# Chung Bong: the forgotten hyung series of TKD...



## exile (May 5, 2008)

OK, a bit melodramatic, but with all these threads running, I figured I needed to do something dramatic to get your attention...

Nonetheless, it _is_ a pretty dramatic story. In brief, Byung Jik Ro, founder of one of the five original kwans, the Song Moo Kwan, and arguably the first one to open (in 1944, earlier than the Chung Do Kwan) was something of an organization man; although he was a devoted and loyal student of Gichin Funakoshi&#8212;under whose direct instruction he earned dan rank (the name Song Moo Kwan is a direct translation into Korean of Shotokan 'Waving Pines Martial Training House")&#8212;he was willing to abandon his Shotokan-based curriculum in favor of General Choi's Ch'ang Hon hyungs and the syllabus built around them in the interest of TKD unity. But things didn't stay that way, and a completely new series of seven hyungs appears to have been created to counter the turn to the General's version of TKD. Very few practitioners are familiar with these forms, apparently, and they have something of a 'cult' status within SMK. As Robert Frankovich reports,

_Tae Kwon Do Song Moo Kwan was one of the original eight kwans recognized by the Korean government in 1945. Song Moo Kwan, the Pine Tree School, was founded by Byung Jik Ro in Seoul shortly after World War II and was one of the kwans that followed in General Choi's attempt to unify the Korean martial arts under the name Tae Kwon Do. Grandmaster Ro had trained with the Shotokan Karate founder, Gichin Funakoshi. When Song Moo Kwan was first taught, Grandmaster Ro used the forms that were taught to him by Funakoshi. When the kwans began to appear, each had its own philosophy and teachings. One concept that made Song Moo Kwan different from the others is that they felt that many of the techniques were being taught incorrectly because the hips were not involved enough while doing the techniques. After the unification of the kwans, Grandmaster Ro started to teach the poomse that had been developed by General Choi. These were used, and still are by some Song Moo Kwan instructors, until 1974 when a student of Grandmaster Ro designed the Chung Bong poomse. Master Jay Hyon had come to Minneapolis, MN in the early 1960's and set up the Karate Center. Master Hyon developed the Chung Bong poomse, which he introduced to his students, and replaced the poomse of General Choi. It is still unclear if these poomse have become the "official" poomse of Song Moo Kwan, but even today the Grandmaster's son Hee Sang Ro teaches them at the dojang (training hall) after Master Hyon retired from teaching. These poomse have become a very valuable training method for many students, unfortunately Master Hyon only developed seven poomse before his retirement.​_
These developments show how fragmented the SMK lineages have become. In my lineage, going back through Gm. Joon Pye-Choi, the Shotokan syllabus was completely restored, with some ancient Okinawan katas (such as Rohai) included in Koreanized form (Okinawan purists don't much like what JPC did in adapting the Okinawan material, but there is is); in other SMK lineages, the Ch'ang Hon hyungs are still taught; and in still others, Master Hyon's Chung Bong forms are the basis of the curriculum. I was able to find videos of these almost completely unknown hyungs on the Web here.

I'd be very interested in the thoughts of my fellow TKDists on these forms, which are part of the tradition of my Kwan, though not my lineage... I haven't tried to do any bunkai or applications study of them yet at all; it's hard working from a video, and I suspect very few TKDists, even with SMK connections, have ever seen these performed live. Strange, the things that turn up in the KMAs, eh?


----------



## Twin Fist (May 5, 2008)

I liked them. They are more "reality" driven that the original forms. And they are simple, yet complex at the same time.

 I dont know if I would teach them OVER the original ITF forms (which the koreans now wish everyone would just forget about....which WERE lifted almost move for move out of the Pinan forms, no matter how badly some dont want to believe that) but I wouldnt mind learning them, or using them as optional forms.


----------



## terryl965 (May 5, 2008)

The seven original forms was a great way of learning and the simplicity of them was great but they had all the SD principle within the complexuty of the forms. I wish there was still alot of people doing them but as we know there number gets smaller every years.


