Tae-Kwon-Do America ?

[jks9199]

Tech question:

I'm going to use {} in place of square brackets so that you can see; the actual commands are in [].

{/quote} closes the word bubble. {quote} opens a new one.

So, I can generate

these words

in a bubble, and then again

put these words into one

.

So, if you use the Reply with quote button, then insert {/quote}, it'll break the balloon. You can start it again with {quote}. (reminder -- [] not {} for actual commands)

 

[dancingalone]

1. Please teach me how to split a post in a reply. 2. HU Lee was also a Chung Do Kwan guy so his time with the Chang Hun forms and his progeny from that time show the CDK influence

JKS pretty much covered it. If you hit the reply button, you'll see the quoted text embedded within tags like {QUOTE=Earl Weiss;1574612} except the curly braces will be brackets instead (we had to change it to get it show up). Every time I want to reply in reference to something you wrote, I just need to make sure my added text is below yours and not contained within these bracketed quote line of {QUOTE=Earl Weiss;1574612} and then ending {/QUOTE}. I usually wind up having to copy and paste the {QUOTE=Earl Weiss;1574612} and {/QUOTE} around several times to break things up in a readable way.

Hope that helps.

 

[jks9199]

One more tech note: If you just want to wrap a quote bubble around something, like if you're copying a news article and want to distinguish your comments from the text of the article, it's easy. There are two ways: either highlight what you want to be in the bubble, and click on the button that looks like a cartoon word balloon in the reply window, or click it first, then paste the material in the middle.

 

[TKDTony2179]

This was the first organization I was with before my instructor left with other instructors to create their own organization.

TA is an american martial art that teaches Taekwondo. It is good organization that has very talented martial artist. They have good curriclum that allow you to learn the martial art. They have plenty of tournaments a year plus national tournaments.

The down fall in it is that they are not part of WTF/kukkiwon or ITF so larger org won't reconize them. It is american tkd so it is sport orieanted.

I was 2 degree when we left that org. Largely part of the school owners losing money to the chairman wanting more money. As far as they cheating customer I don't think that goes on at all.

Try them out. Every instructor is different and that instructor may be a very good one.

 

[Earl Weiss]

People make remixes all the time, Mr. Weiss. Or they add their own spin on things. See the Star Spangled Banner for example. Andrew Lloyd Webber became a very successful modern composer just by changing around some of the classics and then working with a team of lyricists for his productions.

.

Well, I guess that is my point. Someone does a remix or ads something to a song and that is how it's represented. A remix, a sample, something added. They do not represent it to be the correct way of performing the song. The bigger issue would be for someone to learn and perform the remix having no clue that it was something which might be a little or a lot different than the intended standard. Then, one day they dgo out into the real world and are not happy to learn that what tey are doing was something far different than the largely accepted standard.

 

[dancingalone]

Well, I guess that is my point. Someone does a remix or ads something to a song and that is how it's represented. A remix, a sample, something added. They do not represent it to be the correct way of performing the song. The bigger issue would be for someone to learn and perform the remix having no clue that it was something which might be a little or a lot different than the intended standard. Then, one day they dgo out into the real world and are not happy to learn that what tey are doing was something far different than the largely accepted standard.

I dispute "largely accepted standard". I've traveled a lot throughout North America and I have visited literally hundreds of dojo, dojang, kwoon in my time. Anecdotally, I've actually seen more dojang run the Chang Hon patterns unlike the ITF standard than like it, if the Suska vids on Youtube are any indication.

I don't dispute that what is described in General Choi's writings is how he wanted them performed in the last part of his life. It is apparent however that he encouraged MANY instructors to use his patterns and they did not all change with the times to adhere to his latest and greatest requirements as they evolved. And as a result there are equally MANY ways of running the Chang Hon patterns - such is reality when you bring in (or try to anyway) a bunch of strong personalities that had extensive prior experience elsewhere. We should note that this is not a phenomenon limited to North America. The way the TAGB runs these patterns is starkly alike to the American 'rebels' too.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I dispute "largely accepted standard". I've traveled a lot throughout North America and I have visited literally hundreds of dojo, dojang, kwoon in my time. Anecdotally, I've actually seen more dojang run the Chang Hon patterns unlike the ITF standard than like it, if the Suska vids on Youtube are any indication.
is not a phenomenon limited to North America. The way the TAGB runs these patterns is starkly alike to the American 'rebels' too.

