# Check out this sword kata...



## Makalakumu (Jul 14, 2006)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3jKCIliUuaY&search=tang soo do

I watched this and it kept going and going and going and I said to myself, "someone is going to stab themselves doing that form."

I often wonder where stuff like this comes from...

In the years that I have been training, I had the incredible opportunity to train with a 5th dan in Takeda Ryu Aikijutsu. His sword work, and martial arts in general, are amazing because, IMHO, it is training passed down from a time when people were learning to use a sword in actual combat. 

Take a look at this clip, it is similar to what I have seen... 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InlQtTMK5Ys&mode=related&search= 

With that being said, its not just the kicks in that form that are out of place. There is alot more, like the swinging the blade around the head and the figure eights, and the footwork, you name it.  I can hardly believe it.

Forms like these increase the marketability of a martial art, but they do not increase a student's actual skill with a weapon. IMHO, I wish that more people would put as much time in creating new forms as others who have put together something that shows something that they actually know about and master. 

This, IMHO, would go a long way towards actually preserving an art's martial skill.

upnorthkyosa


----------



## Andrew Green (Jul 14, 2006)

I got nothing against flashy forms... but that wasn't flashy.  I got nothing against traditional forms... but that wasn't traditional.  I got nothings against good sword work... but that wasn't good sword work.

For all the criticism flashy stuff gets I think this is the real problem.  People taking there Karate/TKD/Tang So do and doing it with a sword in there hands and calling it "real swordwork", wouldn't suprise me to find out it was a live blade either, as that would make it more "realistic"


----------



## arnisador (Jul 14, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> http://youtube.com/watch?v=3jKCIliUuaY&search=tang%20soo%20do



Ludicrous.


----------



## Jimi (Jul 14, 2006)

Lord have mercy! PEACE


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 14, 2006)

> I got nothing against flashy forms... but that wasn't flashy. I got nothing against traditional forms... but that wasn't traditional. I got nothings against good sword work... but that wasn't good sword work.



The first clip is Haedong Gumdo, pretty silly stuff from a Japanese sword art perspective. The second clip is Kuroda Tetsuzan sensei, and I believe he is performing Tamiya ryu, a koryu art. He is *very* good, and quite traditional. More information about Kuroda sensei can be found here ... http://jbull.home.texas.net/biography.html


----------



## stone_dragone (Jul 14, 2006)

Didn't get to the second clip yet.  The first one looked to my non-sword initiated eye, as was said earlier, that they took TSD techniques and added a sharp pointy metal stick.

Semi entertaining form, from a contemporary perspective.


----------



## Swordlady (Jul 14, 2006)

pgsmith said:
			
		

> The first clip is Haedong Gumdo, pretty silly stuff from a Japanese sword art perspective. The second clip is Kuroda Tetsuzan sensei, and I believe he is performing Tamiya ryu, a koryu art. He is *very* good, and quite traditional. More information about Kuroda sensei can be found here ... http://jbull.home.texas.net/biography.html



Hm...interesting.  I don't know anything about the Korean sword arts; maybe they are meant to be "flashier" than the Japanese sword arts.  *shrug*

The second clip was more enjoyable.  I never heard of Tamiya ryu before.


----------



## soul_sword34 (Jul 15, 2006)

Here is a real sword art that uses some flair.

http://www.stormpages.com/haidonggumdo/hdgdvids.html


----------



## soul_sword34 (Jul 15, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> Hm...interesting. I don't know anything about the Korean sword arts; maybe they are meant to be "flashier" than the Japanese sword arts. *shrug*
> 
> The second clip was more enjoyable. I never heard of Tamiya ryu before.


 
The first clip was BS


----------



## mtabone (Jul 15, 2006)

pgsmith said:
			
		

> The first clip is Haedong Gumdo, pretty silly stuff from a Japanese sword art perspective. The second clip is Kuroda Tetsuzan sensei, and I believe he is performing Tamiya ryu, a koryu art. He is *very* good, and quite traditional. More information about Kuroda sensei can be found here ... http://jbull.home.texas.net/biography.html


 
The first clip is not Haedong Gumdo. It is a World Tang Soo Do form. 

