True Tae Kwon Do

[terryl965]

I know we have had some decussion about what is original TKD but I would like to put a different spin by asking what do each of you to believe is true TKD. Forget about the general or the ATA or the WTF or even the ITF, this about what your beliefs are and what makes your version true TKD?

Remember folks please do not turn this into a decussion like other threads, this is simply a question about what you believe is true TKD and not what you have heard or seen in a book.

 

[KarateMomUSA]

True TKD is truly an individual thing. True TKD to me is TKD, a Korean martial art of self defence that makes you, the individual better. Better in many ways, physically, discipline, sport, SD, manners, focus, hard work, etc.
In essence TKD is a great vehicle to improving one's life, entire life, physically & mentally. If TKD does that for you, then to me, that would be TRUE TKD!

It has little, if anything to do with an organization, but more to do with your teacher, fellow students, how you fit in with them & grow with them, under the guidance of your True TKD Teacher, with the support of your fellow students!

 

[Manny]

True TKD is truly an individual thing. True TKD to me is TKD, a Korean martial art of self defence that makes you, the individual better. Better in many ways, physically, discipline, sport, SD, manners, focus, hard work, etc.
In essence TKD is a great vehicle to improving one's life, entire life, physically & mentally. If TKD does that for you, then to me, that would be TRUE TKD!

It has little, if anything to do with an organization, but more to do with your teacher, fellow students, how you fit in with them & grow with them, under the guidance of your True TKD Teacher, with the support of your fellow students!

KarateMon thank you very much! I agree with you. That's why TKD has grow su much worldwide.

Manny

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Taekwondo is a Korean fighting system characterized by a common set of techniques, cultural aspects, and history.

If I put on a vee neck dobok, use all Korean terminology and start practicing kenpo, it doesn't matter if I'm an 8th dan; it still isn't taekwondo. It may be very good, but it isn't taekwondo.

Taekwondo has a common set of stances, blocks, and strikes executed in a similar fashion across all styles of taekwondo due to the fact that all styles of taekwondo ultimately trace themselves back to one of the five original kwans.

Taekwondo is also notable for eschewing of weapons. I believe that the ATA may have incorporated weapons into its system, but taekwondo was, from the beginning of it actually being called taekwondo, taught without weapons. I am aware that some schools have a weapons curriculum, but that curriculum is culled from systems outside of taekwondo.

If you are performing a striking art that looks markedly different from what is being done by most other taekwondoin and remarkably similar to another martial art, usually Shotokan karate, then you're either stuck in a time warp or you are practicing taekwondo that has a heavy Shotokan influence. Which would be non-compliant or incorrect by the textbooks of the various taekwondo organizations.

The idea of being independent and setting your own standards of what is and what is not taekwondo is out of place in taekwondo. Not because it is 'bad' but because taekwondo has been an organized art with a curriculum meticulously developed by one organization, and later by two other organizations.

Taekwondo has three distinct yu: Kukki, Chang Hon, and Songam, which are overseen by the Kukkiwon, the ITF, and the ATA respectively, with some smaller organizations or independent schools teaching those yu. I know that the ITA has their Ho Am taekwondo, so I suppose you could say four distinct yu. All of these can trace themsevles directly back to the five original kwans.

Taekwondo is not like hapkido that has no strong central organization or organizations. Some are larger, some are smaller, but hapkido is not as defined as taekwondo is. Some have more kicks than taekwondo, some hardly any at all, but are both considered hapkido. You cannot remove all kicks from taekwondo and still call it taekwondo. Well, you could, but nobody would take you seriously.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

The idea of being independent and setting your own standards of what is and what is not taekwondo is out of place in taekwondo. Not because it is 'bad' but because taekwondo has been an organized art with a curriculum meticulously developed by one organization, and later by two other organizations.

I don't agree. TKD has never been a fully 'unified' art ever. From the kwan period with Hwang Kee's ultimate rejection of the TKD movement to the various ITF splints and to now with the dozens and dozens of TKD orgs out there outside of the ITF or KKW umbrella, we seen a persistent history of independent paths taken by various masters.

Is Jhoon Rhee's system still tae kwon do? I would argue yes, yet his brand of TKD is noticeably different than ITF or KKW TKD with his own forms and western boxing influenced stances, guards, and punches. He has created his own tae kwon do and more power to him for it.

