What truly is "Traditional" Tae Kwon Do?

[WMKS Shogun]

After reading through a bit of the "Art VS Sport" thread (very interesting stuff, by the way), I figured we needed a thread to discuss our ideas on what traditional Tae Kwon Do actually is, and what makes it so gosh-darned traditional in the first place.

I suppose for me traditional Tae Kwon Do incorporates forms and their applications, basics, self defense, terms/vocabulary, history and traditions, sparring (as a drill, not a contest), and breaking. It should be a complete package, helping students to grow physically through practice, mentally through learning, and spiritually through hardship.

I would love to hear what others think and I will add more to my own as the thread progresses. So, what do you all think?

 

[dancingalone]

I think you need to delve deeper into your actual drills, correction systems, and outcome measurements to get at the real answer. We all do forms, self-defense, step sparring, and live sparring at some level.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Here are my halmarks of a "traditional Taekwondo school" in order of importance (according to me) with the first four a must:

Poomsae/hyung/tul
Boon hae for said poomsae/hyung/tul
Hoshinsul
Alive sparring with a fairly full set of targets and use of both feet and hands.
Step sparring
Dobok with belts (as opposed to whatever they wear in MMA).
Korean terminology
Breaking
Conditioning for said breaking
Sport sparring

Traditionally, taekwondo has no weapons curriculum, so I did not include it in the list.

Sport sparring has been a part of taekwondo since the late sixties/early seventies, so I do consider it traditional.

Daniel

 

[Joab]

When I took traditional tae-kwon-do, I was told by the teacher it was non contact.

 

[Manny]

After reading through a bit of the "Art VS Sport" thread (very interesting stuff, by the way), I figured we needed a thread to discuss our ideas on what traditional Tae Kwon Do actually is, and what makes it so gosh-darned traditional in the first place.

I suppose for me traditional Tae Kwon Do incorporates forms and their applications, basics, self defense, terms/vocabulary, history and traditions, sparring (as a drill, not a contest), and breaking. It should be a complete package, helping students to grow physically through practice, mentally through learning, and spiritually through hardship.

I would love to hear what others think and I will add more to my own as the thread progresses. So, what do you all think?

I have the same way of thinking, I will ad meditation, and some of practical philosophy.

Manny

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

When I took traditional tae-kwon-do, I was told by the teacher it was non contact.

Wow!! That is the complete opposite of my own experience.

Daniel

 

[Xue Sheng]

I don’t know what you would call traditional but back when I took TKD it was pre-Olympic (long before the Olympic demo in Seoul in 1988) and the teacher was from, trained in and ranked in Korea and part of our curriculum had close in fighting drills, some joint locks and takedowns.

Oh and there was contact and a lot more targets to hit, not just points stuff.

 

[mango.man]

How much real "tradition" is there (or should be expected) in a Martial Art that has only existed for 54 years?

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

How much real "tradition" is there (or should be expected) in a Martial Art that has only existed for 54 years?

As I said on another thread, this art is so new that traditions are still sorting themselves out.

It took the time from 1945 to roughly 1973 to codify the art into a specific art that was at least somewhat distinct from karate (i.e. unique forms, new sparring style, new names, etc.), during which time there was a great deal of infighting, political jockeying, and organizational changes.

I do think that 54 years is long enough to establish a foundation of tradition to some degree, but mainly only in technical elements.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

How much real "tradition" is there (or should be expected) in a Martial Art that has only existed for 54 years?

Great question. It depends on your version of TKD I suppose. There are strains of tae kwon do that still teach material from the kwan days when curriculum was either Shotokan or Shudokan karate.

There's also those independent TKD schools that have reached back into the karate connection for additional insight and training. I am a regular instructor at one such school. They teach the General Choi forms with no sine wave. I flesh out their understanding of the Choi forms using my knowledge of the equivalent shorin-ryu karate forms. The result is definitely not textbook ITF instruction, but it is a fusion of Korean/Okinawan karate. This school could legitimately claim that they follow training ideas that fall back to at least the late 1800s through me.

