# What exactly is the difference between "modern" and "old-school" Taekwondo?



## Ivan (Oct 2, 2020)

I have watched a lot of Taekwondo sparring on YouTube, and every time I scroll down the comment section I see comments such as - "Ooh old school Taekwondo was better". I tried to look into this and I found this video:




From what I saw, and what the narrator was saying, there was something different but I can't quite place it. From what I see:

They kept their hands higher up in their guard. Now personally I keep my right hand raised to my chin, and my left down low and relaxed as it feels it helps me to have faster and more fluid movement.
They people in the video seem to be considerably more aggressive than their "modern" competitive counterparts. You can hear constant "kiai", though I don't know the terms for it in Korean.
The narrator mentioned how the practitioners "flicked their hips forward more". From what I understood, this made their kicks have a larger range as their body would have more momentum, and this also resulted in more power.
But I can't tell if I am missing anything? I feel as if there's another obvious difference that I am not quite getting. Can you guys spot anything?


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Oct 2, 2020)

I think it was largely it became more and more sportinised and watered down.  And after the death of the creator and the splitting of the orgnisation that sort of lead to those difficulties.   The fragmenting meant lots of diffrent standards for isntructors and instructors and that sort of deal.    A budding orginsation that wants to spread cant have a pass out rate of isntructors of 1% after all.  (and expand rapidly)

i havent done "old school", but that seems to be the big diffrence, modern is more sport focused, at least in the big 2 orgnisations.   I think the creators org is still around now days, or at least his style is.

This is other than just generic times changing.


----------



## _Simon_ (Oct 2, 2020)

Ahh everyone says 'old-school' was so much better. For like, eeeeverything haha.

I remember some people I've chatted with, anytime I'd bring up a technique or method, it was predictable that they'd go "ohhh we never did that in the old days, in the old days we did this and we trained harrrrd in the old days"

I'm just bored, don't mind me [emoji14]


----------



## dancingalone (Oct 2, 2020)

Ivan said:


> I have watched a lot of Taekwondo sparring on YouTube, and every time I scroll down the comment section I see comments such as - "Ooh old school Taekwondo was better". I tried to look into this and I found this video:



I am a dinosaur, but when I read that sentiment, I generally think people are referring to really old sparring from the 1950s to 1970s or so.  The kind without protective gear and where the sport hadn't evolved yet to where kicks were preferred because of the higher points awarded.  Basically old school karate matches with hard contact, heavy punches, and sweeps are allowed.


----------



## Ivan (Oct 2, 2020)

dancingalone said:


> I am a dinosaur, but when I read that sentiment, I generally think people are referring to really old sparring from the 1950s to 1970s or so.  The kind without protective gear and where the sport hadn't evolved yet to where kicks were preferred because of the higher points awarded.  Basically old school karate matches with hard contact, heavy punches, and sweeps are allowed.


Sounds awesome. Why did it change?


----------



## dancingalone (Oct 2, 2020)

Ivan said:


> Sounds awesome. Why did it change?


This is only my opinion. 

1) Safety
2) There was a desire for TKD sparring needed to separate itself from generic karate and become its own sport.  And it has -  the ruleset causes players to fight in a certain way.  You still need to be an elite athlete to compete, but you do need to train a certain way to be successful in TKD Olympic rules.


----------



## skribs (Oct 3, 2020)

I think there are two elements, which have largely been touched on.

Safety
Identity
My Dad's old boss was an old-school student who trained in Korea on hard floors.  He was deriding our school for using mats.  My Dad had to remind him that he's had quite a few joints in his legs replaced, and maybe training on those hard floors was a reason why.  That's also why I think there's less contact in training - safety.  It doesn't help to learn self-defense if you're bruised and battered.

The second is identity.  Identity away from Karate and towards a sport.  This identity has led to the creation of the Taegeuk forms (which are designed to not look as much like the Shotokan Karate forms), which have shallower stances and aren't as hard on your legs as the older style of forms.  This identity has led to the evolution of the kicking game, which has taken head punches out of the equation.  Some people are just in it for the art or the sport, and not for the fighting.  That "waters it down", so to speak.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 6, 2020)

Ivan said:


> I have watched a lot of Taekwondo sparring on YouTube, and every time I scroll down the comment section I see comments such as - "Ooh old school Taekwondo was better". I tried to look into this and I found this video:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There are a couple of things to point out in the video. The chest protectors that are mostly white are training hogus; thick and softly padded used during practice to reduce foot injury. And I would be curious to know the weight of the bag they were kicking on. You can also see there is little to no blocking because that is sparring training, working on technique (tendancy, counter, etc...) and accuracy, not necessarily full power kicks. 
The title and commentary is about the differences in JMA kicks and KMA kicks, and he does a good job talking about the hip motion. I would say that is a definite change in how WT TKD kicks are thrown today vs. the older days. To be very sure todays kicks are powerful. For me a primary difference is in the evolution of the complex kicks and the power that can be made. Good for those who can do such kicks, but it narrows the collective and further separates practical TKD from sport TKD. In other words it can make it harder for the more casual or average KKW TKD practitioner to keep up with the curriculum. This is why most schools have separate classes/programs for those who want to seriously compete.   

So to add to your query I would have to ask how far back do you want to go? Today's WT sparring has a lot of differences from sparring when I competed in the 80's-90's. Everything from judging, to rings, to scoring type and area are different. The commonly held rule back then was you must have one of the three: visible shudder, knock down, or knockout. WT competition has gone very far away from this in scoring. 
The noticeable caveats in today's sparring: 
If you knock someone down with a scoring area kick And you fall it can still count as a score. You used to have to show total control throughout the confrontation.  
Especially with an electronic hogu much lighter contacts hits count, still must be more than a touch though. 
Knockouts can still count but 'head hunting' the way we used to is not allowed. The real craftsmen have become masters at complex spinning kicks (3-4 spins in succession), and damn are they fast. And they will change direction 
mid-succession (not my word a WT thing).

If you go back to the 50's & 60's TKD was a Korean military training tool. From what I can gather almost all TKD punched to the face and had sweeps. This is thought to be part of the rub between early TKD and styles like Karate, Shotokan, etc., and let to many of the modifications you see today in some modern TKD styles. I know that at least two of the early Kwans butted heads with some Kung Fu factions (not mantis) over fundamental use of hands/arms and stance/stance work. 

