|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 4, 2006 14:42:50 GMT 8
I've read quite a bit from The Taekwondo Encyclopedia and from several interviews done with General Choi. I've got to say that much which has been associated with Taekwondo seems to be politically charged. Mainly it's regarding the Japanese occupation of Korea, and General Choi's continued unhappiness of this issue.
I personally think there's enough going on for Taekwondo that it really doesn't have to justify it's identify in opposition of its Japanese roots. This is especially coming from a practitioner who does 'Traditional Taekwondo'. Yes, my form of Taekwondo is very similar to hard style Shotokan Karate. But 'very similar' is not 'same as', and there are differences between what I do and what karate kas do.
Much of what this impacts is how karate has been negated in any modern Taekwondo approach. I heard from one seminar that the General was quoted as saying "this is wrong, this is karate, this is not Taekwondo" when refering to something that was demonstrated.
Karate skills and strategies fit the karate-ka's gameplan. The Taekwondo practitioner has a different gameplan. It doesn't make Karate 'wrong'. It makes it different.
This is an issue which I think relates much to how Taekwondo views its creation of power - the sine wave. I was recently looking at how hard style karate-kas generate power. Rather than what the General said about all strikes require you to use a knee spring and push yourself up before going forward, Karate is in exact opposite. You dip down, *then* lunge forward and pop back up to the required level.
But Taekwondo practitioners are many times ridiculed for the sine wave. I admit I don't like how the sine wave is done for patterns. BUt looking at the Taekwondo game plan - there's no way anyone would be able to dip downwards right after a long range or high kick and speed up to the attacker. With the hips tilted for range and angle, the best way is to drop the body with gravity to strike out at the opponent. No karateka will find themselves in this situation if they're doing combat in a 'traditional' manner.
For this thread, I have gone through some resources and I have basically ignored everything I thought sounded like propoganda. I wanted to slough off whatever did not sound like a direct comment on the artform itself. I hope anyone else will do the same.
Perhaps we'll see something really cool at the end of this exercise?
Colin
[Taekwondo] is specifically designed for swift retaliation against the moving aggressor. Most of the devastating manoeuvres in Taekwon-Do are based specially on the initial impact of a blow plus the consequential additional force provided by the rebound of the opponent's moving part of the body.
General Choi Hong Hi Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia Vol1 p22
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 4, 2006 15:10:43 GMT 8
Power and accuracy must be developed to such a high degree that only one single blow is needed to stop an opponent, so that the student can shift stance and block or attack another opponent. Each pattern is different from the other in order to develop reaction against changing circumstances.
General Choi Hong Hi Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia Vol1 p236
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 4, 2006 15:21:37 GMT 8
To call Taekwon-Do purely Korean is somewhat like one country claiming to have introduced fire.
Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia Vol 1 p11
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 4, 2006 15:39:28 GMT 8
The years of research and development by General Choi resulted in the Chang Hun style of Taekwon-Do. Though this style is primarily based on Taek Kyon, Soo Bak-Gi and Karate techniques, a myriad of techniques have been added, especially in the variety of hand techniques and perfection of foot techniques.
The combination of the old classical techniques and new modifications have resulted in a form of self-defence and mental conditioning ...
Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia Vol 1 p35
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 4, 2006 20:04:19 GMT 8
I also include the names of patriots who willingly give up their lives to regain Korea's freedom and independence ...
Each Tul (pattern) of Taekwon-Do expresses the thoughts and the actions of these great men, so the students of Taekwon-Do must reflect the true intentions of those whose name each Tul bears.
General Choi Hong Hi Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia Vol 1 p89
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 4, 2006 20:07:07 GMT 8
The defender must know how to make use of his opponent's momentum and force while utilizing his or her dynamic and reflexive actions against a momentarily undefended target.
General Choi Hong Hi Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia Vol 1 p162
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 4, 2006 20:13:49 GMT 8
... if your opponent is rushing towards you at a high speed, by the slightest blow at his head, the force with which you strike his head would be that of his own onslaught plus that of your blow. The two forces combined; his, which is large, and yours, which is small are quite impressive. This, then, is the reaction force from the opponent.
General Choi Hong Hi Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia Vol 2 p15
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 5, 2006 15:15:17 GMT 8
I wanted to create a new Korean martial art that was based on scientific movement and contained a mentality to fit Korean soldiers. General Choi Hong Hi Taekwondotimes.com p47 January 2000 www.geocities.com/tkd_unknown/47.html
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 6, 2006 21:24:47 GMT 8
|
|
|
Post by supergroup7 on Jan 7, 2006 1:02:33 GMT 8
Colin, I have enjoyed reading each and every one of these postings. Thank you for placing them on the forum.
