. Why don't you practise tohe hyungs they practissed at Chun do kwan before unification of the kwans and birth of the KTA?
I undestund the mental difference in your practise compares to forexample my practise that is more or less sport oriented (eaven I am not a tournament fighter) but I dont understund why you practise somethign that is between Chundokwan and kukki-taekwondo. Why don't you practise either chundokwan or taekwondo?

Now I don't mee to be mean. Just my 2 cents.

 

[MichiganTKD]

Actually I do. I practice the Tae Kwon Do style that my Instructor learned in Korea. He learned the Palgue forms and apparently likes them more. I imagine if he felt the Taegeuk forms had more to offer, he would have practiced them.
Keep in mind, some Kwans completely gave up their identity to the WTF and some did not. The Chung Do Kwan under Mr. Uhm joined the Kukkiwon and the WTF, but did not completely sacrifice its identity. It just minimized it. Other Chung Do Kwan organizations did NOT join the WTF (the WTA under GM Son), and some did as we did-join the WTF but keep their identity. Edward Sell's organization among others. I'm sure there are more.
Basically what it means is that we follow WTF rules for free fighting but traditional Chung Do Kwan for basic practice (basics, basic kicking, philosophy, self defense etc.) There is not as big a difference as you might think. And the Kukkiwon still accepts the Palgue forms BTW. They are not considered the primary forms, but are still accepted.

 

[JanneM]

Dear Mr. MichiganTKD if you read latest version of Kukkiwon textbook or visit Kukkiwon webpage you find that regured poomsae for 1.dan is the taegug forms. Plagwe is still revognised as a form of taekwondo poomsae but you must learn taeguk to obtain a degree in Kukkiwon. If your master does let you pass your dan exsamn with palgwe poomsae it's fine by me, but it is not what the Kukkiwon reguires(how is it spelled?)

As I have mentioned before. i don't want to be rude. I just know how things are(in that field) and what is written in official documents of Kukkiwon about dan gradings.