We may be having a semantic issue. There are, collectively, probably more people doing some variation of the Chang Hon Patterns than those following the ITF standard. However I submit that among those doing variations, the variations are hardly uniform or practiced in any single large quantity standard approaching the number of ITF practitioners following a single standard. To further elaborate. Lets say that over the last 15 years each ITF world cup had about 200 different competitors. (There were many more competitors but many competed at more than one championship.) Lets conservatively state that they represented 1% of the ITF population at the time. As world class competitors they were following one standard. That would be at least 20,000 people following a single standard. Do you know of another Chang Hon group of 20,000 that follows a single standard? Now, to show you how conservative the 20,000 figure is, before the breakup of the ITF, there had been over 10,000 ITF First Dan certificates (over 40 years) issued in in the USA.

 

[dancingalone]

Do you know of another Chang Hon group of 20,000 that follows a single standard? Now, to show you how conservative the 20,000 figure is, before the breakup of the ITF, there had been over 10,000 ITF First Dan certificates (over 40 years) issued in in the USA.

If you count the ATA prior to their switchover to their own Songahm patterns, they would be one. The TAGB in the UK claims over 20,000 members. (http://www.tagb.biz/) Add up the Jhoon Rhee folks who were very numerous at one point who all still do some of the Chang Hon patterns in their own way as well. Those are probably the largest non-ITF groups using these forms (that I know of anyway).

 

[Earl Weiss]

First and foremost I have foundd most groups exagerate their numbers. If you added them all up you would exceed the population of the earth. Secondly, the groups you list are generaly limited to a single country. I have followed ITF USA Dan numbers for almost 40 years in the USA s they progressed sequentilay. So, the 10,000 through 2002 in just the USA is accurate. (That is just those who make it to first Dan) Canada, Argentina and the UK likely had as many each. So, the ATA who were originaly Chang Hun, and the Jhoon Rhee numbers pale in comparison.

 

[dancingalone]

First and foremost I have foundd most groups exagerate their numbers. If you added them all up you would exceed the population of the earth. Secondly, the groups you list are generaly limited to a single country. I have followed ITF USA Dan numbers for almost 40 years in the USA s they progressed sequentilay. So, the 10,000 through 2002 in just the USA is accurate. (That is just those who make it to first Dan) Canada, Argentina and the UK likely had as many each. So, the ATA who were originaly Chang Hun, and the Jhoon Rhee numbers pale in comparison.

All you asked was for a 20,000 member threshold. I'm fairly confident each of those groups totaled a minimum of 20,000 dan and geup holders at one point. I'd be shocked if the total of ATA members now (yeah, they have moved on from Chang Hon) didn't exceed all current ITF ranks in the USA.

In any case, the actual number isn't too germane to the idea that there are many ways to perform the Chang Hon patterns and again what is right is in the eye of the beholder. Sorry, but this is no different than the same 'one, true way' arguments of orthodoxy found in any other martial art like karate or hung gar, etc.

 

[Earl Weiss]

All you asked was for a 20,000 member threshold. I'm fairly confident each of those groups totaled a minimum of 20,000 dan and geup holders at one point. I'd be shocked if the total of ATA members now (yeah, they have moved on from Chang Hon) didn't exceed all current ITF ranks in the USA.
.

The number was germane to the issue you took with my claim that one day people doing a remix or some variation would go out into the real world and learn that what they were doing was not the most widely accepted standard. You took issue wth the claim of most widfely accepted standard. 20, 000 as noted was a ugely low number. Literaly 10's of thousands following this standard throughout the world, there is no other standard or group that comes anywhere close. Case in point a gentlemen from the east coast who does Chang Hon came to train during a visit. At one point I had him watch a group perform a pattern. I then had them say where they learned the pattern. Their answers were; Poland, Siberia, The Czech Republic, Canada and Connecticut. Due to the uniformity in their performance he said he thought they had all learned it from me. Over the years I have had ITF visitors from many states and also other countries like the Netherlands, Slovakia, Argentina, and Russia. All fit right in. Differences existed but they were nominal. Like you, I have seen many Chang Hon Variations. All had their own ideas. They were all blips on the radar in comparison.

 

[dancingalone]

I'm willing to concede you may be right from a world-wide perspective. That said, I don't know that it is terribly important unless we find international tournaments to be of high value. For the broad majority of people, TKD is very much a personal affair largely confined to their individual dojang. So long as their internal standard produces power, fluidity, and some fighting capacity along with the usual physical benefits, that is more than adequate. And depending on one's area, a non-ITF perspective might actually be the prevailing one within large tracts of territory - like mine for example.