I have a few questions.
based specially on the initial impact of a blow plus the consequential additional force provided by the rebound
The Rebound? The opponent gets hurt by rebounding back from the strike? Paint me confused.. do they hit themselves again when they react to the initial strike?
. The two forces combined; his, which is large, and yours, which is small are quite impressive. This, then, is the reaction force from the opponent.
Is this what he meant by the "rebound" part?
contained a mentality to fit Korean soldiers
What is the main difference between Korean soldiers, and other types of soldiers that General Choi Hong Hi felt that he needed to address this?
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 9, 2006 20:28:07 GMT 8
based specially on the initial impact of a blow plus the consequential additional force provided by the rebound The Rebound? The opponent gets hurt by rebounding back from the strike? Paint me confused.. do they hit themselves again when they react to the initial strike? . The two forces combined; his, which is large, and yours, which is small are quite impressive. This, then, is the reaction force from the opponent.Is this what he meant by the "rebound" part? The opponent so stunned because he was hit by a Taekwondo practitioner that he hits himself to make sure he's awake. Hahahahah. :-) I'm not exactly sure what the General is saying, but I assume the rebound is what he called the 'reaction force.' In a circuitous fashion, the 'rebound' seems to have a similar meaning to 'reaction'. Remember, English wasn't his first language. I don't think he meant to differentiate between Korean and non-Korean soldiers. I think he's referring to Korean soldiers as a Korean General in a newly forming army. Thus he's clarifying a point that the martial art is primarily for his soldiers, rather than for civilians. Colin
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 13, 2006 16:32:45 GMT 8
I'd like to offer my definition of what Traditional Taekwondo is.
Taekwondo is a hard style martial art, its power generation is linear. Where circular and swinging techniques are used, they in line with the directness of the strike and the ultimate objective to 'displace' the opponent's centre of gravity or knock opponent out. This is similar to many other hard styles but is dissimilar to arts such as aikido or jujutsu.
There are combat styled arts that use different technique combinations at different distances. This is an effective way to train which is used in Taekwondo. Such an approach is also evidenced in Chang Hon patterns. However, from my own continuing research, it seems more evident that Taekwondo expouses the use of any weapon at any distance. This may result in an interchanging of hand and leg techniques to keep the opponent guessing. This differs from Karate in that Karate's kicks seem to be kept more for short range work to complement hand techniques.
Bearing in mind the need to use upper and lower body techniques interchangeably, the Taekwondo practitioner must have a greater amount of torso flexibility more similar to Chinese style martial artists as opposed to the more rigid Shotokan style which it draws its influence from. Such flexibility allows for the alternation of COG positions required for successful upper body attacks and then successful lower body attacks. This is the greatest challenge for the Taekwondo practitioner - it's a precursor to the modern MMA fighter - to keep in mind the different 'game plans' and to accomodate accordingly.
Similar to other martial arts, Taekwondo pits the practitioner against an opponent. The objective being to attack the opponent, thwart any counter strike or defence, and take the opponent down - in minimal time, if possible. Against multiple opponents, I was taught to position all in a line and deal with them one at a time, also seeking to use one opponent as a shield if possible. I have not seen anything in Taekwondo's patterns that is counter to that. In fact, Taekwondo's training allows the practitioner to thrive in multiple person exercises within the dojo.
Colin
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 13, 2006 23:36:47 GMT 8
An interesting link: Problems in the Identity and Philosophy of T'aegwondo and Their Historical Causes By: Steven D. Capener www.bstkd.com/capener.1.htm
|
|
|
Post by supergroup7 on Jan 15, 2006 12:45:19 GMT 8
Bearing in mind the need to use upper and lower body techniques interchangeably, the Taekwondo practitioner must have a greater amount of torso flexibility more similar to Chinese style martial artists as opposed to the more rigid Shotokan style
Fascinating! If I'm understanding this correctly, a TKD artist would be able to separate the top from the bottom more easilly because they are looking for that creativity, and adaptability, but a Shotokanist is looking for solidity of the whole body into one technique for to increase the power of that strike. Right?
|
|
|
Post by Colin Wee on Jan 20, 2006 11:36:48 GMT 8
Bearing in mind the need to use upper and lower body techniques interchangeably, the Taekwondo practitioner must have a greater amount of torso flexibility more similar to Chinese style martial artists as opposed to the more rigid Shotokan styleFascinating! If I'm understanding this correctly, a TKD artist would be able to separate the top from the bottom more easilly because they are looking for that creativity, and adaptability, but a Shotokanist is looking for solidity of the whole body into one technique for to increase the power of that strike. Right? From the theory within the Chang Hon forms as we practice it, Taekwondo is also looking to increase the power of that one strike, but within that context, yes, we are looking for innovation through flexibility and to see upper and lower body as interchangeable, modular at times, then connected when needed.
|
|