And Mr. Rhee doesn't have to be the only example. Anyone can set his own standards on what comprises his own system of tae kwon do. I believe KarateMom has mentioned she believes the independents greatly outnumber everyone else put together. If that is an accurate ratio, then any idea of orthodoxy cannot stand, regardless of any attempts from any group to codify a standard curriculum.

 

[dancingalone]

And to answer the topic question, true tae kwon do is whatever individuals choose to make of it. Wheel chair players might not be able to execute any kicks at all, removing them totally from their practice, but I still think what they do is tae kwon do and a true expression of it at that. If you practice a striking-based art that descends someone from one of the countless branches of TKD (kwan era, ITF,KKW, whatever), you are doing true tae kwon do even if it is visibly different from what another TKDist practices himself. So a wheelchair guy is still a TKDist. A guy who quits at yellow belt but still knows and practices a front kick along with a reverse punch is still a TKDist. A chodan who switches to MMA but still practices his TKD kicks for the ring is still a TKDist.

In the end, it's about the individual and what he chooses or is able to focus upon.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I don't agree. TKD has never been a fully 'unified' art ever. From the kwan period with Hwang Kee's ultimate rejection of the TKD movement to the various ITF splints and to now with the dozens and dozens of TKD orgs out there outside of the ITF or KKW umbrella, we seen a persistent history of independent paths taken by various masters.

Is Jhoon Rhee's system still tae kwon do? I would argue yes, yet his brand of TKD is noticeably different than ITF or KKW TKD with his own forms and western boxing influenced stances, guards, and punches. He has created his own tae kwon do and more power to him for it.

And Mr. Rhee doesn't have to be the only example. Anyone can set his own standards on what comprises his own system of tae kwon do. I believe KarateMom has mentioned she believes the independents greatly outnumber everyone else put together. If that is an accurate ratio, then any idea of orthodoxy cannot stand, regardless of any attempts from any group to codify a standard curriculum.

I never said that taekwondo was unified or that those who go indie and set their own curriculums are 'not taekwondo'; I said that doing so is out of place.

Jhoon Rhee got his system going about the same time that the Kukkiwon was established I believe (correct me if I am wrong on this). He started his own organization and established standards. The ATA did essentially the same thing. Though each is unique, each still shares common characteristics that mark them as taekwondo.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

I never said that taekwondo was unified or that those who go indie and set their own curriculums are 'not taekwondo'; I said that doing so is out of place.

I would ask what does 'out of place' mean? There is no trademark on the name 'tae kwon do' nor is it a holy word with an exclusive definition to it. It just means the art of the hand and foot.

Jhoon Rhee got his system going about the same time that the Kukkiwon was established I believe (correct me if I am wrong on this). He started his own organization and established standards. The ATA did essentially the same thing. Though each is unique, each still shares common characteristics that mark them as taekwondo.

It doesn't matter about the timeline.

There are people like Benjamin's GM who may have formed their own groups during the same time frame. Or those who did so afterwards like Kim Soo or He Il Cho. It matters not. They set their own curricula and their own standards and they still use the name of tae kwon do. I would not call what they did out of place.

 

[puunui]

Is Jhoon Rhee's system still tae kwon do? I would argue yes, yet his brand of TKD is noticeably different than ITF or KKW TKD with his own forms and western boxing influenced stances, guards, and punches. He has created his own tae kwon do and more power to him for it.

As an aside, GM Rhee wasn't the first to incorporate boxing into Taekwondo. There were two main schools that did that. One was Moo Duk Kwan GM OH Jae Joon, who taught at the Seoul YMCA for many years. He incorporated boxing, including the stance and hand positions into his sparring. Also the Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan (Seoul Jidokwan HQ) had a boxing program. The Han Che people, notably GM LEE Byung Ro (first Taekwondoin to receive Kukkiwon 10th Dan) studied boxing and used that to create the steps and sparring strategies that are used even today.

I believe KarateMom has mentioned she believes the independents greatly outnumber everyone else put together. If that is an accurate ratio, then any idea of orthodoxy cannot stand, regardless of any attempts from any group to codify a standard curriculum.

It might be true in the US, maybe, but I do not believe that it is true worldwide.

 

[dancingalone]

As an aside, GM Rhee wasn't the first to incorporate boxing into Taekwondo. There were two main schools that did that. One was Moo Duk Kwan GM OH Jae Joon, who taught at the Seoul YMCA for many years. He incorporated boxing, including the stance and hand positions into his sparring. Also the Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan (Seoul Jidokwan HQ) had a boxing program. The Han Che people, notably GM LEE Byung Ro (first Taekwondoin to receive Kukkiwon 10th Dan) studied boxing and used that to create the steps and sparring strategies that are used even today.

