Unanswered questions

[PSMA]

Having some down time watching a video I’ve been sent featuring 45 minutes of General Choi teaching. It is mostly a Q&A type seminar about techniques and Forms, and some answers make sense but most answers deflect from the actual questions and some are even unrelated to the question. I just can’t understand why some groups follow a system so blindly when its founder doesn’t have the answers to questions about his own system that he designed. Not to speak ill of anyone, but from my understanding, every system has its positives and negatives and there isn’t always a perfect answer as everything in martial arts can be unpredictable, but to say something is done this way because of X & Y and everyone in the room is proving it can’t be the case, surely makes you questions why it is that way? Comparing with what I have learned about these certain techniques and forms, it doesn’t surprise me why so many individual clubs break away and go independent if the person that “invented” it can’t explain or justify it.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I can't speak to your specific video. I offer this having been through various courses and seminars with him.
First and foremost I do not and did not agree with everything he said. But then again there are likely few people who I agree with everything on.
Next, he was somewhat unique when it came to instructors of his era in that he gave reasons for why he did most things. He also gave examples of what he didn't want and why. Again, this is not to say I agreed with everything.
Sometimes a question was asked and you could see him process it by translating it from English to Korean, formulating an answer in Korean, translating the answer to English and then giving the answer. Sometimes the answer missed the point. I had been at courses where his son was present and this happened, and then his son would have a conversation with him in Korean and he would give an answer that addressed the question. Other times the question was asked again but slightly differently and the answer would be responsive. Sometimes the question was never addressed but then during a later course the same question was asked and addressed.
Even native speakers can miss the concept being addressed.
Then there were times when I did not grasp the concept he was trying to convey, only for it to be clear later at other courses or if I asked others who had been to other courses with him.
If you care to give a specific example >>>> but to say something is done this way because of X & Y and everyone in the room is proving it can’t be the case, <<<I can search my notes to see if he provided an answer.

 

[ballen0351]

I'll also add sometimes presenters have preset talking points for things they want to cover and due to time constrictions they may deflect or not answer specific questions so they can hit their talking points. Politicians are famous for this but a lot of other presenters do it as well.

 

[DaveB]

Having some down time watching a video I’ve been sent featuring 45 minutes of General Choi teaching. It is mostly a Q&A type seminar about techniques and Forms, and some answers make sense but most answers deflect from the actual questions and some are even unrelated to the question. I just can’t understand why some groups follow a system so blindly when its founder doesn’t have the answers to questions about his own system that he designed. Not to speak ill of anyone, but from my understanding, every system has its positives and negatives and there isn’t always a perfect answer as everything in martial arts can be unpredictable, but to say something is done this way because of X & Y and everyone in the room is proving it can’t be the case, surely makes you questions why it is that way? Comparing with what I have learned about these certain techniques and forms, it doesn’t surprise me why so many individual clubs break away and go independent if the person that “invented” it can’t explain or justify it.

There's not much to discuss in your statement. Perhaps you could actually list the umanswered questions. Maybe just one every couple of days if there are a lot.

You may find that folks here know of answers Choi gave in other interviews or texts.

 

[PSMA]

I wasn’t trying to have any pot shots at anyone especially General Choi, and I would agree that this is one video and it was clearly edited so probably missing points which may have actually been covered either in the course or another.

My point was simply I can understand why some become independent especially now GC has passed. There are so many unanswered questions or in some cases misunderstood answers that create the separation umoungst groups.

