The 'real meaning' of TKD patterns......

**gringokahn** · Posted On: 1/22/2007 6:42pm

A friend of mine from Mexico once told someone while arguing...

"You'd eat twenty miles of bullshit just to see where it came from..."

Since I don't agree with katas, patterns and forms I probably wouldn't get much out of reading this book. Stuart, you have and will continue to encounter even more detractors here feel the same.

You will also encouter those who see what you say you are trying to do as the following-

Quote:
Originally posted in ridicule of Wing Chun:
Virus (on another thread)
"We cross-train to fill some of the gaps in the system"
means:
"We give the chun credibilty by using boxing and wrestling, and calling it Wing Chun"

Response by Sophist-

This phenomenon interests me. I suspect that one of the main reasons people do this is because they have attained a highish rank in an art that they discover is ineffective. This rank accords them a certain amount of social status among others who train with them. They're unwilling to give up the privileges of rank and stop training in that style, but they're keenly aware of the failures of their system. Maybe they cross-train, maybe they meet informally with other high-ranking buddies and spar, but somehow they acquire more respectable skills and finally feel competent enough to teach them in tandem with live training. This gives them both the black belt or sash in a system the uneducated can be persuaded is effective, and the skills the educated will respect.

In the long run, though, I think this is mostly a bad thing, even though it seems okay in the short term. If people represent their training as typical of their style and it's not, it ends up bringing people impressed by them to bad teachers to learn choreography.

Response by Virus-

I was thinking a very similar thought today. You can be high ranked in some art, find out that it has "limitations" but that art grants you status and prestige amongst peers. Giving up that status and becoming a noob white-belt tapping out to his tenth armbar for the evening is a big ego dive.

I posted the above simply because it sums up these views very succinctly without me having to type it all out in another way. I'm surprised I haven't heard anyone say it yet here, but one has to wonder if you are this type or whether you actually believe in what you are doing and your circumstances regarding training with other arts is actually the way you are saying.

Unfortunately, all too often this has been the case when books and articles appear which claim to get something out of forms/katas/patterns that have been around for so long. Especially when some or all of the people who created them are and/or were alive until very recently, and these things seemed not to have been taught or emphasized as well as the fact that after all this time nobody seemed to have "realized" or "discovered" the things that the author is saying.

Obviously, there are other things that can factor in like the focus of TKD the past 10-20 or whatever years on the sport aspect of things. Maybe because of this and the political competitions and rivalries between the ITF and WTF (as well as all the others...ad nauseum...). TKD as a whole seems more focused on kicks and less on hand techniques and that has generally speaking been the case, because those of us who have given TKD any time or taken a serious look should know that TKD does have hand strikes as well as other techniques that aren't emphasized or at least don't seem to be emphasized as much. The leadership of TKD seems always to also be the downfall of TKD...but this you already know...so I digress...

Anyways, as has already been said because of the sins of past idiots and all of the charlatans and "popular art" bandwagon jumpers, we are naturally skeptical.

So whether or not you are just a simpleton or are an individual who is merely capitalizing and manipulating for personal or political gain; we can't really tell.

**UpaLumpa** · Posted On: 1/22/2007 6:55pm

Originally Posted by StuartA

(1)Only by some that felt you needed a BB in judo to teach some basic throws as I think they initially were under the impression I was teaching full on grappling classes, which of course Im not or that the book was promoting patterns replacing ground work - which of course it doesnt! But I think thats cleared up now!

...

(2)I agree that I teach some basic stand up grappling techniques - which you dont like, but as repeated in other posts, its not a full on grappling program by any means, just some basic techniques and bits to fill a void which I freely admit is a flaw within the system. As 99% is technically part of TKD anyway (as I have said above and anyone with the texts can confirm) I am quite within the realms of my system to teach it. The fact that I try to make it better has fallen on deaf ears as only the fact that they are not up to your standards seems to matter to you.

(1) It is, again, about whether or not you've had sufficient training to teach basic throws (i.e. outside of TKD). It is not about whether or not you have some arbitrary rank.

(2) Whether or not judo throws fall under the ever expanding umbrella of tkd is an independent issue of whether or not you're qualified to teach them and also independent of your rank in TKD. Oh and your statement is mildly contradictory.

Anyway, I'm repeating myself and you're continuing to conflate issues. Suffice to say your grappling ability or lackthereof is independent of the main focus of the thread and not worth hashing out further as I doubt your biography is attracting people looking for grappling training.

**StuartA** · Posted On: 1/22/2007 7:16pm

Originally Posted by gringokahn

A friend of mine from Mexico once told someone while arguing...

"You'd eat twenty miles of bullshit just to see where it came from..."

Not if it doesnt interest you in the first place!

Since I don't agree with katas, patterns and forms I probably wouldn't get much out of reading this book.

Which as Ive said all along is fine by me.. Im not trying to change anyones opinion of patterns/kata.. just make those that practice them more productive and beneficial.