So excluding the stylistic competitiveness going between the various Kwan's and even other styles on early, TKD had kicks at every height range but they were much, much more practical for the average practitioner (including American military). Of course padding was non existent which I think is a big factor that gets swept under the rug sometimes. 

The modern WT fighting style is 100% a closed circuit animal of it's own that is pretty deeply integrated into to the political requirements mandated at the WT/KKW and USA TKD levels. Way more bureaucratic than it should be but it is what it is. That seems to be standard fare in the Korean political systems, very engrained in their culture. 

FWIW, recently someone made a post here on the forum about the name MMA and how it has evolved. You can make much the same comparison with modern WT/KKW TKD. As a sport, it has continued to refine and evolve. At it's inception it has been designed to be the counter-culture to boxing, using feet as much as boxing uses hands. Globally and politically it is a huge success. It has never made the leap to a professional sport and with the popularity of MMA I have a hard time seeing it every happen. Possibly in smaller sectors of the planet. 

I have to stop for now but will continue to think on this and possibly add more to it.


----------



## granfire (Oct 8, 2020)

well, TKD did not exist prior to the General (who used his influence on a national level to 'unite' the 4 or five existing styles under one banner)
Prior to that select few were able to train in Japanese arts (Korea was occupied!) 

All that aside. 

Now we know more
about injuries, better training practices, and by in large we have grown to avoid unnecessary risks. 
When you have a day job you can't afford to get crippled playing. (we also have less of a social safety net, at least here in the US)

I am not commenting on Olympic TKD. Like a lot of sports it has grown a weird mutation of the art. 
yeah, they are athletic, but I don't think very skilled. 

But yeah, 'the good old days' holding Black Belt camps in the heat of summer, until the participants vomit. 'LOL, he got his bell rung' when practitioners are knocked out (now we know the accumulative effect of concussions.) Although it is funny when somebody goes down, still fighting, but the lights are effectively out. Not haha funny...(seen a girl go down at rank test sparring. At a medium contact organization, that was NOT planned! and the guy who  hit her felt terrible!)

I have to say though, over the last 15 plus years the tone even in internet discussions has softened.
the hard core crowd either retired or had to switch to cane combat I guess. 
because the good old days were only good in nostalgia.


----------



## granfire (Oct 8, 2020)

PS: The 'kia' is the vocalization for 'ki-hap' Korean for yell. 
And generally most people agree one ought to get whipped with their belt if one actually yells 'KIA' 

Yeah, they yelled more, and I disagree with the modern trend to take the yells out:
To yell you have to breathe, to yell loudly, you have to breathe deeply.
Breathing is essential in self defense: You freeze and stop breathing, you can't fight back. 

Also: there is the psychological effect of being yelled at. 
Most people are not used to this and freeze when aggressively yelled at. Even seasoned martial arts practitioners! 
There is a reason you spend so much time in bootcamp being screamed at by the drill instructors.


----------



## Ivan (Oct 8, 2020)

granfire said:


> PS: The 'kia' is the vocalization for 'ki-hap' Korean for yell.
> And generally most people agree one ought to get whipped with their belt if one actually yells 'KIA'
> 
> Yeah, they yelled more, and I disagree with the modern trend to take the yells out:
> ...


Where could you find old school practitioners nowadays? It seems like the true version of the martial art is dead, based on what you're saying.


----------



## granfire (Oct 8, 2020)

Ivan said:


> Where could you find old school practitioners nowadays? It seems like the true version of the martial art is dead, based on what you're saying.


things evolve and change. it's the way of life. 
I come originally from the horse world. and as I age I realize that the old time horse people are dying out. It's nothing you can change, it's how life works. 
One has to be mindful though. Study past masters, and put them in their contemporary context. 
The generation of my grandfather had to work physically hard, he expected his horses to do so as well, they were work animals. 
Very much loved,  but for making a living. 
My dad lived through the lean years after the war, and got to see the rise of riding for pleasure. The horses no longer served to earn their keep. 
Now horses have become a commodity. They are again a means to make a living, but in a different way, and in many ways it is not a change for the better. 
We now understand nutrition and training better, bio mechanics, etc. 
but too many people no longer get to spend time with the animals on a daily basis. 

Translate this into martial arts. 
the guys who learned from the school of hard knocks are passing on. The same ones who fought wars, drilled on parade grounds. 
On the other hand, we are raising new generations of people who depended on their skill and wits for survival. Their numbers are small though compared to the weekend warriors who play martial arts on a daily basis. 
we - generically speaking - don't know a lot of things past generations did intuitively. 
Our world has changed and so has our approach to things.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 8, 2020)

granfire said:


> PS: The 'kia' is the vocalization for 'ki-hap' Korean for yell.
> And generally most people agree one ought to get whipped with their belt if one actually yells 'KIA'
> 
> Yeah, they yelled more, and I disagree with the modern trend to take the yells out:
> ...


I and my friends used to compete to see who could kiai louder on different techniques as kids. Or in sparring. Annoyed the hell out of our instructors, but if we were asked to stop we just wouldn't kiai at all so they accepted it. We were brats.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 12, 2020)

granfire said:


> well, TKD did not exist prior to the General (who used his influence on a national level to 'unite' the 4 or five existing styles under one banner)



Really?! I can't believe anyone's actually saying that.

The _name_ Taekwondo didn't exist prior to General Choi naming it, but it was united by the Kwan leaders, not Choi. In fact, at the time, Choi only had "honorary 4th dan rank" not full regular dan rank, and that was (controversially) revoked by GM Son, Duk-sung in the Seoul newspaper on June 15th 1959 after Choi asked for higher honorary dan rank, so whether he was a legit master is even really in question.

Choi did a lot for popularising and promoting Taekwondo, and for that I'm grateful, but let's not take credit from a bunch of honourable grandmasters who unified Taekwondo and give it to one guy, who in reality is the cause of the major split in Taekwondo. 9 Kwans (we'll ignore the 10th administration only Kwan) came together to unify to form Taekwondo, KTA, and then Kukkiwon. General Choi was the only one to split away - even his original Kwan Ohdokwan still exists in Korea and fully supports Kukkiwon.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 12, 2020)

Ivan said:


> Where could you find old school practitioners nowadays? It seems like the true version of the martial art is dead, based on what you're saying.