Haedong Gumdo is not like that at all....

M.Tabone


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 15, 2006)

WTSD may do this form, but I think it was originally in Kuk Sul Won.  From there, I do not know where it originates.


----------



## soul_sword34 (Jul 15, 2006)

here's a bunch of real Gumdo vids

http://www.youtube.com/results?search=gumdo&search_type=search_videos&search=Search


----------



## Senjojutsu (Jul 16, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> The second clip was more enjoyable. I never heard of Tamiya ryu before.


Some website references:

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~iaido/gsjsa_tamiya.htm

http://www.ustamiyaryu.org/

Tamiya Heibei Shigemasa, along with founding his own ryu, is considered the second headmaster within the Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu/Muso Shinden Ryu iaijutsu lineage founded by Hayashizaki Jinsuke Shigenobu.

Unfortunately (for me) there is only one iai form demonstrated during that entire second video.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 18, 2006)

> The first clip is not Haedong Gumdo. It is a World Tang Soo Do form.


  Sorry for the misinformation. Either way, it is still Korean sword stuff that's sorta silly from a Japanese sword art perspective. Not saying there aren't perhaps reasons for it, just that it is.


----------



## Swordlady (Jul 18, 2006)

pgsmith said:
			
		

> Sorry for the misinformation. Either way, it is still Korean sword stuff that's sorta silly from a Japanese sword art perspective. Not saying there aren't perhaps reasons for it, just that it is.


 
The Korean sword arts may look *very* different from the Japanese sword arts, but I wouldn't necessarily call it "silly".  I mean, outsiders could very easily call most JSA katas "boring".  Just a thought.


----------



## Charles Mahan (Jul 18, 2006)

Well... most JSA sword kata's are boring to watch, particularly to the uninitiated.  The same can be said of watching golf.  Even up at the higher end it's boring as heck to watch, but playing is something else entirely.  

Context is important, and within the context of JSA many of the KSA videos I've seen is full of extraneous seemingly showy movement.  Within the context of JSAs.  I'm sure that within the context of KSAs the movement makes perfect sense.


----------



## howard (Jul 18, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> The Korean sword arts may look *very* different from the Japanese sword arts, but I wouldn't necessarily call it "silly". I mean, outsiders could very easily call most JSA katas "boring". Just a thought.


Very nice point, thank you.

In addition, comments like this unfortunately reinforce the stereotype that elitism is inherent in JMA, even though most of us know that it isn't.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 18, 2006)

> The Korean sword arts may look *very* different from the Japanese sword arts, but I wouldn't necessarily call it "silly". I mean, outsiders could very easily call most JSA katas "boring". Just a thought.


I agree with Charles in that almost everybody considers JSA kata boring. "Like watching paint dry" was how one senior exponent put it. I did say from a Japanese sword arts perspective. All of the things that could possibly be gained from antics such as cutting fruit can be had in the traditional Japanese arts, but without all of the showboating which is considered, well ... silly. I realize that it is intended to liven things up, but that is pretty much the antithesis of the traditional Japanese sword arts. 





> In addition, comments like this unfortunately reinforce the stereotype that elitism is inherent in JMA, even though most of us know that it isn't.


No, it isn't in Japanese martial arts in general. Elitism _does_ tend to be a part of the koryu arts though. Not purposely elitist, but it tends to be inherent in the training. These schools have survived from one head to their successor for hundreds of years. Those that weren't effective died out as their students got killed by superior swordsmen. Therefore, those that remain are the ones that proved to be better than the thousands of other schools that are now dead. Those that practice these koryu arts know in our heads that our ryu is not inherently superior to any other, however, centuries of tradition tells the heart otherwise. It is much the same way that a graduate of M.I.T. may not be any better an engineer than a graduate of Podunk State College. He may even know in his head that the Podunk State graduate is smarter and a better engineer. In his heart though, he will still feel superior because he is from M.I.T. even if he knows it's irrational. 

