# characteristics of tang soo do



## drummingman (Jan 1, 2007)

can someone tell me what are the main things that are taught in tang soo do? what sets it apart from other martial arts? does it focus more on punching or kicking or throws or ground fighting? what sets it apart from other korean martial arts.
in schools that i have see tae kwon do taught it seems that tang soo do is taught as a secondary style to tae kwon do.is this true and if so why?
are there any schools that just teach tang soo do or do the schools that teach tang soo do also always teach tae kwon do and/or other korean martial arts?


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil (Jan 1, 2007)

Tang Soo Do is considered a Martial Art, Tae Kwon Do is considered a Martial Sport.

They are different in many ways, but in most schools today, the Martial Art has been lost, and the sport aspects are what have been practiced and taught.

Where are you located?

If you are in Michigan, or are willing to travel, I will be happy to work with you to help you learn more on this subject


_Heres to a GREAT 2007 for us all!!!_​ 


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## exile (Jan 1, 2007)

The TKD I've been learning for the past three and a half years is definitely a martial, combat-oriented art; we train for close quarters fighting with a lot of emphasis on hand and elbow techs (which make up the vast majority of pattern moves at all levels, and the greater part of the TKD toolkit). This is probably a minority approach within TKD, however. I've seen TSD classes in Columbus and the technical content looks very similar to what we do in our own school. I'm inclined to think that TSD and TKD are both branches of the Korean interpretation of Okinawan/Japanese karate, with TSD having diverged much less from its karate sources than TKD (in many places, at least) has. TSD, from what I've seen, is much more up-front in its inclusion of locks, sweeps, low kicks in conjunction with close-in fighting techs than most TKD, at least the Olympic-influenced version, is; but some TKD lineages also teach those kinds of locking/holding/throwing techniques as setups for hand and elbow strikes. 

The real difference I think is that the largest TKD world organization is committed to a vision of TKD as essentially a sport, driven by the perks of Olympic-level competition, with, increasingly, only lip service given to the self-defense aspects that were its original raison d'etre. I myself think this isn't a good thing at all, and I know there are a fair number of very experienced, skilled TKD MAists and instructors who have a similar take on it (don't get me wrong, I've no quarrel at all with anyone who wants to study TKD from that angle; but the lack of choice in many dojangs and the pressure to take the art increasingly in ring-specific technical directions is very troubling). Those of us who are interested in the `other' aspect of TKD are probably studying something which isn't that different from TSD, though there are bound to be differences in detail (most TKD schools don't teach the Pyang-Ahn hyungs, e.g., whereas my impression is that until recently, TSD dojangs have taught the Pyung-Ahns as part of their core curricula, and so on).


----------



## Butch (Jan 1, 2007)

I agree and disagree. TKD today is split into 2 groups traditional and sport. The sport TKD is usually the KKW version that follows the Olympic sport style of TKD. The traditional is usually ITF with some of the old style Chung Do Kwan and Moo Duk Kwan style TKD. The first style is based on a tournament format with full to semi-full contact type sparring limiting the contact areas. The second style or tratitional style is more self defense and spirital orientatened.
 While I do agree that both have a background in the Japanese arts TSD has evolved beyond this structure and became an art unto itself with its on flavor and style. This is due primarilary to the instructors of the different schools or kwans that have adapted other techniques into their art form.
Butch


----------



## Mariachi Joe (Jan 1, 2007)

Is there a connection between Tang So Do and Chuck Norris' style. I forgot what it's called


----------



## exile (Jan 1, 2007)

Butch said:


> I agree and disagree. TKD today is split into 2 groups traditional and sport. The sport TKD is usually the KKW version that follows the Olympic sport style of TKD. The traditional is usually ITF with some of the old style Chung Do Kwan and Moo Duk Kwan style TKD.



My training is in neither CDK nor MDK, but in a Song Moo Kwan lineage which preserves a lot of Shotokan content and an interest in close quarter fighting techniques favoring hand/arm techs. Nominally SMK was merged into the KKW, but there are independent outposts.




Butch said:


> The first style is based on a tournament format with full to semi-full contact type sparring limiting the contact areas. The second style or tratitional style is more self defense and spirital orientatened.



I think you'll find there are dojangs which try to cover both angles. My impression from what matt.m and zDom post is that Moo Sul Kwan works like that.



Butch said:


> While I do agree that both have a background in the Japanese arts TSD has evolved beyond this structure and became an art unto itself with its on flavor and style. This is due primarilary to the instructors of the different schools or kwans that have adapted other techniques into their art form.
> Butch



Right, and I never said that TSD was the same as its karate foundations. Since you raise the point, though, I'd really be interested in even a brief sketch of how you see the main differences between the Okinawan/Japanese roots of TSD on the one hand and the current technical content of TSD (or the TSD you do, at least). It's hard for an outsider to get that kind of informationanything you could tell me would be much appreciated.