The "true version" of Taekwondo is the current Kukkiwon style. Taekwondo was formed by the unification of the Kwans (original 5, 9 or 10, depending on how you want to count them), and all those Kwans still support Kukkiwon. Taekwondo has changed and been redefined over the years, but that is what Taekwondo is! It's not how it was first done in the 50s, or 60s. Hell if you compare those versions to that in the 70s and 80s it was different. Taekwondo has always been evolving and improving, so if you want the "traditional" Taekwondo, keep up with the changes because that's what the "tradition" of Taekwondo truly is.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 12, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Really?! I can't believe anyone's actually saying that.
> 
> The _name_ Taekwondo didn't exist prior to General Choi naming it, but it was united by the Kwan leaders, not Choi. In fact, at the time, Choi only had "honorary 4th dan rank" not full regular dan rank, and that was (controversially) revoked by GM Son, Duk-sung in the Seoul newspaper on June 15th 1959 after Choi asked for higher honorary dan rank, so whether he was a legit master is even really in question.
> 
> Choi did a lot for popularising and promoting Taekwondo, and for that I'm grateful, but let's not take credit from a bunch of honourable grandmasters who unified Taekwondo and give it to one guy, who in reality is the cause of the major split in Taekwondo. 9 Kwans (we'll ignore the 10th administration only Kwan) came together to unify to form Taekwondo, KTA, and then Kukkiwon. General Choi was the only one to split away - even his original Kwan Ohdokwan still exists in Korea and fully supports Kukkiwon.


I agree with most of what you say. However, it is certainly not fair to rate a 4th (or even 3rd) rank back then to today's "rapid advancement" 4th Dan's. Dynamically opposed. So I could never look down on any of the historical figures based on their 'rank' of the time. Just a different animal back then. 
Yes, I agree that Choi basically 'took his toys and went home' but if he had not done So much for TKD why would we still hear so much about him? Love him or hate him he is One of the founding father of modern TKD.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 12, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> The "true version" of Taekwondo is the current Kukkiwon style. Taekwondo was formed by the unification of the Kwans (original 5, 9 or 10, depending on how you want to count them), and all those Kwans still support Kukkiwon. Taekwondo has changed and been redefined over the years, but that is what Taekwondo is! It's not how it was first done in the 50s, or 60s. Hell if you compare those versions to that in the 70s and 80s it was different. Taekwondo has always been evolving and improving, so if you want the "traditional" Taekwondo, keep up with the changes because that's what the "tradition" of Taekwondo truly is.


No, that is not true at all but it is what we have today by in large. Not completely but in the majority. 
Not at all what Ivan was asking for in the OP I believe, but that is true. TKD is a living entity that is always changing. Sometimes there is more bad than good with that but it is consistently true.
That was a party line answer that I am guessing is from a base that has little to no experience in pre or early KKW martial arts. Please correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## granfire (Oct 12, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Really?! I can't believe anyone's actually saying that.
> 
> The _name_ Taekwondo didn't exist prior to General Choi naming it, but it was united by the Kwan leaders, not Choi. In fact, at the time, Choi only had "honorary 4th dan rank" not full regular dan rank, and that was (controversially) revoked by GM Son, Duk-sung in the Seoul newspaper on June 15th 1959 after Choi asked for higher honorary dan rank, so whether he was a legit master is even really in question.
> 
> Choi did a lot for popularising and promoting Taekwondo, and for that I'm grateful, but let's not take credit from a bunch of honourable grandmasters who unified Taekwondo and give it to one guy, who in reality is the cause of the major split in Taekwondo. 9 Kwans (we'll ignore the 10th administration only Kwan) came together to unify to form Taekwondo, KTA, and then Kukkiwon. General Choi was the only one to split away - even his original Kwan Ohdokwan still exists in Korea and fully supports Kukkiwon.


yeah, hard to believe. 
(I actually read several histories)
Korea as such didn't exist (in modern times) until after WWII. 
Prior to that Japan had the country under iron control, effectively from 1905, officially from 1910 on.
(25 years is a long time to break traditions)

So all the stories about how old the art is is nationalism born from oppression. 
Cool beans, but still not an unbroken lineage. There is a reason why early Taekwondo looks so much like karate. 
the earliest Kwan leaders were lucky to be able to train in Japan. 
Choi had the biggest ego in a room full of egos, and the national muscle to force his vision on the other practitioners. Having every young man in the country do 'his' style in the Army goes a very long way in unifying the curriculum.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 12, 2020)

Ivan said:


> Where could you find old school practitioners nowadays? It seems like the true version of the martial art is dead, based on what you're saying.



In kickboxing mostly.






Kelly sief is a good example of old school TKD that has made the transition.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Oct 12, 2020)

Ivan said:


> Where could you find old school practitioners nowadays? It seems like the true version of the martial art is dead, based on what you're saying.



I trained old school TKD with one of General Choy's students way back in the late 1970s. While I was there the Olympics was looming and he split the class in to "traditional" and "Olympic" because he had students that wanted olympic. I tried both sides, but stuck with "traditional" We had the high kicks, but also low kicks, strikes, in close fighting and takedowns. Last I knew my teacher, Mr Kim, was still teaching, but I have no idea what classes at his schools are like now. When I went he had only 2 schools. And one of those closed, the one I was at, and I went to his main school for awhile.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 13, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> it is certainly not fair to rate a 4th (or even 3rd) rank back then to today's "rapid advancement" 4th Dan's. Dynamically opposed. So I could never look down on any of the historical figures based on their 'rank' of the time. Just a different animal back then.



