Taegeuk vs Palgwe Poomsae

[Bailey_Turnbow_Tkd]

Are there any specific reasons that one of these systems of poomsae should be taught/practiced instead of the other? Most WTF schools that I know of teach Taegeuk forms. I've heard schools teaching both together, or teachingpalgwe forms to color and than teaching Taegeuk forms to 1st dan black belts. I was taught the palgwe forms, although I later learned all of the Taegeuk forms, as I think it's good to learn as many different Poomsaes as possible.
Which Poomsaes did you learn while earning your black belt(WTF, ITF, or other)? Do you prefer Taegeuk or Palgwe forms? Why?

 

[MAist25]

I originally learned the Palgwe poomse and later the Taegeuks. Personally, I feel like the Palgwe's are better forms and if I was the head instructor of a school I would choose to teach the Palgwes rather than the Taegeuks. I do not like the high stances in the Taegeuk series and some of the techniques feel very un-natural to me such as performing outside to inside blocks opposite of the way the body turns. The palgwes are a better set of forms in my opinion.

 

[Bailey_Turnbow_Tkd]

Thanks for the response. I've been thinking the exact same thing about how unnatural the some of the blocks feel. Especially body. I wouldn't be surprised is some instructors have inward/outward blocks so that they are more practical and natural.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

We do palgwes. I have friends who do the taegeks and from what I have seen I prefer the palgwe forms, but Im probably biased because they are what I know.

 

[Bailey_Turnbow_Tkd]

Oh I'm definitely biased towards palgwe. That's all I knew for most of my TKD training.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Which Poomsaes did you learn while earning your black belt(WTF, ITF, or other)? Do you prefer Taegeuk or Palgwe forms? Why?

When I studied in ITF schools, I learned the Chang Hon forms. When I joined a Moo Duk Kwan school I learned the Palgwae forms. When I decided to get a KKW BB I learned the taegeuk forms.
I think the Chang Hon forms are the most technically challenging and demanding in part because they're more specific. For example, the Palgwae and Taegeuk forms will call for, say, a front snap kick. The Chang Hon forms will specify a target. Similarly, the Chang Hon forms will specify some very difficult moves, such as the head-high super slow motion sidekick, spinning hook kick combo in Moon Moo. You will not find anything like that in either the Palgwae or Taegeuk forms.

That being said, they all are valid and valuable teaching tools, and the best reason for teaching one rather than another is simply because it's the standard for the org you belong to.

I am aware that there are plenty of places that give KKW rank without requiring training in the KKW curriculum. Our MDK school is one such. I learned the Taegeuk forms because although I have the highest regard for the knowledge of my Master and our KJN, I disagree with the practice.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.

 

[Jaeimseu]

Are there any specific reasons that one of these systems of poomsae should be taught/practiced instead of the other? Most WTF schools that I know of teach Taegeuk forms. I've heard schools teaching both together, or teachingpalgwe forms to color and than teaching Taegeuk forms to 1st dan black belts. I was taught the palgwe forms, although I later learned all of the Taegeuk forms, as I think it's good to learn as many different Poomsaes as possible.
Which Poomsaes did you learn while earning your black belt(WTF, ITF, or other)? Do you prefer Taegeuk or Palgwe forms? Why?

I originally learned the Chang Hon set, but like Dirty Dog, I learned the Taeguek poomsae because I wanted Kukkiwon certification and I wanted to be knowledgable about the official Kukkiwon curriculum.

Personally, unless your particular school requires the Palgwe set or you just love collecting different patterns, I don't think there is any reason to learn the Palgwe poomsae. The Taeguek poomsae is the official Kukkiwon poomsae, and has been for a very long time. I suppose a school could use multiple pattern sets to give supplemental material for students to learn, but I feel like it's a waste of class time to learn yet another combination of techniques that are mostly the same from set to set.

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk

 

[Earl Weiss]

Reasons are pretty simple. The first new set of forms for TKD as a system were the Chang Hon. When General Choi became persona non grata most who went to WTF only had learned that set or a precurser from a one of the root systems. I trained at a WTF school from 1975-77 that taught the Chang Hon Forms and had the Korean edition of General Choi's 1965 Book on the Desk. Thhe genius of the WTF / KKW was to welcom all systems. As opposed to the ITF which used only a single system. The need to distance itslelf from General Choi and have a unified system to eliminate issues with KKW certified BBs changing schools and not being recognized because they did not know the other system lead to the need for a unified system which the KKW has implemented and seems to be enforcing for rank certification . (I will leave it to KKW people to elaborate on how or if this applies now.)