  In my opinion, that's where all of the cries of elitism come from.


----------



## Charles Mahan (Jul 18, 2006)

pgsmith said:
			
		

> I agree with Charles in that almost everybody considers JSA kata boring. "Like watching paint dry" was how one senior exponent put it.


 
Ha!  I've had an instructor say it should be not like watching paint dry, but rather like watching dry paint.


----------



## howard (Jul 18, 2006)

pgsmith said:
			
		

> I agree with Charles in that almost everybody considers JSA kata boring. "Like watching paint dry" was how one senior exponent put it. I did say from a Japanese sword arts perspective. All of the things that could possibly be gained from antics such as cutting fruit can be had in the traditional Japanese arts, but without all of the showboating which is considered, well ... silly. I realize that it is intended to liven things up, but that is pretty much the antithesis of the traditional Japanese sword arts.


Paul, even though I study a nominally Korean sword art, I find many JSA kata very nice to watch.  One has to look beneath the surface of the basic movements to appreciate all of the subtleties in every little movement.  There are so many things going on in just drawing and cutting horizontally from seiza that you could probably write a book about it.

A lot of people just don't appreciate how many years of practice are needed to perform even a simple kata at a high level.



			
				pgsmith said:
			
		

> Elitism _does_ tend to be a part of the koryu arts though. Not purposely elitist, but it tends to be inherent in the training. These schools have survived from one head to their successor for hundreds of years. Those that weren't effective died out as their students got killed by superior swordsmen. Therefore, those that remain are the ones that proved to be better than the thousands of other schools that are now dead. Those that practice these koryu arts know in our heads that our ryu is not inherently superior to any other, however, centuries of tradition tells the heart otherwise. It is much the same way that a graduate of M.I.T. may not be any better an engineer than a graduate of Podunk State College. He may even know in his head that the Podunk State graduate is smarter and a better engineer. In his heart though, he will still feel superior because he is from M.I.T. even if he knows it's irrational.


Thanks for that context.  btw, I hope you understand that I wasn't accusing you of elitism.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 18, 2006)

> Thanks for that context. btw, I hope you understand that I wasn't accusing you of elitism.


No problems! I've had my own wrestling bouts with elitism, and have come to the conclusion that I'm just not able to get around some of it.  So, I've had people call me an elitist snob and I haven't been able to mount any sort of defense. Such is life, and a price that I'm willing to pay.


> I've had an instructor say it should be not like watching paint dry, but rather like watching dry paint.


That's about true. That's one of those things that seperates the experienced from the newer practitioners I think. The more experience you get, the more time you are able to spend doing a kata repetetively just working to fix a single movement of it. Still doesn't make watching it for any length of time any better though.


----------



## soul_sword34 (Jul 18, 2006)

My instructor told me something about the difference between the Japanese/Korean philosophies I will never forget.  The Japanese sought to refine all techniques to it's most basic and simple element.  To kill with one stroke.  The Korean strategy was to maim or wound and leave that soldier/warrior on the battle field.  In this way it took more soldiers to carry that one, reducing the numbers available on the field.  In Gumdo the Chiburi motion looks fancy but has a purpose, In Iai the sword is brought up around and down sharply, in Gumdo it is the same, some forms in Gumdo also require a reverse motion to the sword on the final Chiburi, a "twirly" movement clockwise, which honestly removes more blood than the first "blood flick".  Studying the Bunkai of Gumdo can reveal much about form and function.  I watched that first video and I saw no application, expecially the armpit thing...LOL!!!!  Can someone expand on that?


----------



## Charles Mahan (Jul 18, 2006)

That sounds like a very modern take on battlefield tactics.  It's the basic design philosophy behind land minds.  They are designed to wound as many people as possible.  Most modern weapons on the other hand are designed to kill with extreme prejudice.  Why?  Well, an injured opponent can still hurt you or someone else.  A dead opponent, preferably one killed instantly is no longer a threat and you can move on to the next threat.  