I wasn't judging the 4th Dan, most of the school heads were 4th Dan in those days. It's the fact that it was honorary. And he then asked for a 6th Dan because his "blood brother" (close friend) had received one.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 13, 2020)

granfire said:


> yeah, hard to believe.
> (I actually read several histories)



Likewise, I've done the same and haven't found one that refers to Choi unifying the Kwans. Could you maybe reference one that says that?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 13, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Choi did a lot for popularising and promoting Taekwondo, and for that I'm grateful, but let's not take credit from a bunch of honourable grandmasters who unified Taekwondo and give it to one guy, who in reality is the cause of the major split in Taekwondo. 9 Kwans (we'll ignore the 10th administration only Kwan) came together to unify to form Taekwondo, KTA, and then Kukkiwon. General Choi was the only one to split away - even his original Kwan Ohdokwan still exists in Korea and fully supports Kukkiwon.


Ohhhhhhhhh.... you were doing so well in your correction up to this point.... 
Two words for you. Hwang Kee.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 13, 2020)

Dirty Dog said:


> Ohhhhhhhhh.... you were doing so well in your correction up to this point....
> Two words for you. Hwang Kee.



Hwang Kee was a bit of a strange case, but even so he was still the Chief Director (E Sa Jang) of the KTA in 1959 so the part about "came together" still holds true. Also current MDK HQ in Korea is part of KTA and follows KKW syllabus. I know there's a MDK Tang Soo Do offshoot, but the Taekwondo portion is KTA/KKW. So while Hwang Kee may have split away, MDK remains, so my point remains  

I look forward to your further details though...

Out of interest, I believe GM Kang Shin-chul is the current head of Moodukkwan in Korea, but I'm not sure I'm right. Any MDK members that can confirm or correct that?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 13, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Hwang Kee was a bit of a strange case,


That's certainly true.


> but even so he was still the Chief Director (E Sa Jang) of the KTA in 1959 so the part about "came together" still holds true. Also current MDK HQ in Korea is part of KTA and follows KKW syllabus.


That is VERY debatable. As founder of the MDK, Hwang Kee considered his to be the only valid MDK system. And the branch that stayed with the KTA completely bogus.


> I know there's a MDK Tang Soo Do offshoot, but the Taekwondo portion is KTA/KKW. So while Hwang Kee may have split away, MDK remains, so my point remains
> 
> I look forward to your further details though...


Currently you can find MDK TKD that follows the KKW system. Also, MDK TKD that does not follow the KKW. Also MDK TSD that follows the system Hwang Kee taught prior to the unification and immediately following his split. Also MDK Soo Bahk Do that follows his final teaching. This last is the only one Hwang Kee would recognise.


> Out of interest, I believe GM Kang Shin-chul is the current head of Moodukkwan in Korea, but I'm not sure I'm right. Any MDK members that can confirm or correct that?


You'd have to start by clarifying which of those MDK system you're talking about.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 13, 2020)

I don't know about MDK history and politics as much as I do about general Taekwondo history and politics. For example, when Hwang Kee left Korea (he went to USA, right?) did the other seniors of MDK agree that the MDK HQ was moving to USA? Or did they vote to keep a current president in the current offices and regard him as the founder rather than current president?

I generally have a very weird personal view though that the Kwans all have an HQ in Korea, and have maintained lineage there, so HQs of Kwans being outside of Korea are an offshoot rather than official. That view may coloured by the fact that I'm CMK and that's the case there, maybe if I'd been MDK/ODK I'd have viewed it very differently.


----------



## granfire (Oct 13, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Likewise, I've done the same and haven't found one that refers to Choi unifying the Kwans. Could you maybe reference one that says that?


LOL< It always depends on who's disciple penned the history. 
But do carry on. 
your dissertations only underscore my point: TheEgo with the biggest muscle in a room full of big egos. 

TKD might be 'the largest' martial art in the world. but you can't find enough practitioners to fill a kiddy pool who agree which branch and subdivision is TKD.  

Choi fell from grace for aiding and abetting. 
His motives I have never seen anywhere examined in any shape or form. 
But hailing myself from a previously divided country, I can assume one or another of his motives.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 13, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Hwang Kee was a bit of a strange case, but even so he was still the Chief Director (E Sa Jang) of the KTA in 1959 so the part about "came together" still holds true. Also current MDK HQ in Korea is part of KTA and follows KKW syllabus. I know there's a MDK Tang Soo Do offshoot, but the Taekwondo portion is KTA/KKW. So while Hwang Kee may have split away, MDK remains, so my point remains
> 
> I look forward to your further details though...
> 
> Out of interest, I believe GM Kang Shin-chul is the current head of Moodukkwan in Korea, but I'm not sure I'm right. Any MDK members that can confirm or correct that?



andyjefferies, there is a strong MDK TKD contingent worldwide. Many schools, like ours, teach a combination of traditional MDK material And WT/KKW material. To complete at more than a local level in TKD this is necessary. If someone has no desire to compete under WT rules then there is a avenue to advance without it And get KKW certification. 
This dogma that there is only "one" TKD way is silly. It never has been that way. Hell, there is not 'one' of any style I can think of.   
If you insist on including the 4 Kwans that materialized after the war then in fairness the number would be upwards of 40 Kwans. There are 5 major Kwan's historically speaking, CMK, CDK, JDK, MDK, & SMK. The motivation to establish the KTA was to unify all the Kwans. From what I understand most of the major Kwans do still exist largely as a historical reference in Korea. Many people still practice the original material.  

Dirty Dog, to my knowledge,  Hwang H.C., Kwan Jang Nim is still the President of MDK. Is this your understanding?
Donggyu Lee, Sa Bon Nim is Deputy in Korea but I do not know if that title holds as the 'head' of Korean MDK.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Oct 14, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> Dirty Dog, to my knowledge,  Hwang H.C., Kwan Jang Nim is still the President of MDK. Is this your understanding?
> Donggyu Lee, Sa Bon Nim is Deputy in Korea but I do not know if that title holds as the 'head' of Korean MDK.



That would be my understanding, yes. Of the MDK SBK at least. But I also accept that there is a "President Of The MDK" for every splinter. And that's fine.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 14, 2020)

granfire said:


> LOL< It always depends on who's disciple penned the history.
> But do carry on.
> your dissertations only underscore my point: TheEgo with the biggest muscle in a room full of big egos.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, I don't understand? You said you'd read several histories but now can't present one that contains your opinion that he was the unifying influence behind the Kwan unification?