 

[Earl Weiss]

. For the broad majority of people, TKD is very much a personal affair largely confined to their individual dojang. .

.

I think this applies to many martial arts practitioners. Some stay primarily within their own little universe for a lifetime. Some by choice venture out for a variety of things (Seminars, competitions etc) and some are forced to venture out when they relocate or their school evaporates for any number of reasons. .

 

[dancingalone]

.

I think this applies to many martial arts practitioners. Some stay primarily within their own little universe for a lifetime. Some by choice venture out for a variety of things (Seminars, competitions etc) and some are forced to venture out when they relocate or their school evaporates for any number of reasons. .

Absolutely. So if 'portability' of standard is our highest criterion, it seems like it would be best to choose the most widely practiced martial art with the most universal set of standards in the world. I dunno what that is, maybe boxing? That of course illustrates what a fruitless thing universality really is.

 

[chrispillertkd]

I'm willing to concede you may be right from a world-wide perspective. That said, I don't know that it is terribly important unless we find international tournaments to be of high value.

Just an observation, here. You started out by doubting that Gen. Choi's standard was, if not the widest spread standard of practice for his patterns, a wide-spread one. When Master Weiss demonstrated that it was you simply conceded the point but say that isn't important. It seems a bit disingenuous to me (although maybe I'm mistaken). Part of the idea of having "styles" is standardizing practices across practitioners. Whether it's important or not might be another question. Maybe. It certainly is important in the sense that set standards are part of what makes up a style/system/whatever you want to call it. As time goes on styles can develop separate branches, some of which become so different from the original that they not only are no longer considered a branch of the first style but a new style all together.

Standardization is important in more venues than just tournaments. I have been at a training camp where over 300 people from the U.S., Canada, England, Ireland, New Guinea, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and other countries were in attendance. We all were there to train in the same style, which meant we were all there to train under the same technical standard. And we did. Without the standardization we wouldn't have been able to all come together to train in the way that we did, or would have spent a lot of valuable time having to get everyone on the same page. There is a time and a place for that, and I have been to seminars and courses of different arts which have been very enjoyable. But those are different.

For the broad majority of people, TKD is very much a personal affair largely confined to their individual dojang. So long as their internal standard produces power, fluidity, and some fighting capacity along with the usual physical benefits, that is more than adequate. And depending on one's area, a non-ITF perspective might actually be the prevailing one within large tracts of territory - like mine for example.

Of course, all martial arts become very personal for people. The longer you practice the more personal they become. But that, IMNSHO, has nothing to do with having a widespread technical standard. I've never found there to be a conflict between following the standard of my style and having my own expression of that style. It's like calligraphy, painting, or any other art. You have to have a good grasp of the fundamentals and their underlying principles in order to express yourself in the first place.

Pax,

Chris

 

[dancingalone]

Just an observation, here. You started out by doubting that Gen. Choi's standard was, if not the widest spread standard of practice for his patterns, a wide-spread one. When Master Weiss demonstrated that it was you simply conceded the point but say that isn't important. It seems a bit disingenuous to me (although maybe I'm mistaken).

I said "I dispute "largely accepted standard". I've traveled a lot throughout North America and I have visited literally hundreds of dojo, dojang, kwoon in my time. Anecdotally, I've actually seen more dojang run the Chang Hon patterns unlike the ITF standard than like it, if the Suska vids on Youtube are any indication." I could have explained myself better, and at this point I certainly don't want to argue this much further, but those sentences seem clear enough, right? I don't think General Choi's final standard is by any means the "largely accepted standard" in North America. I AM willing to concede Mr. Weiss is probably correct if we look at it from a world wide view and I have said as much.

I don't think is is being disingenuous. What I said seems rather black and white to me even when I go back to re-read it.

Part of the idea of having "styles" is standardizing practices across practitioners. Whether it's important or not might be another question. Maybe. It certainly is important in the sense that set standards are part of what makes up a style/system/whatever you want to call it. As time goes on styles can develop separate branches, some of which become so different from the original that they not only are no longer considered a branch of the first style but a new style all together.

I agree. And there are many styles of TKD that use the Chang Hon forms, correct? I briefly alluded to this idea when I mentioned the Pinan forms used by many karate styles. They all do them differently, sometimes greatly so. This is no different than with the Chang Hon forms which is a statement I make time and again.