 

[PSMA]

I can't speak to your specific video. I offer this having been through various courses and seminars with him.
First and foremost I do not and did not agree with everything he said. But then again there are likely few people who I agree with everything on.
Next, he was somewhat unique when it came to instructors of his era in that he gave reasons for why he did most things. He also gave examples of what he didn't want and why. Again, this is not to say I agreed with everything.
Sometimes a question was asked and you could see him process it by translating it from English to Korean, formulating an answer in Korean, translating the answer to English and then giving the answer. Sometimes the answer missed the point. I had been at courses where his son was present and this happened, and then his son would have a conversation with him in Korean and he would give an answer that addressed the question. Other times the question was asked again but slightly differently and the answer would be responsive. Sometimes the question was never addressed but then during a later course the same question was asked and addressed.
Even native speakers can miss the concept being addressed.
Then there were times when I did not grasp the concept he was trying to convey, only for it to be clear later at other courses or if I asked others who had been to other courses with him.
If you care to give a specific example >>>> but to say something is done this way because of X & Y and everyone in the room is proving it can’t be the case, <<<I can search my notes to see if he provided an answer.

The question was regarding 3, 2, 1 step sparring and pre arranged sparring, and how important they are in relation to free sparring? The answer was relating to who do you first love first and who loved you first and when people ask its you mother and father as they naturally do. I would suspect that this was likely a misunderstanding with the language barrier. Of which to think about it, may well be the main reason some of the answers seemed less relevant to others.

Another subject was mentioned about how the instep can’t be used as an attacking tool (except to very soft targets) and when asked why there was some friendly digs at the WTF from GC and saying how they don’t know anything

 

[DaveB]

Thats a good question. I'd be curious as to the official TKD answer too.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Having some down time watching a video I’ve been sent featuring 45 minutes of General Choi teaching. It is mostly a Q&A type seminar about techniques and Forms, and some answers make sense but most answers deflect from the actual questions and some are even unrelated to the question. I just can’t understand why some groups follow a system so blindly when its founder doesn’t have the answers to questions about his own system that he designed. Not to speak ill of anyone, but from my understanding, every system has its positives and negatives and there isn’t always a perfect answer as everything in martial arts can be unpredictable, but to say something is done this way because of X & Y and everyone in the room is proving it can’t be the case, surely makes you questions why it is that way? Comparing with what I have learned about these certain techniques and forms, it doesn’t surprise me why so many individual clubs break away and go independent if the person that “invented” it can’t explain or justify it.

I'm not famillar with the video(s) in question, but I'll suggest one though adjustment: don't confuse "didn't" with "can't" or even "won't".

Often, when asked a question we either misunderstand the point of the question, or we drag ourselves off on a tangent of something we feel is more important to deal with. And sometimes the answer isn't something we are interested in discussing at that point for some reason (this would fall under the "won't" category).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I wasn’t trying to have any pot shots at anyone especially General Choi, and I would agree that this is one video and it was clearly edited so probably missing points which may have actually been covered either in the course or another.

My point was simply I can understand why some become independent especially now GC has passed. There are so many unanswered questions or in some cases misunderstood answers that create the separation umoungst groups.

In some cases, the issue is likely that there isn't one answer, but many. I find a lot of students, when talking to high-ranking instructors, founders-of-style, etc. will ask for something deep, meaningful, and definitive on a topic where there are many shades of grey and many variations that are useful.

 

[skribs]

I just can’t understand why some groups follow a system so blindly

I've only seen one ITF person giving instruction, Ginger Ninja Trickster on YouTube. And he is a very very good video instructor (the best video instructor I've ever seen). Now, I study KKW TKD, not ITF TKD, but there is quite a lot of overlap. If I was training at his school, I would trust the system because I trust him, and not because of anything General Choi said or did.

There's two thoughts that come to mind regarding this:

1. It's like another post on the TKD forums about how "Black Belts should know who X and Y are." Unless X and Y are teaching me, what's important is what I'm learning at my school. People don't have to "blindly follow" General Choi. They have to follow their local ITF master.
   
   
2. My philosophy has always been that it's not the art, it's the master. So it's less about the ITF system and more about how well your master teaches it. Whether or not you will learn good fighting principles and applications is not up to the fact you're taking ITF, or KKW, or ATA, or Shotokan, or Wing Chun, or MMA, or whatever else you might take. It's up to the ability of your instructors to teach, your dedication to learn, and your compatibility with their teaching style.