If you look at Jhoon Rhee's hyung creations, you can see that boxing permeates the basics of his system. Not so much the case if you view the KKW poomsae or the ITF tuls.

 

[puunui]

If you look at Jhoon Rhee's hyung creations, you can see that boxing permeates the basics of his system. Not so much the case if you view the KKW poomsae or the ITF tuls.

The boxing incorporation in Taekwondo was more in the sparring, since boxing is a sparring based activity, and is not forms oriented. As an aside, I have been watching this show on FX I think it is, Lights Out. Last night's episode was about a guy who didn't keep his hands up and ended up getting knocked out.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I would ask what does 'out of place' mean? There is no trademark on the name 'tae kwon do' nor is it a holy word with an exclusive definition to it. It just means the art of the hand and foot.

Out of place, as in unusual, not normative.

Nor is there are trademark on the name 'way of the empty hand' but there are certain things that are normative within karate. Eschew enough of them and add in elements that are clearly idendifiable as being from another or other arts, then the question must be asked if it is still karate. For example, if you're doing mostly boxing with the occasional kick and shuto, then really, you're teaching boxing with a couple of add ons.

It doesn't matter about the timeline.

There are people like Benjamin's GM who may have formed their own groups during the same time frame. Or those who did so afterwards like Kim Soo or He Il Cho. It matters not. They set their own curricula and their own standards and they still use the name of tae kwon do. I would not call what they did out of place.

The time line wasn't the point. The point is that their systems, while different, share the common characteristics that make taekwondo taekwondo and not, say, kenpo.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

Out of place, as in unusual, not normative.

Nor is there are trademark on the name 'way of the empty hand' but there are certain things that are normative within karate. Eschew enough of them and add in elements that are clearly idendifiable as being from another or other arts, then the question must be asked if it is still karate. For example, if you're doing mostly boxing with the occasional kick and shuto, then really, you're teaching boxing with a couple of add ons.

Actually, you can compare to Uechi-ryu karate to Shotokan karate and see little in common between the two. Nonetheless they are both karate systems.

And I would say 'out of place' is a phrase used only when there is a certain standard or more established already. So belching at my dinner table is out of place, yet it would not be in certain Asian circles. The same applies to this discussion.

Another point I would make on this is what makes Songahm ATA 'in place' instead of 'out of place'? They are a former ITF group that left and then ultimately formed their own curriculum and standards, and this sounds like a lot of other groups out there, albeit on a smaller scale.

The time line wasn't the point. The point is that their systems, while different, share the common characteristics that make taekwondo taekwondo and not, say, kenpo.

Look at the Jhoon Rhee forms on youtube and compare them to KKW and ITF forms. To my eye, they are VERY different, even if they all use a reverse punch and a variation of the front stance like say JKA Shotokan, something which I would hope that no one would call TKD.

What exactly makes them all TKD? The use of yop chagi? Mr. Weiss has mentioned several times that the ITF has many specifications about the various usages of yop chagi unique to ITF...

In other words, I don't necessarily believe there needs to be any common technical link for the term 'tae kwon do' to apply. It's more of a cultural, lineal, or historical term.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Actually, you can compare to Uechi-ryu karate to Shotokan karate and see little in common between the two. Nonetheless they are both karate systems.

I'll take your word for it, as I am not overly familiar with karate styles outside of Shotokan and Kyokushin, and of the two, I have only practiced one.

Look at the Jhoon Rhee forms on youtube and compare them to KKW and ITF forms. To my eye, they are VERY different, even if they all use a reverse punch and a variation of the front stance like say JKA Shotokan, something which I would hope that no one would call TKD.

What exactly makes them all TKD? The use of yop chagi? Mr. Weiss has mentioned several times that the ITF has many specifications about the various usages of yop chagi unique to ITF....

The various usages of yop chagi exist in Kukki taekwondo but I don't believe that they are broken down with specific names. I'd have to look at the Kukki textbook again to be sure, however. I would consider commonality of techniques, even if practiced differently, to be enough of a technical link when combined with other factors.

In other words, I don't necessarily believe there needs to be any common technical link for the term 'tae kwon do' to apply. It's more of a cultural, lineal, or historical term.