You somehow feel I have an ego about this - I wasn't present at any of the unification meetings, I'm too young. I came along after and, like you, have just read histories from that time (Modern History of Taekwondo, Kukkiwon textbook, A Killing art - although I don't like it, ITF Encyclopaedia set, etc) as well as the history lectures on the Kukkiwon master courses.

This isn't about me shouting you down or somehow proving I'm better than you (the only things I think you mean when you talk about ego), but if someone has actually claimed this in a history of Taekwondo, I want to read it because I haven't up to now so it's a different perspective that I want to read.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 14, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> andyjefferies, there is a strong MDK TKD contingent worldwide. Many schools, like ours, teach a combination of traditional MDK material And WT/KKW material. To complete at more than a local level in TKD this is necessary. If someone has no desire to compete under WT rules then there is a avenue to advance without it And get KKW certification.
> This dogma that there is only "one" TKD way is silly. It never has been that way. Hell, there is not 'one' of any style I can think of.



Strangely if you speak to 99% of Taekwondoin in Korea, they won't even refer to (and depending on age may not even know about) the Kwans, there is only one Taekwondo in their eyes - Kukkiwon.



dvcochran said:


> If you insist on including the 4 Kwans that materialized after the war then in fairness the number would be upwards of 40 Kwans. There are 5 major Kwan's historically speaking, CMK, CDK, JDK, MDK, & SMK. The motivation to establish the KTA was to unify all the Kwans. From what I understand most of the major Kwans do still exist largely as a historical reference in Korea. Many people still practice the original material.



When I've mentioned the Kwans, I'm generally talking about those that attended the 1961 unification events: Jidokwan, Chungdokwan, Changmookwan, Moodukkwan, Songmookwan, Ohdokwan, Kangdukwon, Hanmookwan and the Jungdokwan (Chungdokwan offshoot). There were lots of smaller kwans, but they weren't large enough to take part in those events.

I agree most of the major Kwans still exist in Korea, they still give out Dan rank to members (although also promote Kukkiwon rank) and often hold social events. They do (as far as I know) all 100% perform standard Kukkiwon Taekwondo though, not some older Kwan-specific version.



dvcochran said:


> Dirty Dog, to my knowledge,  Hwang H.C., Kwan Jang Nim is still the President of MDK. Is this your understanding?
> Donggyu Lee, Sa Bon Nim is Deputy in Korea but I do not know if that title holds as the 'head' of Korean MDK.



Thank you for this. I didn't read all of the article about GM Kang, Shin-chul (I was tired and it was in Korean, so my focus wasn't there enough to read all of it), so I wonder what the article was claiming then.

Do you happen to know Hwang "H.C"'s given name? Is he a relative of GM Hwang Kee?


----------



## _Simon_ (Oct 14, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> I'm sorry, I don't understand? You said you'd read several histories but now can't present one that contains your opinion that he was the unifying influence behind the Kwan unification?
> 
> You somehow feel I have an ego about this - I wasn't present at any of the unification meetings, I'm too young. I came along after and, like you, have just read histories from that time (Modern History of Taekwondo, Kukkiwon textbook, A Killing art - although I don't like it, ITF Encyclopaedia set, etc) as well as the history lectures on the Kukkiwon master courses.
> 
> This isn't about me shouting you down or somehow proving I'm better than you (the only things I think you mean when you talk about ego), but if someone has actually claimed this in a history of Taekwondo, I want to read it because I haven't up to now so it's a different perspective that I want to read.


I think granfire was referring to Choi having the big ego, not yourself


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 15, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Strangely if you speak to 99% of Taekwondoin in Korea, they won't even refer to (and depending on age may not even know about) the Kwans, there is only one Taekwondo in their eyes - Kukkiwon.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


From what I have gathered it is rather amazing how quickly Korea was able unify TKD in their country, especially given the time and communication gaps, influences and mass scattering of styles there. There is much speculation that what occurred was essentially a coup, S.O.P. there for decades. Regardless, it set the path for South Korean MA's going forward. But I would caution you to think that is where the history began. Always fascinating to me that a martial art/sport has become the marquis icon for a whole country.

I cannot say with certainty but I would assume the Kwan's still organizing in Korea practice their heritage. Why else would they organize? Very similar to how TKD schools globally that are XXX Kwan practice more than just WT/KKW curriculum, which is what we do. I have worked out and/or taught at around 200 schools in North America and this is a consistent theme.
And I sincerely hope so because, brother, that curriculum is seriously lacking, assuming one is looking for more that just competing. 

H.C. Hwang is one of his son's.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 15, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> From what I have gathered it is rather amazing how quickly Korea was able unify TKD in their country, especially given the time and communication gaps, influences and mass scattering of styles there. There is much speculation that what occurred was essentially a coup, S.O.P. there for decades. Regardless, it set the path for South Korean MA's going forward. But I would caution you to think that is where the history began. Always fascinating to me that a martial art/sport has become the marquis icon for a whole country.



I agree.



dvcochran said:


> I cannot say with certainty but I would assume the Kwan's still organizing in Korea practice their heritage. Why else would they organize?



Because in Korean culture, relationships are SUPER important and often more so than competence or ability. So they really value that maintaining a link/relationship with the other kwan members (at least the older generation does - the younger generation more often talk about which university they studied Taekwondo at than which kwan they're from).



dvcochran said:


> Very similar to how TKD schools globally that are XXX Kwan practice more than just WT/KKW curriculum, which is what we do. I have worked out and/or taught at around 200 schools in North America and this is a consistent theme.



That's interesting. My main Kwan experience is with Changmookwan, and I know they 100% follow the Kukkiwon syllabus/standards, and the organisation exists more as a friendship organisation (organising events, competitions, etc) and dan rank issuing centre.



dvcochran said:


> And I sincerely hope so because, brother, that curriculum is seriously lacking, assuming one is looking for more that just competing.



Really? I don't feel it's lacking. Modern Kukkiwon Taekwondo has basic techniques, poomsae, destruction - power and athletic jumps/spings, sparring, self-defence (including groundwork and grappling). The only thing I can think isn't covered is weapons training, and I'm OK with that.



dvcochran said:


> H.C. Hwang is one of his son's.



Do you know his given name rather than just "H.C."? Just so I can make a note of it.