 

[dvcochran]

Having some down time watching a video I’ve been sent featuring 45 minutes of General Choi teaching. It is mostly a Q&A type seminar about techniques and Forms, and some answers make sense but most answers deflect from the actual questions and some are even unrelated to the question. I just can’t understand why some groups follow a system so blindly when its founder doesn’t have the answers to questions about his own system that he designed. Not to speak ill of anyone, but from my understanding, every system has its positives and negatives and there isn’t always a perfect answer as everything in martial arts can be unpredictable, but to say something is done this way because of X & Y and everyone in the room is proving it can’t be the case, surely makes you questions why it is that way? Comparing with what I have learned about these certain techniques and forms, it doesn’t surprise me why so many individual clubs break away and go independent if the person that “invented” it can’t explain or justify it.

Is there a way you can send me the video?

 

[Earl Weiss]

My point was simply I can understand why some become independent especially now GC has passed. There are so many unanswered questions or in some cases misunderstood answers that create the separation umoungst groups.

Certainly there are some unanswered questions. His latest works only contained 15 Volumes as well as several video productions. If there were no unanswered questions there would likely be 150 Volumes or more and as many videos

 

[Earl Weiss]

The question was regarding 3, 2, 1 step sparring and pre arranged sparring, and how important they are in relation to free sparring? The answer was relating to who do you first love first and who loved you first and when people ask its you mother and father as they naturally do.

Sometimes he would speak metaphorically. This could have great impact or the point could be lost. He could have quoted Dalton in Road House and simply said "Opinions Vary"

 

[Earl Weiss]

Another subject was mentioned about how the instep can’t be used as an attacking tool (except to very soft targets) and when asked why there was some friendly digs at the WTF from GC and saying how they don’t know anything

The above seems to list 2 subjects. Are you saying he didn't respond to either or you did not like the responses. i.e. instep / top of foot used for soft targets and his disdain for WT / Kukki TKD.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Thats a good question. I'd be curious as to the official TKD answer too.

To which question do you refer?

 

[Earl Weiss]

. There are so many unanswered questions or in some cases misunderstood answers that create the separation umoungst groups.

I'm sorry, but IMO what you state has nothing to do with separation among groups.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Sitting here wishing there was a video that could be referenced. I'm completely clueless of what is being referenced and the questions that weren't answered.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I find a lot of students, when talking to high-ranking instructors, founders-of-style, etc. will ask for something deep, meaningful, and definitive on a topic where there are many shades of grey and many variations that are useful.

I find that many students think high-ranking instructors know everything and that's far from the truth. People in general tend to push "master" higher than what is healthy. These people know a lot about what they do, but if they haven't thought about a certain question, they may not have an answer.

 

[pdg]

Sometimes he would speak metaphorically. This could have great impact or the point could be lost. He could have quoted Dalton in Road House and simply said "Opinions Vary"

Sometimes it's not even as far as a true metaphor, not everything translates...

For instance, I can say something like "he fell in the apples" and people from some parts of France will know exactly what I'm talking about, people from other parts of France will think I mean something else, and someone from Sicily won't have a clue.

Sure, you can translate words but context and intent are sometimes entirely different.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Sure, you can translate words but context and intent are sometimes entirely different.

Yes, translating to convey a concept is often difficult. But somehow we need to get the meaning across. Plus, in unique environments the terminology is often unique as well. General Choi would explain he had to come up with / choose hundreds of names for techniques and you simply had to understand how the terminology applied. I expect that he came up with Korean names and someone helped him come up with English equivalents. Not an exact science, and it must have been repeated many times over as the works were translated into various languages. Once at a course a student was questioning how a move should be done differently if the text said "While Forming" as opposed to "While Executing" The General's son was there and his answer was "You are over analyzing" . So the point (IMO) was the process of translating or choosing words was not as painstakingly exacting as we might think.