----------



## YoungMan (May 5, 2008)

If you go on Youtube and type in "Chung Bong forms", you will find footage of a black belt showing all seven Chung Bong forms. 
I don't care for them myself. I don't if it's the forms or the guy doing them, but they don't impress me. Too much like karate.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 6, 2008)

And Chon Ji and Won Hyo are NOT too much like Karate?

for that matter, what TKD forms are NOT carbon copies of karate forms?


----------



## exile (May 6, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> I liked them. They are more "reality" driven that the original forms. And they are simple, yet complex at the same time.
> 
> I dont know if I would teach them OVER the original ITF forms (which the koreans now wish everyone would just forget about....which WERE lifted almost move for move out of the Pinan forms, no matter how badly some dont want to believe that) but I wouldnt mind learning them, or using them as optional forms.



There's a good article about the Shotokan elements in the ITF forms in the 1988 volume of  _Black Belt_ somewhere... someone whose name I don't recall exactly, but it was something like Chris Thomas.



YoungMan said:


> If you go on Youtube and type in "Chung Bong forms", you will find footage of a black belt showing all seven Chung Bong forms.



Yes, that's the same place as the link in my first post takes you to. There are one or two other vids that show individual CB forms, but that Karate North site is the only place I've found that shows all seven. And I've only been able to find a text description of the step-by-step movements for one of them. Nor have I been able to find much information about the chap who devised them, the one Frankovich mentions. So much stuff back then that we are never going to know, clearly...


----------



## terryl965 (May 6, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> And Chon Ji and Won Hyo are NOT too much like Karate?
> 
> for that matter, what TKD forms are NOT carbon copies of karate forms?


 
Exactly every Poomsae that we do have some elements of Karate, that is where TKD came from and we all know this to some extent.


----------



## YoungMan (May 6, 2008)

Not really. The forms are the just karate-influenced aspect of Taekwondo. Many other aspects of TKD look nothing like karate. Even the Chung Bong forms bear little resemblance to the KKW forms. They look decidedly like karate forms
The KKW color belt forms, admittedly, have this carryover influence from the Japanese forms. But the black belt forms are much less Japanese looking.
I've said for a while now it's high time the Kukkiwon developed new forms that retained good power but removed the Japanese influence. Maybe that's my generation's job.


----------



## terryl965 (May 6, 2008)

YoungMan said:


> Not really. The forms are the just karate-influenced aspect of Taekwondo. Many other aspects of TKD look nothing like karate. Even the Chung Bong forms bear little resemblance to the KKW forms. They look decidedly like karate forms
> The KKW color belt forms, admittedly, have this carryover influence from the Japanese forms. But the black belt forms are much less Japanese looking.
> I've said for a while now it's high time the Kukkiwon developed new forms that retained good power but removed the Japanese influence. Maybe that's my generation's job.


 
Youngman maybe it will be your generation job to create some new poomsae for the KKW but the problem is you can never take away the past no matter how much everyone trys. A new set of form would be nice but it would be the best interest of competition and SD that they are more street practicle from that stand point.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 6, 2008)

the problem with that Terry is that any new forms cant say "THIS IS WHAT COMPETITION TKD IS ALL ABOUT" and be self defense oriented.

Competition forms and self defense forms have less in common than  Prince and Oral Roberts..........


----------



## terryl965 (May 6, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> the problem with that Terry is that any new forms cant say "THIS IS WHAT COMPETITION TKD IS ALL ABOUT" and be self defense oriented.
> 
> Competition forms and self defense forms have less in common than Prince and Oral Roberts..........


 
Not really if you stay with tradition rather than flash, me I have never ever been into the flashy stuff.


----------



## SageGhost83 (May 6, 2008)

What is wrong with the Japanese influence? It is not as if the Japanese couldn't fight or anything. Besides, TKD is in and of itself a derivative of Japanese/Okinawan Karate. Why change it for the sake of nationality when it is already highly effective to begin with? If we are going to deny the Japanese influence then we might as well just deny TKD itself because most of its contents are from Japanese/Okinawan Karate. New forms would be great, but I agree with Terry - TKD is what it is and no amount of revisionism or cultural denial will change that. TKD could come from Mars for all I care, I would still love it. I don't care if its Japanese influenced or Martian influenced. The forms seem to be more in line with TKD's roots and they look very ITF, IMHO.