I would suggest NOT learning multiple systems, at least for the initial progress to BB. I cannot speak for non Chang Hon systems, but the CH system is very detailed. Of course many choose to ignore details and make it simpler / easier. It is difficult enough to learn and practice details of the CH system vis a vis terchnical parameters of techniques such as, names stance lengths, levels of techniques, how to chamber, how the technique travels and retracts, striking surfaces, without having to learn and seperate those parameters from different names and parameters of another system.

As a newbie I would think a choice of what is "better" (for you) would be virtualy impossible. So a better choice might have to do with other factors you like about a club or school. Sport oriented, age of classmates, how they spar, convenience network of similar similar schools etc.

 

[Master Dan]

Going back to the early 70's Palgwe's were first then Taeguek's were introduced GM explaining that they were for white people to lazy to do harder more traditional stances?? Well you can get into all the politics and explanations of the constant rewriting of Korean TKD history that KKW wanted to step away from ties to Shotokan Karate Ect. I will always continue to teach both because they both offer a rich diversity and style and totally disagree with the statements that all PoomSe is an upright application of sparing. There is merit to the narrower higher transition front stance that KKW wants in all PoomSe now for their official party line and you simply cannot apply that traditionally to Palqwe's because they have a different origin, when I wear the KKW hat we comply. However if you want to do more than just dance and work on applications that are offensive and study BonKi you will find a rich set of applications in the Palqwe's clearly similar to the Kata's lending to Kempo interpretation in applications. You need to have an open mind. Deep stances build strength and balance/ balance and position in close in fighting is the primary foundation of defending yourself why anyone want to limit that is beyond me. KKW WTF Competition Taegueks for other demos variety is good but I require all my students to learn both and most important how to defend themselves rank and belts are the true waste of time if you cannot defend your self and other when needed.

 

[Manny]

When I got inside TKD (1983) my master taught us the Palgwes, I did them till 1986, form Palgwe 1 to palgwe 8, then sudenly my mastre changed in 1987 to Taeguks so we droped the Palgwes. Wich one is better? well some nostalgia tell me Palgwes are very nice they are more martial arts orinted for me, the taeguks are cold forms and very robotic sometimes but I don't recall so well the palgwes and I have to switch to taeguks.

Manny

 

[cali_tkdbruin]

When I began my TKD training I was taught the Taeguek forms, I eventually learned and tested on all 8 poomse. As I progressed in my TKD training I began learning the Palgwe forms, and also eventually tested on all of those forms as well along with the initial black belt forms. I think to be a more complete Taekwondo practitioner one should be taught both the Taeguek and Palgwe forms. Personally, I like the more traditional Palgwe forms, JMHO... :asian:

 

[WaterGal]

Well, the reason most WTF schools teach the Taegeuk forms is because that's what KKW requires. It's in the official KKW promotion regulations that to get your first dan you're supposed to know Taegeuk 1-8. That's not to say they're better than other forms, I'm sure there are plenty of great forms out there, and if you're an unaffiliated school you can pick whichever ones you like. But the Taegeuk forms are the official ones for KKW.

 

[IcemanSK]

When I began TKD in 1982 my master taught us the Tae Guek poomsae & added Pal Gwe Yuk, Chil & Pal Jang poomsae as well. I enjoyed all of them for different reasons. For my students, I teach the Tae Guek poomsae because of the Kukkiwon standard. I've shown the Pal Gwe poomsae to my students, but they have little interest in them. They're happy to only learn the Tae Guek poomsae.

 

[dancingalone]

I've been a martial arts a long time and 'know' dozens of forms from a variety of Japanese, Okinawan, and Korean systems. My thought is that if you are a KKW TKD person you should learn and practice the Tae Geuk series primarily because they are the standard recommended by the KKW leadership and if you ever want to compete at the national and international level, those are the forms you will be asked to perform.

This is not to say you can't also use the Palgwe series to great effect for personal development as a martial artist. You can. But you will find your opportunities lessened to an extent by doing so. Admittedly, this is probably irrelevant to most out there.