I also teach them kobudo.

 

[miguksaram]

Traditional Taekwondo = Karate and some chuan'fa...

 

[Earl Weiss]

Wow!! That is the complete opposite of my own experience.

Daniel

You need to understand that Safety Gear was primitve to non existant in the 1960's and earlier.

Han Cha Kyo was originaly Chung Do Kwan and one of the pioneers, involved in the demo before President Rhee in 1954 (1953?). And an Original Oh Do Kwan member / instructor. He was once asked why they did non contact sparring as he had done in the Oh Do Kwan.

His answer was simple. At any moment they might be engaged in real combat and hand to hand warfare. They couldn't risk having to do that with injuries sustained in TKD sparring.

 

[granfire]

when i took traditional tae-kwon-do, i was told by the teacher it was non contact.

hahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[Xue Sheng]

All I can say is TKD back way back when..... Students asked my teacher for protective gear and he thought was pretty funny because there was no protective gear in a fight.

But he went and ordered some from somewhere and all I can say is the protective gear back in the stone age hurt more than getting kicked without it. It was something like bamboo staves covered with thin padding which spread the pain across your entire torso instead of just where you were hit... and it was at that moment I decided the sports side of it was not for me and stuck with the other group becuase they were not wearing protective gear... and yup... you did get hurt from time to time

 

[ATC]

...the protective gear back in the stone age hurt more than getting kicked without it. It was something like bamboo staves covered with thin padding which spread the pain across your entire torso instead of just where you were hit...

Funny thing about your comment is that I feel this way now. I hate...uhmmm...dislike wearing the hogus. When you get hit you feel the pain everywhere, without them I only feel the foot or fist where I got hit, and that hurts a lot less. I think the gear is more for preventing bruises than pain. That includes the head, forearms, shin, and instep guards.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I think the gear is more for preventing bruises

Now why would I want to do that.... sorry... that damn old school
dinosaur reared it ugly head agian

 

[dortiz]

Then my Jow would go to waste!



Dave O.

 

[dancingalone]

Then my Jow would go to waste!



Dave O.

Sadness is spilling or shattering a jow jar that cost you $400 to brew.

 

[WMKS Shogun]

For the record guys, I am enjoying your take on what is 'traditional' Tae Kwon Do and the great thing is in this case, I think it really is left to the individual or school or organization to determine and that can be a powerful thing. I like Daniel Sullivan's (sorry if I misspelled the last name, I am typing this quickly on my lunchbreak) comment about how TKD is only about 50 years old and therefore cannot really have many strong traditions. To some extent I agree, but that does not mean it is devoid of them. I am also enjoying hearing some of the stories from our more venerable members who trained 'back in the day' and hearing how different it was from today and also how different the individual experiences were. Thanks guys and if anyone else has anything to share, please keep it coming.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Your spelling looked okay to me.

Just to clarify, it is not so much that I feel that it is too new to have traditions; it does. But it is new enough that those traditions are still being sorted out.

Taekwondo has spent the past 54 years trying to be not-karate, but in order to get off of the ground, it began as essentially Korean karate. In the process, it inherited a good number of traditions from karate.

One was the kyu/dan and belt system (karate inherited that from judo), another the dogi (also inherited from judo by karate). Forms were inherited, much of the base technique was inherited, sparring style was inherited, and even the name, "karate" was used early on when promoting taekwondo outside of Korea.

Now, taekwondo has its own forms, and in some orgs, is on its second or third generation of them, its own dobok in Kukkiwon/WTF, its own unique sparring style in the WTF, which is now an olympic event as well and is very distinct from Shotokan karate.

But all of taekwondo has not adopted the same items. Only the WTF uses its sparring style, a lot of schools do not use the vee neck dobok, and all of taekwondo still uses the same belt and kyu/dan system found in karate.

There are traditions in terms of behavior that are common to all Asian MA due to them being common to Asian culture, and I would expect these to endure.

Daniel