# New Soo Bahk Kichos



## MBuzzy (Mar 14, 2008)

The US SBD Fed members here should be aware of this, but I'm curious if anyone else has heard of these or incorporated them into your training.  A few years ago, a set of new basic movements (Kichos or Kibon Dong Cha) were introduced into the curriculum.  There are 5 sets, each with 2 variations.  They are all based on the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro Hyung.

I will post more about each of the 5 variations when I get home and have access to the list as I haven't memorized them yet, but I'm curious what the general feeling are in introducing new basics like this.  An added dynamic is that some are arguably not basic.  For example, the first new movement is Hwak Kuk Jang Kap Kwon, or double back fist.  It is the first movement from Yuk Ro Cho Dan (Du Mun) Hyung.  As the basics move on, there are more advanced movements from Po Wohl (Yuk Ro Sa Dan), Yang Pyang (Yuk Ro Oh Dan), Chil Sung Il and Sam Dan, etc.  

We are teaching the new basics to ALL students to prepare them for the higher level forms - so is it a good idea to expose the younger students to such advanced movements, simply to prepare them for upcoming hyung?


----------



## exile (Mar 14, 2008)

Craig, I'm curious&#8212;did the SBD folks ever use the kicho set that consisted of the Japanese (though some argue Okinawan) Taikyoku katas, which was simply picked up and imported into TKD and TSD, and is now dear to us as kicho il/ii/sam jang? I'm asking because it would be useful, in terms of your OP question, to know a little bit more about the SBD syllabus historical background...


----------



## JoelD (Mar 14, 2008)

Craig, our Dans have been doing those new movements for about a year or so now, but Sa Bom Nim does not have the color belts do them. Here is a list of them i found...

*Hwak Kuk (Seize, Smash)*
Hwak Kuk Kwon Do - Single hand Kwon Do, Tuel Oh Kwon Do
Hwak Kuk Jang Kwon Do - Yang Kwon Do, Tuel Oh Yang Kwon Do, Single Kwon Do
Hwak Kuk Jang Kap Kwan - Moves in Du Moon Hyung

*Do Mahl Sik (Paint, Smear Method)*
Il ban - Choong Dan Soo Do Mahk Kee, Du Moon's smear/pushing moves
E ban - Joon Jul - Dan Jun admire move

*Ta Ko Sik (Beating, Drum Method)*
Il ban - Sang Dan Mahk Kee, Last move of Chil Sung Sam Ro Hyung
E ban - Ta Ko Sik at Sal Chu Hyung, Tuel Oh Sang Dan Kong Kyuk/Tuel Oh Dwi Kwon Do Ha Dan Kong Kyuk

*Po Wol Seh (Embracing)*
Il ban - Beginning moves of Po Wol Hyung
E ban - Beginning moves of Chil Song Il Ro Hyung and Ha Dan sweep

*Yo Sik (Shake/Roof Shaking Method)*
Il ban - Tuel Oh Ha Dan Soo Do Kong Kyuk/Tuel Oh Ha Dan Dwi Soo Do Kong Kyuk, Ha Dan Yuk Soo Do Kong Kyuk/Ha Dan Dwi Soo Do Kong Kyuk, Yo Sik Ha Dan Mahk Kee, Yo Sik Tuel Oh Choong Dan Kong Kyuk
E ban - Yang Pal Koop Mahk Kee (both sides), Yo Sik Ahneso Pahkuro Mahk Kee, Kwan Soo Kong Kyuk (turn to rear when advancing)


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 14, 2008)

exile said:


> Craig, I'm curiousdid the SBD folks ever use the kicho set that consisted of the Japanese (though some argue Okinawan) Taikyoku katas, which was simply picked up and imported into TKD and TSD, and is now dear to us as kicho il/ii/sam jang? I'm asking because it would be useful, in terms of your OP question, to know a little bit more about the SBD syllabus historical background...