Stuart, you have and will continue to encounter even more detractors here feel the same.

Yup, Ive realised that.. and with them its a pointless debate really! Not because they are right or wrong (for them) just cos they arnt into it!

You will also encouter those who see what you say you are trying to do as the following

>>>> reads passage <<<<
Theres a difference though. Firstly, I cross train for enjoyment of training and learning experience more so than fill in the gaps. With IAOMAS I am lucky to have the opportunity to train with others on a regular basis, I dont actually see this as cross-training, just training with other martial artists of different styles, which I enjoy as Im a martial artist first and a TKD man second. With regards to the throwing etc. as Ive stated repeatedly I readily admit the manual stuff is poor, so actively try to make what is there anyway, better! Not different stuff.. the same stuff! I could simply ignore it and not do it like many TKD schools do (or dont as the case maybe) but I choose to encompass the whole system (model sparring excluded). A wing chun man punches very different to a boxer, whereas western boxing techniques have a part of TKD since as long as Ive been doing it and if I wasnt shown them well or I thought they were weak, Id seek out a boxer to make them better - bit like tweaking a car to make it faster/smarter etc. Im not swapping something by doing that, just tweaking it!

Again, I dont represent the throws and things as typical of the style, mearly that they are there in the text so should be taught/trained. Furthermore, I always point out these short comings and explain that although what we do is adequate for what we need them for (if practised regularly and when at a reasonable level obviously) and its worth going to a direct grappler to make them if you want to. Furthermore, I have no problem with donning a white belt if I take at another art at all - ego is not my big thing. I always stand at the back of classes Ive visited of other styles, its usually the class instructor that wants me at the front, but Im happy at the back if I dont know the system (even in my system Im not hung up on grades and and happy standing anywhere really)

I posted the above simply because it sums up these views very succinctly without me having to type it all out in another way. I'm surprised I haven't heard anyone say it yet here, but one has to wonder if you are this type or whether you actually believe in what you are doing and your circumstances regarding training with other arts is actually the way you are saying.

My circumstances are as stated, Ive no reason to lie as Im not trying to draw sucker students into a Mcdojo on exhorbarent contracts - all my set up is pretty much stay/leave easily type of thing. Nor am I trying to portray myself as a martial arts mega-man or something - I simply do what I thinks best for my students (and previously for me). My personal circumstances (4 kids, one with down-syndrome, a full time job and still training at my own system) dicates I dont have that much time (especially regularly) to train in a new system - theres arts Id love to do from the ground up, but couldnt commit to them! Sure, I could of 10 years ago.. but I invested all my training time into TKD.

Unfortunately, all too often this has been the case when books and articles appear which claim to get something out of forms/katas/patterns that have been around for so long. Especially when some or all of the people who created them are and/or were alive until very recently, and these things seemed not to have been taught or emphasized as well as the fact that after all this time nobody seemed to have "realized" or "discovered" the things that the author is saying.

As I said in a previous post, the simple history of where the ITF patterns come from dictates theres more to them than taught. Shotokan Karate & TKD history tells us why they are not in there now. The way the ITF was run tells us why they were not open to new ideas about what they have already done - I have not really done anything more than put 2 & 2 togethor and used that to research (not flash of light, discovery etc) and examine what I was taught/shown.

Obviously, there are other things that can factor in like the focus of TKD the past 10-20 or whatever years on the sport aspect of things.

yes, there are many reasons and there is a section of the book that discusses them. The whys and why nots! And yes, I do undertsand the rest of it as you stated.

Anyways, as has already been said because of the sins of past idiots and all of the charlatans and "popular art" bandwagon jumpers, we are naturally skeptical.

Skeptic is fine, closed mind is a waste of my fingertips!

So whether or not you are just a simpleton or are an individual who is merely capitalizing and manipulating for personal or political gain; we can't really tell.

I am none of those things. Just someone who wants to better the art he does - no more, no less! You cant tell because you dont know me, ask others that do!

Stuart

**StuartA** · Posted On: 1/22/2007 7:31pm

Originally Posted by oldman34

In spite of myself, I find that I am beggining to like you.

Which just goes to confirm you did have you mind made up in the beginning!! Though Im starting to like you too.. just a little mind you :-)

I will pick up a copy of the book. I am interested in TKD taking a more realistic approach to self defense. Is your book the answer?

Its the answer to making patterns more productive, its not a SD book per se and obviously patterns are just one area of training, out of many.

I dont know. I will at least give you the benefit of the doubt until I read it.

Okay - like I said, feel free to email me directly when you have a copy if you like!

Cheers,

Stuart

**StuartA** · Posted On: 1/22/2007 7:42pm

Originally Posted by UpaLumpa

(1) It is, again, about whether or not you've had sufficient training to teach basic throws (i.e. outside of TKD). It is not about whether or not you have some arbitrary rank.

Actually it was about rank, but I digress.. as basic throws fall under the scope of TKD and I have learnt them within TKD as well as outside of TKD previously and afterwards the answer is yes.