----------



## Butch (Jan 2, 2007)

Exile ask
Right, and I never said that TSD was the same as its karate foundations. Since you raise the point, though, I'd really be interested in even a brief sketch of how you see the main differences between the Okinawan/Japanese roots of TSD on the one hand and the current technical content of TSD (or the TSD you do, at least). It's hard for an outsider to get that kind of informationanything you could tell me would be much appreciated.

sorry but I don't know how to use the quote system.LOL!
The Okinawian system came first and then the Japanese system. The way that TSD change it was to basicly raise the kicks and add a few that the Okinawa/Japan systems didn't have. In the TSD system our moves are more flowing and not as shape as the other two. I think that this comes from the influx of Chinese systems that some of the core masters of the earily TSD systems brought with them when they join the TSD systems. If you look at a TSD stylist doing a form you will see the movements are more rounded and flowing than its Okinawa/Japanese counterparts.
 If you go back to the begining you will find almost no differance between the three but after about 20 years the kicks raised from knee kicks to chest and head kicks. The self- defense moves went to head on strikes rather than trying to find a nerve strike, but those are still there, just not taught as much as they once where.
 Once you really look at the three systems it is easy to see where the changes are and where they stayed the same.
Butch


----------



## exile (Jan 2, 2007)

Butch said:


> Exile ask
> Right, and I never said that TSD was the same as its karate foundations. Since you raise the point, though, I'd really be interested in even a brief sketch of how you see the main differences between the Okinawan/Japanese roots of TSD on the one hand and the current technical content of TSD (or the TSD you do, at least). It's hard for an outsider to get that kind of informationanything you could tell me would be much appreciated.
> 
> sorry but I don't know how to use the quote system.LOL!



No problem, I can follow you. If you want to quote a whole post, use the big `QUOTE' button in the lower right; if you decide you don't want to quote the whole post, just delete the excess. 



Butch said:


> The Okinawian system came first and then the Japanese system. The way that TSD change it was to basicly raise the kicks and add a few that the Okinawa/Japan systems didn't have. In the TSD system our moves are more flowing and not as shape as the other two. I think that this comes from the influx of Chinese systems that some of the core masters of the earily TSD systems brought with them when they join the TSD systems. If you look at a TSD stylist doing a form you will see the movements are more rounded and flowing than its Okinawa/Japanese counterparts



OK, that's interesting... but it's funny, because it's also true that the 19th c. Okinawan systems, that people like Matusuma  and Itosu developed, _also_ incorporated CMA elements (the names of some of the Chinese MAs whose systems were incorporated into e.g. Shuri-te are supposedly recorded in the names of the katas recording those contributions: Chinto, Wanshu, Kushanku and so onCMAs and other elements of Chinese culture were actively imported into Okinawa from the late 14th c. on, after the king of Okinawa acknowledged tributary status to the Emperor of China.



Butch said:


> If you go back to the begining you will find almost no differance between the three but after about 20 years the kicks raised from knee kicks to chest and head kicks. The self- defense moves went to head on strikes rather than trying to find a nerve strike, but those are still there, just not taught as much as they once where.
> Once you really look at the three systems it is easy to see where the changes are and where they stayed the same.
> Butch



Ah, that's something I didn't realizeI'd thought that TSD (and other kwan-era KMAs) kept the kicks low, and that the raising hadn't taken place till the arena-competition era began in the late 60s, that it was done for effect, to impress ring judges. And the business about losing the explicit idea of weak point/nerve complex strikes was something else I hadn't realized...

Thanks very much for the info, Butch!


----------



## Butch (Jan 2, 2007)

OK, that's interesting... but it's funny, because it's also true that the 19th c. Okinawan systems, that people like Matusuma and Itosu developed, _also_ incorporated CMA elements (the names of some of the Chinese MAs whose systems were incorporated into e.g. Shuri-te are supposedly recorded in the names of the katas recording those contributions: Chinto, Wanshu, Kushanku and so onCMAs and other elements of Chinese culture were actively imported into Okinawa from the late 14th c. on, after the king of Okinawa acknowledged tributary status to the Emperor of China.

While this is true, some of the style was changed to a harder form which stuted the Okinawian art form of that time. It is also true that most of what was taught is not what we see today it is only what has been handed down with each instructors interputation(sp?) Sorry spelling isn't one of my strong points.

Ah, that's something I didn't realizeI'd thought that TSD (and other kwan-era KMAs) kept the kicks low, and that the raising hadn't taken place till the arena-competition era began in the late 60s, that it was done for effect, to impress ring judges. And the business about losing the explicit idea of weak point/nerve complex strikes was something else I hadn't realized...