 

[Pyrophilus]

When I started TKD 5 years ago, we were taught Palgwe poomsae as color belts. Apparently palgwe was the form used for tkd up until 1968ish, when the taeguk poomsae was officially adopted/endorsed by kukkiwon.

That being said, my GM came to US in 1968, so it makes sense that he thinks palgwe is a better form for beginners. During palgwe training, we were taught to make very wide long stances for maximum stability, and a lot of wait rotation to maximize power. The forms also had many "round" motions.

Then after you attained your 1st dan, you were taught taeguk poomsar, along with goryeo.

I was very confused as a color belt. This is because there was a master from our school who was on the US National team. She would pull me aside and tell me to not make my stances so wide, and less of the over pronounced "core" motions when doing blocks. This was in contrast to what the instructors and the GM were telling me.

My master(as we were a secondary school of GM's)who was the headmaster of our dojang, and who is KTA trained, told me that the old palgwe poomsae advocated stability and power.

After 1972, the KKW/WTF decided to sacrifice stability and power for agility and speed. So for the taeguk poomsae, I was told that the long stances are narrower (whereas a real palgwe long stances are wider). Also for taeguk poomsae, the motions are more linear and fast.

On my personal opinion, I think there are merits of both forms. As I am not going to be sparring at my age (mid 40's), I think working on power seems important as it seems appropriate for kyukpa (breaking). But I am happy to know that not all long stances are (should be) the same.

Same goes for kicks. An assistant instructor that came and went in my dojang convinced everyone that there is only one roundhouse, where you flick your leg back as fast as you hit your target (or you get your leg "grabbed"). Obviously this made it so much harder for the poor color belts to try to break boards. My master explained to us that there are multiple variations of kicks (kyukpa, deminstration, and sparring versions just to name a few) roundhouse inclusive.

These things being said, I feel that palgwe and taeguk have two different approaches to tkd, one not being superior to other (in my opinion).

Like most people, I am glad that I found TLD, albeit late in my life.

 

[JP3]

I started out in ATA, with the Songahm set of forms..... and ended up getting into a WTF brand school. That instructor did a thing where he was teaching the Taeguek set to his color belts, and upon reaching 1st dan, he opened them up to the palgwe. It was not "required" to learn them in the syllabus at all, but there was a sort of peer pressure to not only learn them but to do them well.

I can go along with the Taeguek are more upright, straight-line (generally) and tend to train speed and agility of motion over being based and generating power... those these things are not ignored.

 

[IcemanSK]

This thread (particularly the OP) from Mater Peter Miles may be helpful to those interested in the history of the Pal Gwe/Tae Geuk poomsae. Philosophy In Taeguek Poomsae

 

[WaterGal]

On my personal opinion, I think there are merits of both forms. As I am not going to be sparring at my age (mid 40's), I think working on power seems important as it seems appropriate for kyukpa (breaking). But I am happy to know that not all long stances are (should be) the same.

I know this is off-topic, but why do you think you're too old to spar? Mid-40s (or 30s, like me) may be too old to be starting to try for the Olympics, but it's not too old to spar recreationally.

 

[Gwai Lo Dan]

In my case, at 47 years old, I'm too old to spar because I know better. When I see a 13 year old yellow belt kicked in the face by a 20 year 3rd dan, I make a mental note, "there's a guy I won't spar". When I think I'm "fun sparring" without a helmet and the 2nd dan kicks me in the head, I think "there's a person I won't spar." And so, I end up with few people I trust enough to spar as training - i.e., giving them opportunities to practice less proficient techniques (as opposed to trying to always stop them).

 

[JR 137]

In my case, at 47 years old, I'm too old to spar because I know better. When I see a 13 year old yellow belt kicked in the face by a 20 year 3rd dan, I make a mental note, "there's a guy I won't spar". When I think I'm "fun sparring" without a helmet and the 2nd dan kicks me in the head, I think "there's a person I won't spar." And so, I end up with few people I trust enough to spar as training - i.e., giving them opportunities to practice less proficient techniques (as opposed to trying to always stop them).

That appears to be a problem with your classmates and/or your instructor not teaching students to control themselves rather than sparring itself.

If there's a bunch of students looking to kick someone in the head forcefully, especially when you're not wearing head protection, I'd be looking for a different school rather than not sparring. But that's just me.