I can't see how that philosophy could be applied to feudal warfare.  It only really works at a distance.  If me and two of my fellow soldiers are standing toe to toe with five enemy soldiers all armed with feudal weapons, I can't see how intentionally wounding one of my enemies is going to help just a whole lot.  It's not like his buddies are gonna turn their backs on me and help him off the field of battle.  Not until I and my friends are neutralized.  That's obviously not a problem for land mines.  I'm not there when my landmine goes off, but it's a big problem for feudal style combat.

Maybe I'm just coming at this from a JSA perspective.


----------



## pstarr (Jul 18, 2006)

I will say that from a Japanese swordsmanship point of view, just about everything the fellow in the first clip was wrong...but then I don't know anything about Korean swordsmanship-


----------



## howard (Jul 19, 2006)

Charles Mahan said:
			
		

> Maybe I'm just coming at this from a JSA perspective.


No, Chalres, I don't think so...

That theory sounds anectodal to me... if anybody could cite some reliable references from the literature of Korean history, I'd be much more prone to believe it.



			
				pstarr said:
			
		

> I will say that from a Japanese swordsmanship point of view, just about everything the fellow in the first clip was wrong...but then I don't know anything about Korean swordsmanship-


I have no idea what the origin of that form is.  I believe somebody mentioned that it might be Kuk Sul Won?

It looks absolutely nothing like our (Korean, but Japanese-influenced) sword art.  Some of the stuff he's doing looks like pure theatrics - like that XMA stuff.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 19, 2006)

soul_sword34 said:
			
		

> My instructor told me something about the difference between the Japanese/Korean philosophies I will never forget. The Japanese sought to refine all techniques to it's most basic and simple element. To kill with one stroke. The Korean strategy was to maim or wound and leave that soldier/warrior on the battle field. In this way it took more soldiers to carry that one, reducing the numbers available on the field.


 
I do not believe that I have ever come across this in any of the Korean arts that I have studied.  Not saying that you are wrong or that your instructor is wrong in this interpretation but this was never conveyed to me by any Korean teacher.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 19, 2006)

The form in the video looks like to me that a teacher with classical unarmed forms training made a sword form for competition.  Unfortuantely,
this is what you will see in tournament competitions and does not really represent Korean sword work.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com


----------



## soul_sword34 (Jul 19, 2006)

Brian R. VanCise said:
			
		

> I do not believe that I have ever come across this in any of the Korean arts that I have studied. Not saying that you are wrong or that your instructor is wrong in this interpretation but this was never conveyed to me by any Korean teacher.
> 
> Brian R. VanCise
> www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com


 
Unfortunately I have no reference for this as my mentor is no longer around.  It does make sense though when you look at a real Haidong Gumdo form.  I only got to Shimsang Gumbup, 1st blackbelt form and in analysing the Bunkai and the brief conversations I had with Kwang Jang Nim you can very easily depict maiming techniques and there are finishes.  Where as in Japan, in my experience, there is always a finishing technique.  My mentor also mentioned something about, forgive my memory, the "Korugi East Sea White House System" and that is the root of all Gumdo/Song Moo.  I have a lot of research to do, all by myself.  Sorry I'm a 1st blackbelt and have no one else but you guys right now my Dojang is a memory.  The first video, again, is definitely not good and is not Haidong Gumdo.  Check out the other videos I posted earlier for a better reference.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 19, 2006)

soul_sword34 said:
			
		

> The first video, again, is definitely not good and is not Haidong Gumdo.


 
One thing we can definately agree on is that the first video definately is not Haidong Gumdo!

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 19, 2006)

> The Korean strategy was to maim or wound and leave that soldier/warrior on the battle field. In this way it took more soldiers to carry that one, reducing the numbers available on the field.


  I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense because the sword was *not* a battle field weapon. It has been well documented that the sword was merely a sidearm in the feudal Japanese battle field.