----------



## granfire (Oct 15, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> From what I have gathered it is rather amazing how quickly Korea was able unify TKD in their country, especially given the time and communication gaps, influences and mass scattering of styles there.


It was a matter of national pride after 53, after being dominated by China and Russia for decades, annexed by Japan for almost 40.


----------



## granfire (Oct 15, 2020)

granfire said:


> It was a matter of national pride after 53, after being dominated by China and Russia for decades, annexed by Japan for almost 40.



It should read 'national identity'


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 15, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> I agree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Kwan Jang Nim Hwang, Hyun-Chul.

I am glad your school is well rounded. More so back in the 80's-90's I visited several WT/KKW schools that only worked on Kukki poomsae and sparring. I do know they have been working on a more well rounded syllabus for some time but have not really had a reason to research it in depth. Of course I cannot say for sure but I suspect your school may do more. Is there published KKW curriculum yet? 
Our schools sound similar. Our GM has been on the Kukkiwon steering committee since 1996 and we have always had a robust SD program including a small amount of grappling. Our roots go back pre Kukkiwon and we regularly punch to the face when sparring. For those who are entering more than just local tourneys we have sparring classes.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 16, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> Kwan Jang Nim Hwang, Hyun-Chul.



Just in case you didn't know, if you're using the Korean title it should go after the name. Maybe worth something as a tip  Or feel free to ignore 

Anyway, thank you for his full name - I really appreciate it.



dvcochran said:


> I am glad your school is well rounded. More so back in the 80's-90's I visited several WT/KKW schools that only worked on Kukki poomsae and sparring. I do know they have been working on a more well rounded syllabus for some time but have not really had a reason to research it in depth. Of course I cannot say for sure but I suspect your school may do more. Is there published KKW curriculum yet?



Unfortunately not, there are grading syllabus but it doesn't include self-defence. I believe they are publishing a book and a video on self-defence and step sparring, but I haven't heard yet that they are completed. They showed a rough cut of the video syllabus on the master course in 2016, but it was various masters in various dojangs, rather than professionally shot and edited.



dvcochran said:


> Our schools sound similar. Our GM has been on the Kukkiwon steering committee since 1996 and we have always had a robust SD program including a small amount of grappling. Our roots go back pre Kukkiwon and we regularly punch to the face when sparring. For those who are entering more than just local tourneys we have sparring classes.



That's awesome that you also have a robust SD programme, I feel it adds a lot to a person's confidence level (even if some of the techniques/combinations are rather unrealistic - although then I try to avoid teaching them too much and mark down in a grading if used).


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 16, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> Just in case you didn't know, if you're using the Korean title it should go after the name. Maybe worth something as a tip  Or feel free to ignore
> 
> Anyway, thank you for his full name - I really appreciate it.
> 
> ...


This sounds about part for WT/KKW. As hard as they try to deny it all they are really concerned with is competition and keeping their Olympic slot. I have been to a Lot of KKW schools in North America and have never seen anyone claim to teach a KKW self defense curriculum. It is disappointing and where misinformed people like @Steve get the idea that all KKW schools are crap. All TKD just cannot be painted with the same brush.   
I agree it is a necessary label for most TKD schools to be successful from a business sense. That said it is Not a complete curriculum. I imagine the SD videos you mentioned were from instructors like ours who are seriously vested in WT/KKW but have a wealth of other background. Sad and frustrating (and typical) that a bunch of 'A' type Korean personalities still haven't gotten along enough to build a full curriculum. And it is going on 50 years now.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 16, 2020)

***Correction***
I did not realize I placed the salutation backwards. Thank you for pointing it out. 
I apologize to Hwang Hyun-Chul, Kwan Jang Nim for the error.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 18, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> ***Correction***
> I did not realize I placed the salutation backwards. Thank you for pointing it out.
> I apologize to Hwang Hyun-Chul, Kwan Jang Nim for the error.



I don't think any Koreans would take offence at it, they're very forgiving of errors in Korean by those that aren't fluent in Korean and happy that people are trying. I just thought I'd let you know in case you didn't know  (and may be useful for others too).

Weirdly, after a while it becomes second-nature. If I'm speaking English to a Korean master/grandmaster I'll put their title before their name, but if I'm speaking Korean to the same named person, I'll naturally put the title afterwards.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Oct 23, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> The _name_ Taekwondo didn't exist prior to General Choi naming it, but it was united by the Kwan leaders, not Choi. In fact, at the time, Choi only had "honorary 4th dan rank" not full regular dan rank, and that was (controversially) revoked by GM Son, Duk-sung in the Seoul newspaper on June 15th 1959 after Choi asked for higher honorary dan rank, so whether he was a legit master is even really in question.
> 
> Choi did a lot for popularizing and promoting Taekwondo, and for that I'm grateful, but let's not take credit from a bunch of honourable grandmasters who unified Taekwondo and give it to one guy, who in reality is the cause of the major split in Taekwondo. 9 Kwans (we'll ignore the 10th administration only Kwan) came together to unify to form Taekwondo, KTA, and then Kukkiwon. General Choi was the only one to split away - even his original Kwan Ohdokwan still exists in Korea and fully supports Kukkiwon.


Let's examine history a little. 
First GM Son was no longer CDK president when he placed an ad in a newspaper expelling General Choi and revoking his rank. The same ad also expelled GM Uhm and GM Nam.   So, questions should be asked if someone who was no longer president of an organization or even a member had the right to expel  people and revoke their rank.  We know GM Uhm was president after GM Son was gone and remained so for many decades. GM Nam remained a member as well.   So, what does that tell you about GM Sons advertisement and efficacy of the purported actions contained therein. 
Next let us look at what General Choi did.   As head of the 29th infantry division, (using the name Oh Do Kwan being art of the genius)  recruited, and trained top MA talent in a new system he developed so it could be taught on a wide schedule.   Took trained people on world tours to demonstrate, dispatched instructors throughout the world to teach, recruited Korean instructors in other parts of the world  (Jhoon Rhee a notable example) to start teaching the system . Lobbied endlessly against resistance to use the name. 
There is no doubt he was successful do to his position and ability to access government resources. 
I asked GM Nam, knowing how people were typically loyal to their instructors / Kwans how it was that General Choi was so successful   (again the Name Oh Do Kwan comes to mind)  that General Choi was so successful attracting people.  His answer was because General Choi had access to resources no one else had.  If they wanted to do a demo somewhere they would get on a military transport and go. 
So there is no doubt the motivation was to spread a system on a wide basis taking a page from Funakoshi, Kano etc. with the advantage of modern travel and communications   (along with the spread a public relations  feat for SK) 
Also no doubt the General Choi's  success was due to political influence and resources. 
Now, fast forward   18 years or so, the SK government uses it's resources to  come up with TKD v2, and uses it's influence and resources develop a system,  recruit, and train instructors, and dispatch instructors across the globe   with the now even greater advantage of better communication and travel. 
What other honorable GM came even close to duplicating General Choi's efforts / results notwithstanding his access to resources?