 
The answer is yes.  The basic hyung in the SBD curriculum are nearly perfect replicas of the Taikyoku katas.  There are some minor differences, but they are nearly perfect.

Heck, for a time Hwang Kee claimed that he "created" all three of the Ki Cho hyungs.


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 14, 2008)

exile said:


> Craig, I'm curiousdid the SBD folks ever use the kicho set that consisted of the Japanese (though some argue Okinawan) Taikyoku katas, which was simply picked up and imported into TKD and TSD, and is now dear to us as kicho il/ii/sam jang? I'm asking because it would be useful, in terms of your OP question, to know a little bit more about the SBD syllabus historical background...


 
I realized that - sorry!  I was at school and didn't want to forget the question!    Many thanks to Joel for posting those.  He's got them dead on.  I actually have the same list.  At our Dojang ALL belts do these, but they are only required for the Ee Dan and Sam Dan tests.

UpNorth has got it right too, we do use the Kicho Hyungs imported from Taikyoku.  The moves of those hyung also contribute to a lot to our basic movements that we use to "march the floor."  It is actually published in most of the SBD texts that the "Kicho Hyungs" or Taikyoky forms were created by Hwang Kee in Seoul in 1952.  I personally have not broached the question as to their similarity to some Japanese forms, but it would be interesting to know.

As for the new Kichos, they are very chinese in their form and execution.  They all use the very long, deep stance and consist of a great many slower, pushing type movements.  These kichos were taken directly from the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro forms.

So I'm mainly curious if they have made their way to any other curriculums, particularly the other curriculums that do include the Chil Sungs and Yuk Ros.  I would be very interested to know or get some insight as to how they particular movements made their way into the curriculum at all.  Is it more of a push to "de-japanize" the art?  They are obviously of Chinese influence and really make me wonder what the future of Soo Bahk Do is and how much we will continue to divert from the path of the other schools of Tang Soo Do.


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 14, 2008)

And on the same note - if you have any insight as to the history of the Taikyoku kata, I would love to know the history a little better so that I'm a bit more prepared if I ever decide to ask the question....


----------



## JoelD (Mar 14, 2008)

You beat me to it, Craig ;-) I was just going to point out to Kyo Sa John that it is taught in the SBDMDK curriculum that KJN Hwang Kee created the Kicho Hyungs. I own a copy of Gichin Funakoshi's Shotokan text and noticed early on in my training of the similarity of the first three basic forms. Also in the training texts (SBDMDK texts)are the Pyung Ahn Forms that are credited to an individual named Mr. Idos. After reading around a bit i found that it is widely believed that it was Itosu that the books are referring to. I also found those forms in Funakoshi's book under the name of Heiean. I've also seen them on youtube as Pinan.


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 14, 2008)

JoelD said:


> You beat me to it, Craig ;-) I was just going to point out to Kyo Sa John that it is taught in the SBDMDK curriculum that KJN Hwang Kee created the Kicho Hyungs. I own a copy of Gichin Funakoshi's Shotokan text and noticed early on in my training of the similarity of the first three basic forms. Also in the training texts (SBDMDK texts)are the Pyung Ahn Forms that are credited to an individual named Mr. Idos. After reading around a bit i found that it is widely believed that it was Itosu that the books are referring to. I also found those forms in Funakoshi's book under the name of Heiean. I've also seen them on youtube as Pinan.


 
  Now you're starting to get into dangerous federation territory!  That is correct, the Pyahng Ahns came from Japan and were created by Itosu.  They are known as Heian or Pinan in Japan.  Exile explained to me once that it is likely that when Itosu's name was translated, the spelling and pronunciation changed due to the difference in languages - but he can expand much more on that topic.

I would caution you a bit when bringing this stuff up in your Dojang, with the Federation publishing and teaching their version of the history....it depends on your Sa Bom as to how it will be received.  So just be aware.