(2) Whether or not judo throws fall under the ever expanding umbrella of tkd is an independent issue of whether or not you're qualified to teach them and also independent of your rank in TKD.

TKD's umbrella is simply being opened more fully from where its been held by those that dont wish to do more than they have to or admit they arnt teaching the full spectrum of what was originally the system. The issues you talk of are "joined" issues as it explains why its there to teach and why they should be taught. The fact that many of the TKD pioneers had BB's in judo also goes along way to explain why they are there. As I do TKD, have learnt TKD which includes learning the throws and am a qualified instructor of it, then yes Im qualifed to teach them if that is the only issue, as I am qualified to teach the kicks and the rest of it up to my level.

Oh and your statement is mildly contradictory.

Is it!! I dont see it, but perhaps I may have worded it incorrectly or something, or its not been read right!!

Anyway, I'm repeating myself and you're continuing to conflate issues.

The issues mix as they are inter-related and go to explain the reasoning of things!

Suffice to say your grappling ability or lackthereof is independent of the main focus of the thread and not worth hashing out further

Good.. now as a grappler yourself can I ask for your help with something :redface: (only joking).
Actually, as we seem done now, heres something you might want to, as you say "call them on" seeing as BJJ dont kick or punch do they..!! (Its from a BJJ site which I believe would be popular amongst BJJ guys as its by the Machado's). :new_argue It doesnt bother me btw - more power to them!

Ya know Im yaking your chain right! goose/gander etc.! :wav:

as I doubt your biography is attracting people looking for grappling training.

Thats good cos its not meant to and those that have contacted me in the past wanting this - I send in the right direction!

Stuart

**Blues-man** · Posted On: 1/22/2007 9:42pm

Originally Posted by StuartA

Like I said, Im dont believe all the ITF hype and have my own opinions, some of which you touch upon in the thread, bits I agree with, other bits I disagree with, but prefer to feel that despite his short comings, without Gen Choi pushing the art, it would never be as popular as it was - unfortunatly, the efforts expended doing that unfortunatly left it open to neglect other areas. Plus of course Im not really into slagging off the founder of the art I teach (or anyone come to that matter), though do acknowledge all is not what they'd like you to believe! Plus there are others that are much better TKD historians than me. There is a specific book coming out soon by a Korean historian that should prove enlighting to us all!

Hi Stuart. This is offtopic but... can you tell about that book and who is the korean historian?

**StuartA** · Posted On: 1/22/2007 10:11pm

Originally Posted by Blues-man

Hi Stuart. This is offtopic but... can you tell about that book and who is the korean historian?

The author is Dr. He Young Kimm. Hes a noted Korean historian and Ive read some of his stuff before in the MA press & Asian Journals - its very indepth, so should make a good read!

I dont know that much about it, but its suppose to cover most of the Korean arts and again is suppose to have the facts and dispell the heresay & myths etc. A "pull no punches" look apparantly!

As he's is Korean, apparently he has been writting it for years but wouldnt publish it whilst any of the founders were still alive as he felt that would be wrong. Im not sure when its gonna be out, some were touting it as Christmas 2006 but it wasnt, so I dont know now! Just keep an eye out I guess!

Regards,

Stuart

***DerAuslander*** · Posted On: 1/23/2007 2:56am

Originally Posted by UpaLumpa

(2) Whether or not judo throws fall under the ever expanding umbrella of tkd is an independent issue of whether or not you're qualified to teach them and also independent of your rank in TKD. Oh and your statement is mildly contradictory.

Throws were there at the beginning of TKD, and gradually fell out of practice with SOME, even the majority, of TKD instructors.

This does not mean all.

If my instructor learned throws from his instructor, who learned them from the founder of our Kwan, then he is perfectly qualified to teach them, and your opinion can go flush itself.

**oldman34** · Posted On: 1/23/2007 6:37am

Originally Posted by emboesso

You're arguing with a mindset that would fly to the Mayo Clinic to have nation's foremost heart surgeon put a band-aid on a papercut.

I think he (upalumpa) is missing the points that everyone else here has gleaned from this discussion.

1. Read the book, to get a better understanding of what stuartA is talking about.

2. He didnt add these techniques. Through some on the side training, he realized that some of the moves he was learning, were the same as some he saw in TKD. He researched it, and found that pre watered down days of TKD, these things existed in TKD.

**Art** · Posted On: 1/23/2007 12:10pm

Originally Posted by DerAuslander108

Throws were there at the beginning of TKD, and gradually fell out of practice with SOME, even the majority, of TKD instructors.

This does not mean all.

If my instructor learned throws from his instructor, who learned them from the founder of our Kwan, then he is perfectly qualified to teach them, and your opinion can go flush itself.

Der I think you are a little more versed in some of the history than I am, go going back to the beginning did not some of the original kwan heads have some judo behind them. I recall reading that at some point but my brain could be making stuff up again.

For some reason jidokwan sticks in my head, can you confirm?