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 26, 2020)

Earl Weiss said:


> Let's examine history a little.
> First GM Son was no longer CDK president when he placed an ad in a newspaper expelling General Choi and revoking his rank.



I completely agree, that's why I always write "(controversially)" when I describe the event.



Earl Weiss said:


> The same ad also expelled GM Uhm and GM Nam.   So, questions should be asked if someone who was no longer president of an organization or even a member had the right to expel  people and revoke their rank.  We know GM Uhm was president after GM Son was gone and remained so for many decades. GM Nam remained a member as well.   So, what does that tell you about GM Sons advertisement and efficacy of the purported actions contained therein.



I would say that the two are different things. If someone signs my rank certificate and believes that I did something wrong, serious enough that I no longer deserves that rank (even if they are no longer in that position) then I would accept my rank had been revoked as it was their name on it. I maybe would re-apply to the current head to ask for a new rank certificate with their signature, if they felt it appropriate.

However, if that person no longer held authority in the association, I don't think they can determine who is and is not a member.

So the two are different in my eyes, but that is my personal opinion.



Earl Weiss said:


> Next let us look at what General Choi did.   As head of the 29th infantry division, (using the name Oh Do Kwan being art of the genius)  recruited, and trained top MA talent in a new system he developed so it could be taught on a wide schedule.   Took trained people on world tours to demonstrate, dispatched instructors throughout the world to teach, recruited Korean instructors in other parts of the world  (Jhoon Rhee a notable example) to start teaching the system . Lobbied endlessly against resistance to use the name.
> There is no doubt he was successful do to his position and ability to access government resources.



I agree, he definitely had a more forward thinking view on how to take this Korean art and make it global. The KKW side of the fence was slower on making that jump.



Earl Weiss said:


> I asked GM Nam, knowing how people were typically loyal to their instructors / Kwans how it was that General Choi was so successful   (again the Name Oh Do Kwan comes to mind)  that General Choi was so successful attracting people.  His answer was because General Choi had access to resources no one else had.  If they wanted to do a demo somewhere they would get on a military transport and go.
> So there is no doubt the motivation was to spread a system on a wide basis taking a page from Funakoshi, Kano etc. with the advantage of modern travel and communications   (along with the spread a public relations  feat for SK)
> Also no doubt the General Choi's  success was due to political influence and resources.
> Now, fast forward   18 years or so, the SK government uses it's resources to  come up with TKD v2, and uses it's influence and resources develop a system,  recruit, and train instructors, and dispatch instructors across the globe   with the now even greater advantage of better communication and travel.



I don't know if I'd agree with v2 given that I don't feel General Choi defined all of Taekwondo, but determined what his style was, the unified Kwans on the other side did the same thing as a joint effort. Inside of Korea, there are other Kwans that pre-date Ohdokwan.



Earl Weiss said:


> What other honorable GM came even close to duplicating General Choi's efforts / results notwithstanding his access to resources?



As a group they came close (or some would say surpassed given the Olympics success and much greater size) but that's the difference in thinking for me. I always feel that General Choi was very egotistical. He was "The Founder", he was the one with all the power, the kwan was named "School of my way" (and I know he later apparently clarified that it meant "my as in each member's way", but that feels like political wordplay to me). So comparing him on one side to a group of people on the other side that felt it was a group effort is fair and I would say proven equal over time (even though he did it first).

That's why I'd predicted the multiple ITF split that would happen after General Choi passed away. He led an organisation where he maintained the power and prestige, so there were always going to be a bunch of people that felt they were at the top table, ready to also hold that same power and prestige.


----------



## granfire (Oct 26, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> I always feel that General Choi was very egotistical. He was "The Founder", he was the one with all the power, the kwan was named "School of my way" (and I know he later apparently clarified that it meant "my as in each member's way", but that feels like political wordplay to me).


"the biggest ego in a room full of egos"
I suppose it sounds better to you when you say it.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 26, 2020)

granfire said:


> "the biggest ego in a room full of egos"
> I suppose it sounds better to you when you say it.


If you have ever been in a meeting with a group of Korean GM's you know what he is saying. It seems to be a cultural thing to have the biggest ego.


----------



## Pepsiman90 (Oct 26, 2020)

I think everyone else nailed it on the head, but to the best of my understanding, the ITF-style is more traditional and focuses on self-defense, whereas WTF/WT-style focuses more on the sport/competitive side of things. Both styles are 100% valid in my opinion as they instill physical and mental discipline (My brother-in-law and his kids currently train under WTF/WT, for context's sake.), but which one someone prefers is based on what exactly they're looking to get out of it.


----------



## granfire (Oct 26, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> If you have ever been in a meeting with a group of Korean GM's you know what he is saying. It seems to be a cultural thing to have the biggest ego.


I have met men from many parts of the world. 
Goes with the equipment 

Alas, it was what I was saying all along. 
Might be an ego thing?
Dunno.


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 27, 2020)

Pepsiman90 said:


> I think everyone else nailed it on the head, but to the best of my understanding, the ITF-style is more traditional and focuses on self-defense, whereas WTF/WT-style focuses more on the sport/competitive side of things. Both styles are 100% valid in my opinion as they instill physical and mental discipline (My brother-in-law and his kids currently train under WTF/WT, for context's sake.), but which one someone prefers is based on what exactly they're looking to get out of it.