----------



## tkd1964 (May 6, 2008)

Personally, from the forms I saw on Youtube, they look more like the free forms of open tournaments. I don't see them as looking ITF, but I'm bias and I don't see them as KKW. I would like to see them performed by the official Song Moo Kwan and see how they look. 

Mike


----------



## YoungMan (May 6, 2008)

Personally, I'd rather do form and technique that reflects the nation and culture that gave birth to it. Otherwise, you have this grab bag of techniques that really have nothing in common.
As far as developing new forms, they don't have to be reflective of sparring. I do think they should be reflective of the principles important in Taekwondo. To me, the Japanese forms, and the Chung Bong forms as well, strike me as too rigid and static. Keep in mind, the forms do not have to be Japanese or Japanese-influenced to be effective. What people should do is keep what makes Taekwondo effective, understand what is good self defense, what makes good aesthetics, and translate that to forms. I think it can be done.
Having said that, I'm sure exile will chime in to tell me how wrong I am.


----------



## FearlessFreep (May 6, 2008)

> TKD could come from Mars for all I care



That would be Panzer Kunst


----------



## rmclain (May 6, 2008)

There can be a problem with tying any art to a country, because some can use it for ethnotrinsic posturing, etc.  Instead the art should belong to the people that sweat, practice and preserve the art.  - Not political leaders, businessmen, or even the instructors that stand around and point while other people actually sweat and practice on the dojang floor. 

 In the case of Taekwondo, I believe the only advantage of being closer to the Japanese or Okinawa or Chinese root arts is that those art have a longer history and many more "trials by fire" than the short time taekwondo has existed.  Could Taekwondo surpass the arts from Japan and Okinawa for self-defense?  Absolutely, but it is highly unlikely for a SD aspect given the direction of Taekwondo in the past 40 years.  Taekwondo just doesn't have the same goals and direction as these other arts anymore.  

When this threat started and I saw the title mentioning "Chung Bong," I thought the threat was about the staff.  Just my opinion, but those forms on youtube were really awful.

R. McLain


----------



## Twin Fist (May 6, 2008)

SageGhost83 said:


> TKD is in and of itself a derivative of Japanese/Okinawan Karate.



there are people on this very board that will call you a heretic for that..LOL


----------



## e ship yuk (May 6, 2008)

exile said:


> (the name Song Moo Kwan is a direct translation into Korean of Shotokan 'Waving Pines Martial Training House")



Actually, it isn't.  The character used for Moo in Song Moo Kwan is the same used in Moo Duk Kwan, meaning martial, or military.  A direct translation would be Song Do Kwan.  The character used for To in Sho To Kan is the same used for Do in Chung Do Kwan, meaning wave.


----------



## exile (May 6, 2008)

e ship yuk said:


> Actually, it isn't.  The character used for Moo in Song Moo Kwan is the same used in Moo Duk Kwan, meaning martial, or military.  A direct translation would be Song Do Kwan.  The character used for To in Sho To Kan is the same used for Do in Chung Do Kwan, meaning wave.



Right, it's not word for word&#8212;but I'm not saying it was. When I say 'direct', rather than 'literal', I'm thinking on the one hand of _Kan_ in Shoto Kan as not just 'house', but '(training) hall', while the Korean, though it doesn't supply the waving bit, supplies the pines. The Japanese leaves the 'martial' in 'martial' training implicit. Still, I think it's close enough: 

Japanese: Waving Pines [martial]Training Hall
Korean: Pine Tree Martial [training] School

Not literal, but the sense is pretty much congruent.


----------



## SageGhost83 (May 6, 2008)

YoungMan said:


> Personally, I'd rather do form and technique that reflects the nation and culture that gave birth to it. Otherwise, you have this grab bag of techniques that really have nothing in common.