----------



## Charles Mahan (Jul 19, 2006)

In all fairness Paul, he's talking about Korean battlefields.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 19, 2006)

> In all fairness Paul, he's talking about Korean battlefields.


  Sorry, you're right Charles. That would make a difference since fuedal Korea had artillery shells in addition to archers on their battlefields.


----------



## Charles Mahan (Jul 19, 2006)

Well... I didn't say that it made any real difference, but hey you never know.  Perhaps the Koreans did make prominent use of the sword on the battlefield.  And perhaps it was common practice for one side of the conflict to allow members of the other side to aid wounded soldiers off the field of battle.  It does stretch the limits of reason however.  If anyone really expects people to buy into that arguement, there really needs to be some proof offered.  Historical documents, first hand accounts, something along those lines.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 19, 2006)

> Well... I didn't say that it made any real difference, but hey you never know.


  You're right, I just let my cynical side carry me off sometimes.


----------



## soul_sword34 (Jul 20, 2006)

Charles Mahan said:
			
		

> Well... I didn't say that it made any real difference, but hey you never know. Perhaps the Koreans did make prominent use of the sword on the battlefield. And perhaps it was common practice for one side of the conflict to allow members of the other side to aid wounded soldiers off the field of battle. It does stretch the limits of reason however. If anyone really expects people to buy into that arguement, there really needs to be some proof offered. Historical documents, first hand accounts, something along those lines.


 
Mr. Mahan all I can say to that is watch one Haidong Gumdo form and tell me what you see happening.  Now when I watch an Iaido form I see, kill, kill, kill.  Very merciful in my opinion.  I'm sure there must be somewhere or someone on the web who knows more about Korean/Japanese tactics in mass combat.  Anyways unlesss absolute evidence can be provided I suggest just dropping this one. Know what I mean.  I watched that first video again now and the more I watch it the more I just want to stick my fingers down my throat and vomit.


----------



## pgsmith (Jul 20, 2006)

> I'm sure there must be somewhere or someone on the web who knows more about Korean/Japanese tactics in mass combat. Anyways unlesss absolute evidence can be provided I suggest just dropping this one.


This is from a 1999 conversation with Karl Friday, professor of Asian history at University of Georgia. The conversation was actually about the role of firearms in changing warfare in feudal Japan, but the casualty statistics are very interesting.



> First, this whole picture of Light Brigade style charges against gunners is dramatically overblown; there's a ton of new research coming out that shows that guns didn't dramatically alter the shape of Japanese warfare, they simply replaced the bow and arrow. An analysis that I was just looking at this morning, of documents reporting battlewounds, for example, shows that between 1500 and 1560, out of some 620 casualties described, 368 were arrow wounds, 124 were spear wounds, 96 were injuries from rocks (thrown by slings or by hand), 18 were sword wounds, 7 were combined arrow and spear wounds, 3 were combined arrow and sword wounds, 2 were combined rock and spear wounds, and 2 were combined rock and arrow wounds.
> Between 1563 and 1600 (after the adoption of the gun) some 584 reported casualties break down as follows: there were 263 gunshot victims, 126 arrow victims, 99 spear victims, 40 sword victims, 30 injured by rocks, and 26 injured by combinations of the above (including one poor SOB who was shot by both guns and arrows and stabbed by spears, and one who was speared, naginata-ed, and cut with a sword). In other words, long distance weapons (arrows and rocks) accounted for about 75% of the wounds received in the pre-gun era, and about 72 % (arrows + guns + rocks) during the gunpowder era. Which is to say that "traditional fighting" does not appear to have been heavily centered on close-quarters clashes of swords or even of spears, except in literary sources.


----------



## Ninjamom (Jul 21, 2006)

This is very close to the numbers I had heard, which put the death rate of medeival swordsmen on the battlefield to about 80% due to spears/archers, rather than other swordsmen.


----------



## soul_sword34 (Jul 21, 2006)

More than likely lives lost in a volley.  If I remember right, correct me if I'm wrong, rifles then were of the fuse/flash pan variety.


----------