One tip I would say is to listen out for if the school describes themselves as WTF/WT or Kukkiwon/KKW.

If they use WTF/WT then (IMHO) they're more likely to be sport focused). If they use Kukkiwon/KKW (which is actually correct, WT is just a sports competition body) then they're more likely to do the whole curriculum which either includes traditional ITF-like self defence or more modern self-defence as per the current Kukkiwon curriculum.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 27, 2020)

granfire said:


> I have met men from many parts of the world.
> Goes with the equipment
> 
> Alas, it was what I was saying all along.
> ...


Fully agree it is an ego thing from an American perspective. It seems to me 'A' type Koreans take it to a whole different level.


----------



## granfire (Oct 27, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> Fully agree it is an ego thing from an American perspective. It seems to me 'A' type Koreans take it to a whole different level.



I think we just don't notice it from Americans or Europeans. Plenty of tail wagging in those cultures as well.
Most just don't have the national platform and the relative vacuum to thrive in.


----------



## Bruce7 (Oct 27, 2020)

Ivan said:


> I have watched a lot of Taekwondo sparring on YouTube, and every time I scroll down the comment section I see comments such as - "Ooh old school Taekwondo was better". I tried to look into this and I found this video:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



IMO when I think of old school MA, I think of people like Bill Wallace (karate) who's side kick is as good as any TKD side kick. A man that enjoys teaching as much as he enjoys doing.


----------



## Jaeimseu (Oct 27, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> Fully agree it is an ego thing from an American perspective. It seems to me 'A' type Koreans take it to a whole different level.



While their are undoubtedly some egos amongst some Korean GMs, the most annoyingly egotistical martial artists I’ve come across have been American masters. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Earl Weiss (Oct 28, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> I I always feel that General Choi was very egotistical. He was "The Founder", he was the one with all the power, the kwan was named "School of my way" (and I know he later apparently clarified that it meant "my as in each member's way", but that feels like political wordplay to me).


Egotistical is one way to put it. Another is to understand he was a General and when the General says do something he expects it to get done. Now, of course this is problematic when the people he tells are not under his command. 
As to the second point -  To my knowledge - General Choi never issued any such explanation or wordplay. I never heard this or saw it in print  until I asked  Nam Tae Hi how General Choi was able to attract followers who are typically loyal to their instructor or Kwan.    He explained that this was part of  choosing the name Oh Do Kwan or "Gym Of My Way" or "Gym for all of Us"  So it could be a place for everyone as opposed to using an existing name which might be viewed as joining an existing  competing Kwan. If you haven't read the article which contains the first known published print reference I am aware of  I can provide it.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Oct 28, 2020)

Jaeimseu said:


> While their are undoubtedly some egos amongst some Korean GMs, the most annoyingly egotistical martial artists I’ve come across have been American masters.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sometimes the Instructor conveys lessons to the student thru their actions.


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 28, 2020)

Jaeimseu said:


> While their are undoubtedly some egos amongst some Korean GMs, the most annoyingly egotistical martial artists I’ve come across have been American masters.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Agree. In many cases though, who do you think they learned from?


----------



## Jaeimseu (Oct 28, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> Agree. In many cases though, who do you think they learned from?



True, but as adults, we are responsible for our own actions. I don’t care why you’re a jerk (not you, sir). I care THAT you’re a jerk. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## andyjeffries (Oct 28, 2020)

Earl Weiss said:


> Egotistical is one way to put it. Another is to understand he was a General and when the General says do something he expects it to get done. Now, of course this is problematic when the people he tells are not under his command.
> As to the second point -  To my knowledge - General Choi never issued any such explanation or wordplay. I never heard this or saw it in print  until I asked  Nam Tae Hi how General Choi was able to attract followers who are typically loyal to their instructor or Kwan.    He explained that this was part of  choosing the name Oh Do Kwan or "Gym Of My Way" or "Gym for all of Us"  So it could be a place for everyone as opposed to using an existing name which might be viewed as joining an existing  competing Kwan. If you haven't read the article which contains the first known published print reference I am aware of  I can provide it.



So up until GM Nam's explanation, it could have literally been a pure ego thing "this is MY school" from General Choi's point of view?


----------



## dvcochran (Oct 28, 2020)

Jaeimseu said:


> True, but as adults, we are responsible for our own actions. I don’t care why you’re a jerk (not you, sir). I care THAT you’re a jerk.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Well said. At least in my Korean environment ego is mellowing out a bit. The A type personality is going to rear it's head in every environment at some point. It is just that it is more conducive in some environments than others. You would be amazed how prevalent steroids were in 80's college football and regional/national level TKD competition. Made for some real axxholes. And no, I did not need steroids to be an axx.


----------



## Earl Weiss (Oct 29, 2020)

andyjeffries said:


> So up until GM Nam's explanation, it could have literally been a pure ego thing "this is MY school" from General Choi's point of view?


Not at all. Up until GM Nams explanation Non Korean Language speakers misunderstood the meaning.   This fit nicely into their pre conceived notions and was then misapplied to bolster the egotistical critique. It was gym of "My Way" . (not "My School") as each person speaking in the first person at the Gm would use the name.   He also said it could be translated as "The Gym for all of us." Here is the interview.  https://1c47d0f0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites...K1jgOfmRgf9e8TrX4LOc41Z-yKxks=&attredirects=0


----------



## Mitlov (Nov 3, 2020)

just one opinion, but I think the difference between 1990s taekwondo and modern taekwondo can really be tied to the electronic hogu. And I can relate it to something I've seen in fencing. In saber, where you need a judge to recognize that you got the touch in most situations, saberists are very aggressive and theatrical to get the judge to feel that they're being dominant. Complete with loud yelling whenever they think they scored, to try and convince the judge that they did in fact score. In epee, were electronic scoring is completely determinative, people tend to be more relaxed and hit no harder than they need to hit to set off the sensors. Relaxed is fast, and hitting harder than you need to hit doesn't help with speed, so epee looks much less intense to a spectator than saber does.

I think that the electronic hogu may have changed WT TKD from a saber dynamic to an epee dynamic. No less intense from a competitor standpoint, but perhaps less action-packed from the standpoint of a spectator.


----------