 
Korea didn't exactly give birth to a lot of things found in TKD, so it wouldn't be too accurate to say that those things reflect Korea and its culture. The funny thing about the arts is that none of them are exclusively from any one country. There is a lot of borrowing and importing of techniques and principles across nations and cultures that come together to form a particular style. I know that I continually say that TKD is derived from Japanese Karate, but Japanese karate is also derived from Okinawan Karate, which in turn imported and borrowed many things from White Crane Chuan Fa. See where I am going with this? No one nation can claim any one art as exclusively being its own because more likely than not, and especially in TKD's case, it's very origins can be traced back to another nation and culture. As far as techniques having something in common, that comes down to the science and principles behind the techniques themselves, not the nation that adopts them or the culture that is applied to them. Don't get me wrong, I love Korean culture too - the arts and crafts of Korea are among some of the most beautiful in the far east, and don't get me started on the food :fanboy:. Hmmm, you know what? The role of ethnocentrism in the martial arts is a very interesting subject in and of itself. Perhaps someone will start a new thread on it *hint* *hint*.


----------



## SageGhost83 (May 6, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> there are people on this very board that will call you a heretic for that..LOL


 
So true! I am expecting Youngman's fist to come out of the computer screen and give me a black eye any minute now :uhohh::boxing::lol:.


----------



## exile (May 6, 2008)

I'm going to say something which I'm intending to be taken in general; it's directed at no one person in particular, and really, I don't want to get into personalities&#8212;I don't think that's useful. My whole point is just this: the guy who devised these hyungs was a Korean, a senior student of one of the Kwan founders. Does it make sense for Americans, say, to object to them on the grounds that they aren't, in some sense, _Korean_ enough? As Americans, we don't really have any clue about what it means to _be_ Korean; we'll always be outsiders, looking through a (very, very thick piece of) glass darkly, at something that only members of that particular culture understand in their bones, just as someone who's learned English as a second language, no matter how fluent they are or how many decades they've spoken it, will never know it the way a ten year old native speaker does. Technical objections&#8212;sure, that's a different thing entirely. The question of the street applicability of a form is always a fair one, as *Terry* has stressed; and that's something that has nothing to do with culture, but something more like engineering: is this an efficient design solution to a certain [self-defense] kind of problem? But it seems to me extremely bizarre for some member of culture X to criticize the product of someone from culture Y on the grounds that that product isn't Y-ish enough. 

This ties in with *Rob McLain's* and *SageGhost's* points about ethnocentrism and cultural chauvinism. People who allow themselves to become spear-carriers and shield bearers for someone else's calculated, partisan agenda, particularly when this incorporates nationalist ideological motives, run the risk of falling under the rubric of Lenin's 'useful idiots' description. Lenin was referring to people in the relatively democratic west who acted as cheerleaders and publicists for Bolshevik repression in the belief that it was a necessary precursor to 'the withering away of the state'. Lenin knew much better; his contemptuous description of such people as useful idiots reflected the cynical realism of his own view that the purpose of the Revolution was to establish control over the Russian economy and Russian society by any means necessary. The moralistic justifications for doing that produced by a later generation of useful idiots, people like Walter Duranty, who later won the Pulitzer Prize for his whitewashing of some the worst cases of Stalinism's terror, are good examples of what can happen when you take over the role of reciting excuses and justifications for someone else's institutional agenda. Things don't have to be that extreme, though. An American, Canadian or European who looks askance at the product of a very advanced Korean practitioner's understanding of his own art on the grounds that it's not Korean enough is dangerously close to doing the same sort of thing. In a culture which has been a cross roads for influences from Northern Asia, Mongolia, Japan and China for thousands of years, what would it _mean_ to say that something produced by a Korean 'isn't Korean enough'?

I myself don't really know what to make of these forms. I'm certainly not going to try to impose a litmus test on them about whether or not they are sufficiently Korean. I think they can be judged, but on the basis of whether they seem to embody useful, practical technical content&#8212;just as I judge Okinawan, Japanese or Chinese forms on that basis. I don't think any of us are in a position to _say_ 'how Korean' something is, because I'm pretty sure that even if something like that represents a meaningful kind of judgment (which I actually doubt), none of _us_ has enough an idea of what 'being Korean' means to be able to make such a judgment competently.   Imagine someone borne and bred in the Caucasus making a judgment that a particular piece of Hawthorne's writing didn't truly reflect 'New England culture' and ask yourself if _that_ would make any sense.