Standardization is important in more venues than just tournaments. I have been at a training camp where over 300 people from the U.S., Canada, England, Ireland, New Guinea, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and other countries were in attendance. We all were there to train in the same style, which meant we were all there to train under the same technical standard. And we did. Without the standardization we wouldn't have been able to all come together to train in the way that we did, or would have spent a lot of valuable time having to get everyone on the same page. There is a time and a place for that, and I have been to seminars and courses of different arts which have been very enjoyable. But those are different.

Birds of the same feather. The vast majority of practitioners have no concern about international gatherings whether for seminars or tournaments or politics either. So, again if we think we need portability/universality/standardization for any of these reasons, fine. Throw in the rank recognition/portability thing too if you want. None of them change the essential fact that any method or standard for forms that produces power, fluidity, and a modicum of fighting skills is perfectly adequate in of itself. So doing the Chang Hon forms with a CDK flavor is likewise fine - and there's an awful lot of people who do just exactly that and who would reject as I do that they must conform to some final testament of General Choi's unless they be left out or left behind.

Of course, all martial arts become very personal for people. The longer you practice the more personal they become. But that, IMNSHO, has nothing to do with having a widespread technical standard. I've never found there to be a conflict between following the standard of my style and having my own expression of that style. It's like calligraphy, painting, or any other art. You have to have a good grasp of the fundamentals and their underlying principles in order to express yourself in the first place.

Chris, the main argument Mr. Weiss and I have been having is that there is loss on the part of the people who DON'T follow General Choi's last word on the subject. I say there is no loss, while clearly Mr. Weiss thinks there is a 'correct' way of running the forms. I understand where he is coming from - I just don't agree at all, not surprisingly so considering my own lineage and how the forms were transmitted to us. As I said, right is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I



Chris, the main argument Mr. Weiss and I have been having is that there is loss on the part of the people who DON'T follow General Choi's last word on the subject. I say there is no loss, while clearly Mr. Weiss thinks there is a 'correct' way of running the forms. I understand where he is coming from - I just don't agree at all, not surprisingly so considering my own lineage and how the forms were transmitted to us. As I said, right is in the eyes of the beholder.

.
Your experiences have lead you to believe that those following the non ITF standard suffer no loss. My experience is different. If I asj\k why they do something a certain way, it's not that I have an issue because their reasons are different than mine, it's because often they have no reason other than "That is what my instructor did." To be fair, I have run into ITF people who were taught or learned this way as well, but that is not the fault of the system. Reasons are spelled out most of the time. Reasoneable minds can disagree as to whether the reasons make sense. I have issues with some of the rationale. But it least it's there to consider. Other issues are loss of detail. An example might be: No idea what the diffferences are between a Side - Piercing, Pushing, Thrusting, Checking, kick all of which is contained in the patterns. Not having these differences dilutes the art.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Chris, the main argument Mr. Weiss and I have been having is that there is loss on the part of the people who DON'T follow General Choi's last word on the subject. I say there is no loss, while clearly Mr. Weiss thinks there is a 'correct' way of running the forms. I understand where he is coming from - I just don't agree at all, not surprisingly so considering my own lineage and how the forms were transmitted to us. As I said, right is in the eyes of the beholder.

Well, yes there is a loss. There is simply the loss of knowing what the original intent of the patterns was, what the original technical principles were, etc. that you are now deviating from when you change things. Whether it's an important loss is another matter. IMHO, yes it's important because if you're changing something it's generally a good idea to know what you're changing from and why you're doing so. Others may have a different view but there you go. If you don't know where you are coming from it's hard to tell where you're going.

 

[granfire]

Well, yes there is a loss. There is simply the loss of knowing what the original intent of the patterns was, what the original technical principles were, etc. that you are now deviating from when you change things. Whether it's an important loss is another matter. IMHO, yes it's important because if you're changing something it's generally a good idea to know what you're changing from and why you're doing so. Others may have a different view but there you go. If you don't know where you are coming from it's hard to tell where you're going.

Oh well. Considering that the good General was building on a few centuries of Martial Arts, I think it is safe to assume the forms were never carved in stone.

And I am speaking about the whole of the craft, from China to Okinawa, to Japan and Korea and then some.

Or we would all be doing the same stuff.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Absolutely. So if 'portability' of standard is our highest criterion, it seems like it would be best to choose the most widely practiced martial art with the most universal set of standards in the world. I dunno what that is, maybe boxing? That of course illustrates what a fruitless thing universality really is.

Universality - For some fruitless, for some not. Lets face it the entire MA universe is small. Each segment certainly much smaller. I have heard the entire MA Supply business has gross receipts of less than a single Walmart store. Still, we live in an increasing mobile society. So, for many being able to find a "home" elsewhere is a real plus.