In that case, with no consensus on Taekwondo being an umbrella term for essentially any Korean MA with strikes, then it is only true taekwondo if it is practiced according to the Kukkiwon or the ITF and everything else is not taekwondo or taekwon-do, but suffers from misapplication of the term. That would include the ATA, Jhoon Rhee, and all the rest.

Had the question been 'what do you believe constitutes taekwondo in general?', my answer would have been "any Korean fighting system that is predominantly strikes that can trace its roots to the five original kwans."

But because the question is 'what is true taekwondo?' I gave a more specific answer as to what I personally believe true taekwondo to be, which I will stand by.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

T

But because the question is 'what is true taekwondo?' I gave a more specific answer which I will stand by.

Daniel

Fair enough. If this is an answer applicable personally to you, I can find no fault with that. I thought you meant to state this on broader terms.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Fair enough. If this is an answer applicable personally to you, I can find no fault with that. I thought you meant to state this on broader terms.

A bit of both. That it is my personal belief is implicit in the OP"

I know we have had some decussion about what is original TKD but I would like to put a different spin by asking what do each of you to believe is true TKD. Forget about the general or the ATA or the WTF or even the ITF, this about what your beliefs are

However, I that is my answer if I am being asked to define it in broader terms. I have to stick with broader terms to an extent because Terry goes on to ask...

and what makes your version true TKD?

...and I have no personal version of taekwondo. Unless you considered what I learned, Kukki plus HKD Hoshinsul to be 'my version.' Though technically, this is Master Kim's version, not mine.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

A bit of both. That it is my personal belief is implicit in the OP"


However, I that is my answer if I am being asked to define it in broader terms. I have to stick with broader terms to an extent because Terry goes on to ask...
...and I have no personal version of taekwondo. Unless you considered what I learned, Kukki plus HKD Hoshinsul to be 'my version.' Though technically, this is Master Kim's version, not mine.

Daniel

It is your own. You practice it after all even if he taught it to you. This speaks to my wheel chair example. He is also practicing his own form of tae kwon do and it is as 'true' as any one else's.

 

[dancingalone]

The boxing incorporation in Taekwondo was more in the sparring, since boxing is a sparring based activity, and is not forms oriented. As an aside, I have been watching this show on FX I think it is, Lights Out. Last night's episode was about a guy who didn't keep his hands up and ended up getting knocked out.

This is one of my primary criticisms of forms practice as generally done in TKD. To me, I think they should be a more integrated activity with clear linkages into basics, sparring, and practical application.

Students often look upon pattern practice as useless and a time filler and I don't fault them if they've never trained forms in a comprehensive, integrated fashion.

 

[puunui]

This is one of my primary criticisms of forms practice as generally done in TKD. To me, I think they should be a more integrated activity with clear linkages into basics, sparring, and practical application.

I don't think I ever looked to forms for practical applications, even when I was studying Karate. Forms were just one of those things that you had to do, like memorizing the multiplication table or the periodic table of elements.

Students often look upon pattern practice as useless and a time filler and I don't fault them if they've never trained forms in a comprehensive, integrated fashion.

I used to think about forms like that, but I have since changed my opinion. I can appreciate forms now as a way to lengthen my life. I also try to think about the lessons embedded in the Kukkiwon Yudanja poomsae when I practice them.

 

[dancingalone]

I don't think I ever looked to forms for practical applications, even when I was studying Karate. Forms were just one of those things that you had to do, like memorizing the multiplication table or the periodic table of elements.




I used to think about forms like that, but I have since changed my opinion. I can appreciate forms now as a way to lengthen my life. I also try to think about the lessons embedded in the Kukkiwon Yudanja poomsae when I practice them.

I definitely lean more towards the practical usage side as a teacher and practitioner. My thought is that if we want to practice forms as meditative forms of gentle exercise, I would suggest delving into yoga or possibly tai chi chuan instead. Why? Because these forms have certain manipulative health benefits through activating the chakras and meridian points. In contrast, the karate kata were always more about transmitting information about how to damage another person's body instead, and I would suspect likewise the recently created TKD patterns are not intended to help physically heal and rejuvenate either.

As for fighting applications with forms, this is why I currently study and teach Okinawan karate as my primary art. I intentionally sought out an art and teacher that has meaningful knowledge transmitted through the kata. It's one of my goals to reintegrate some of this information back into the syllabus I teach my tae kwon do students. This is not meant to be a dig at TKD in any way. Each style has its own pluses and minuses, and on balance, IMO forms are one of the avenues in which TKD can grow.