What I'd really like is some idea of what is and is not good technically about these forms. For instance, I'm really interested in what it is about them that Rob McLain doesn't like at all (hint, hint!). What was Master Hyon doing with kicking in these forms? What kind of techniques are the forms giving hints about in terms of practical combat applications? _Those_ kinds of questions, I think we're in a pretty good position to give good answers to...


----------



## tkd1964 (May 7, 2008)

rmclain said:


> There can be a problem with tying any art to a country, because some can use it for ethnotrinsic posturing, etc. Instead the art should belong to the people that sweat, practice and preserve the art. - Not political leaders, businessmen, or even the instructors that stand around and point while other people actually sweat and practice on the dojang floor.
> 
> In the case of Taekwondo, I believe the only advantage of being closer to the Japanese or Okinawa or Chinese root arts is that those art have a longer history and many more "trials by fire" than the short time taekwondo has existed. Could Taekwondo surpass the arts from Japan and Okinawa for self-defense? Absolutely, but it is highly unlikely for a SD aspect given the direction of Taekwondo in the past 40 years. Taekwondo just doesn't have the same goals and direction as these other arts anymore.
> 
> ...


 
You can say that Okinawa and Chinese arts had more "trials by fire" but not Japanese Karate since it was only introduced in the 1920's. the first Kwan leaders, such as GM Ro and GM Lee, could be considered first generation Karateka.


----------



## rmclain (May 7, 2008)

tkd1964 said:


> You can say that Okinawa and Chinese arts had more "trials by fire" but not Japanese Karate since it was only introduced in the 1920's. the first Kwan leaders, such as GM Ro and GM Lee, could be considered first generation Karateka.


 
Yes, I agree with this.

1st generation:  Don't forget Yoon Kwe-byung, also known as Yoon Ui-byung, (founder Ji Do Kwan)- his teachers were Toyama Kanken and Mabuni Genwa. He even had his own school in Japan called, "Han Moo Kwan" and published a staff technique textbook in Japan, dedicated to Mabuni Kenwa and Toyama Kanken.  ***After 1950 Lee Kyo-yoon used the name "Han Moo Kwan" in Korea also.

Also, Yoon Byung-in (founder YMCA Kwon Bup Bu/Chang Moo Kwan) studied under Toyama Kanken from ~1939-1946.  These two 1st generation instructors were listed in Toyama's instructor's directory published in the late 1940's or early 1950's as 4th dans and representatives in Korea.  They both returned to S. Korea following WWII.

R. McLain


----------



## cdunn (May 7, 2008)

FearlessFreep said:


> That would be Panzer Kunst


 
Mmm, that would be a problem, I seem to lack the neccesary parts to practice that particular art.


----------



## FieldDiscipline (May 7, 2008)

exile said:


> I myself don't really know what to make of these forms.



Pretty much what I was thinking.


----------



## terryl965 (May 7, 2008)

The forms thereself are a great learning tool if you understqand all the techniques in them. The main problem is nobody wants to take the time and break down and learn all the techs. must just learn the movements of each given form, poomsae.


----------



## exile (May 7, 2008)

terryl965 said:


> The forms thereself are a great learning tool if you understqand all the techniques in them. *The main problem is nobody wants to take the time and break down and learn all the techs. *must just learn the movements of each given form, poomsae.



In a lot of case, people's instructors themselves never learned how to do that, so when they started to teach, they didn't know what the applications are. They can only teach what they themselves know. And they may not even realize that there are such techniques concealed within the movements of the form. Look at all the threads in the Karate fora in which people express the view that kata are just a kind of folkdance, why should we be burdened having to learn them, etc. etc. It's a problem that cuts across a lot of MAs, unfortunately...


----------



## terryl965 (May 7, 2008)

exile said:


> In a lot of case, people's instructors themselves never learned how to do that, so when they started to teach, they didn't know what the applications are. They can only teach what they themselves know. And they may not even realize that there are such techniques concealed within the movements of the form. Look at all the threads in the Karate fora in which people express the view that kata are just a kind of folkdance, why should we be burdened having to learn them, etc. etc. It's a problem that cuts across a lot of MAs, unfortunately...