Like I said after about 20 years. Yes some of the kicks  where added or changed and some of it was even due to the tournament ciruit, but after talking to some of the guys that where around in the late 60's and earily 70's as well as my own GM who was around with GM Hwang Kee before it was Moo Duk Kwan, I have pieced together some of this and been told straigh out by others what went on and when.

Thanks very much for the info, Butch![/quote]
Your welcome
Butch


----------



## exile (Jan 2, 2007)

Butch said:


> OK, that's interesting... but it's funny, because it's also true that the 19th c. Okinawan systems, that people like Matusuma and Itosu developed, _also_ incorporated CMA elements (the names of some of the Chinese MAs whose systems were incorporated into e.g. Shuri-te are supposedly recorded in the names of the katas recording those contributions: Chinto, Wanshu, Kushanku and so onCMAs and other elements of Chinese culture were actively imported into Okinawa from the late 14th c. on, after the king of Okinawa acknowledged tributary status to the Emperor of China.
> 
> While this is true, some of the style was changed to a harder form which stuted the Okinawian art form of that time. It is also true that most of what was taught is not what we see today it is only what has been handed down with each instructors interputation(sp?) Sorry spelling isn't one of my strong points.
> 
> ...



Thanks again for this information. It would be really useful if someday, someone was able to work out a comprehensive and balanced history of the  developments which have given rise to the various KMAs. My feeling is that that kind of knowledge wouldn't be purely decorativeyou know, the kind of thing where every book on some MA feels obliged to throw in a rehash of various bits of legendary history starting with Bodhidharma and the Shaolin Temple and, in the case of the KMAs, the Three Kingdoms era and the Hwarang and the rest of the kitchen sink, as though there were some actual documented linkage possible between what the defenders of Silla were doing thirteen hundred yeaers ago on the one hand and what WTF has just decided the Taegeuks should look like on the one hand. My feeling is, this is a bit of a sham, considering that we haven't even pieced out a coherent, comprehensive story about what the kwans were doing fifty years ago. 

The way legend gets passed off as history in the MAs isn't just a pain because of its flim-flam aspect, but more importantly, I believe, because a detailed, evidence-based history of these MAs would give us invaluable clues to _technical_ matters. If certain moves were introduced into an MA for reasons unrelated to combat efficiency, and if people have been twisting themselves into knots to find a combat rationale for them, then it would make life a whole lot easier for everyone if we were able to discover the actual reason for the practice in question; we could let it go as a fighting technique and stop trying to find the hidden application that would make sense of it (the ITF sinewave in its extreme form is a good example).  My interest in the kwan-era versions of KMA is based on my strong suspicion that these versions were probably much less distorted by political or nationalist ideologies or marketing agendas than anything we've had since, and much more driven by considerations of pure combat effectiveness. So if those guys were doing this or that, I want to learn about it...


----------



## Butch (Jan 3, 2007)

Mariachi JoeIs there a connection between Tang So Do and Chuck Norris' style. I forgot what it's called

Yes there is Master Norris started out in Judo and while injured he started TSD MDK under GM JC Shin. He also trained with GM JJ Kim after his return to the states.
Butch


----------



## MBuzzy (Jan 3, 2007)

Mariachi Joe said:


> Is there a connection between Tang So Do and Chuck Norris' style. I forgot what it's called


 
To answer your question - yes, very big connection, in fact...when Chuck Norris PCS'd to Osan AB, South Korea, he began his martial arts training in Tang Soo Do.  He holds black belts in TSD, Tae Kwon Do, Shito Ryu Karate, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.  He also founded Chun Kuk Do or "Universal Way" and since he was born, roundhouse kick related deaths have risen by 13,000 percent.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 3, 2007)

MBuzzy said:


> To answer your question - yes, very big connection, in fact...when Chuck Norris PCS'd to Osan AB, South Korea, he began his martial arts training in Tang Soo Do. He holds black belts in TSD, Tae Kwon Do, Shito Ryu Karate, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. He also founded Chun Kuk Do or "Universal Way" and since he was born, roundhouse kick related deaths have risen by 13,000 percent.


 
Someone once attempted to tell Chuck Norris that roundhouse kicks weren't the best way to kick.  This has been recorded by historians as the worst mistake EVER.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja (Jan 11, 2007)

Mariachi Joe said:


> Is there a connection between Tang So Do and Chuck Norris' style. I forgot what it's called



Interestingly enough, Chuck Norris was originally a TSD fighter...his instructor was none other than C. S. Kim, back when he was training in Korea. There was a magazine article about it a while ago - apparently they had a disagreement, and Chuck left...to make his own style.

And then he got the snot kicked out of him by Bruce Lee...:-D


----------