 
I completely agree so many instructors do not even know the true meaning of forms so why should there students.


----------



## Miles (May 7, 2008)

I thought the hyung looked interesting but also very much like Karate.  I don't that is a slight on them at all, they just had a more Karate-like look than a Taekwondo look.  I attribute that to GM Hyon being a very early student of GM Ro.

Thanks for finding those and posting the link!

Miles


----------



## exile (May 7, 2008)

Miles said:


> I thought the hyung looked interesting but also very much like Karate.  I don't that is a slight on them at all, they just had a more Karate-like look than a Taekwondo look.  *I attribute that to GM Hyon being a very early student of GM Ro.*
> 
> Miles



That makes a lot of sense, Miles. In its early days SMK really was a literal transplant of Shotokan, and it would make sense for someone who had studied with Gm. Ro in that earliest phase to internalize that model of the art.

It's interesting, though, isn't it, that he maintained that view (as expressed in the hyung set he created) even after Gm. Ro had decided to go in a different direction...

This is something that I keep tripping over in looking at the way the MAs, and the KMAs in particular developed: individual decisions and preferences on the part of key players at the 'opportune moment' (as Captain Jack Sparrow would say) have often assumed an important role in the way the whole subsequent history of the art developed...


----------



## Haakon (Jul 18, 2010)

Ancient thread, but an interesting topic. The Chung Bong forms at Karate North was the first Tae kwon do I was exposed to in 1984. I learned up through Chung Bong 3 or 4 and then moved to the west coast and started at a ITF school. What a shock going from Chung Bong 1 to Chon Ji! I wondered where the rest of the form was, and no kicks until the third pattern? It seemed very odd, and very simple, compared to what I had been learning.

I'm now relearning them from the Karate North videos and what I remember, I will probably do them with the narrow ITF style back stance and not the wide Karate North version though, going back to the wide stance would be rough.

Black Belt magazine did an article on them in 1994 that some might find interesting. Google has it online: http://books.google.com/books?id=QN...resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false


----------



## dancingalone (Jul 19, 2010)

Haakon said:


> I'm now relearning them from the Karate North videos and what I remember, I will probably do them with the narrow ITF style back stance and not the wide Karate North version though, going back to the wide stance would be rough.
> 
> Black Belt magazine did an article on them in 1994 that some might find interesting. Google has it online: http://books.google.com/books?id=QN...resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false



Thanks for the link.  Haakon, why are you learning these forms other than a lineage connection?  I am curious what value you perceive in them.  No right or wrong answer - I am not bashing the forms.


----------



## Lord-Humongous (Jul 19, 2010)

What the devil is he doing at the start of each pattern?  Looks like he is gathering chi like a shaolin monk.


----------



## dancingalone (Jul 19, 2010)

lord-humungous said:


> What the devil is he doing at the start of each pattern?  Looks like he is gathering chi like a shaolin monk.



With his hands formed in knifehands?  Not likely, unless his idea of ki gathering is entirely different from my own training.  The angles of the arms and hands in relation to the torso are all wrong too for that type of exercise.  If anything, he'd be bleeding off ki.  Of course, this is strictly from my own perspective.  He might have entirely sound reasons by his system for doing this stuff.


----------



## Haakon (Jul 19, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Thanks for the link.  Haakon, why are you learning these forms other than a lineage connection?  I am curious what value you perceive in them.  No right or wrong answer - I am not bashing the forms.



Nostalgia is one reason, they were the first forms I learned and I'd like to re-learn them. Maybe I'll video them at some point to have a reference copy for myself for posterity. 

The forms are slightly more "real world", or "real sparring" than the ITF forms, at least from the standpoint of using more practical guarding stances and pulling punches back and not always leaving the arm extended. I don't do a lot of TKD these days (about 99% focused on Hapkido) so it's fun to do some of the TKD forms too. 



lord-humungous said:


> What the devil is he doing at the start of each pattern?  Looks like he is gathering chi like a shaolin monk.



Sort of. They do tan jon breathing before the pattern. Breath in as the arms come up, exhale as the arms go down. He's doing it faster than I remember them teaching it in the 80's.


----------