You will find that a great number of our forms come from other systems.  EXCEPT the Chil Sungs and Yuk Ros - you will find those only in othe r Tang Soo Do styles.


----------



## exile (Mar 14, 2008)

JoelD said:


> You beat me to it, Craig ;-) I was just going to point out to Kyo Sa John that it is taught in the SBDMDK curriculum that KJN Hwang Kee created the Kicho Hyungs. I own a copy of Gichin Funakoshi's Shotokan text and noticed early on in my training of the similarity of the first three basic forms. Also in the training texts (SBDMDK texts)are the Pyung Ahn Forms that are credited to an individual named Mr. Idos. After reading around a bit i found that it is widely believed that it was Itosu that the books are referring to. I also found those forms in Funakoshi's book under the name of Heiean. I've also seen them on youtube as Pinan.



Note: in his last book, published in 1995 on the history of the Moo Duk Kwan, Hwang Kee admitted that he'd found the Pinan kata in a book on Japanese karate in the library of the railway station where he worked, and that was the basis for the Pyung-Ahns. For the unappetizing details, see Hancock's article  here.

Funakoshi changed the name of the set from Pinan to Heian and reversed the order of the first two. A very good introduction to effective, realistic bunkai for the Pinans is available here ('The Pinan/Heian Series as a Fighting System' in Abernethy's directory&#8212;you can download these fantastic articles for _free_).


----------



## Muwubu16858 (Mar 14, 2008)

My teacher still refers to the 3 kicho hyung as Tae Guk Cho Dan, Ee Dan and Sam Dan (Korean pronounciation for Taikyoku), whih he says are their original name. So yes, your assumption is right, exile.


----------



## JoelD (Mar 14, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Now you're starting to get into dangerous federation territory! That is correct, the Pyahng Ahns came from Japan and were created by Itosu. They are known as Heian or Pinan in Japan. Exile explained to me once that it is likely that when Itosu's name was translated, the spelling and pronunciation changed due to the difference in languages - but he can expand much more on that topic.
> 
> I would caution you a bit when bringing this stuff up in your Dojang, with the Federation publishing and teaching their version of the history....it depends on your Sa Bom as to how it will be received. So just be aware.
> 
> You will find that a great number of our forms come from other systems. EXCEPT the Chil Sungs and Yuk Ros - you will find those only in othe r Tang Soo Do styles.


 
Funny you say that, Craig. I once mentioned it to my instructor but she didnt seem angry or put off by it. We didn't talk very long on the subject though. But, I have heard it is a sore spot for some. 

Heres my feeling on the subject... At this point in my training I'm not overly concerned as to were this person or that person says these forms came from. The fact that Hwang Kee was an amazing martial artist and one of the most important figures in asain martials arts in the 20th century can't be disputed. Right now I am just happy to be training under such an amazing martial artist and person as my Sa Bom. I wish i would have found her years ago. Soo Bahk!


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 14, 2008)

JoelD said:


> Funny you say that, Craig. I once mentioned it to my instructor but she didnt seem angry or put off by it. We didn't talk very long on the subject though. But, I have heard it is a sore spot for some.
> 
> Heres my feeling on the subject... At this point in my training I'm not overly concerned as to were this person or that person says these forms came from. The fact that Hwang Kee was an amazing martial artist and one of the most important figures in asain martials arts in the 20th century can't be disputed. Right now I am just happy to be training under such an amazing martial artist and person as my Sa Bom. I wish i would have found her years ago. Soo Bahk!


 
That is an excellent attitude - I couldn't agree more.  Unfortunately, my engineer's mind is never going to let stuff like this rest until I find what I consider to be the real answer.    You are definately lucky to be training where you are - especially with your Sa Bom Nim's recent "promotion!"


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2008)

They started introducing these techniques to us when I was in the Moo Duk Kwan back in 2000.  I was training for my chodan and was hitting up a couple of the dan classes at Master Nelson's (my teahcer's teacher) dojang.  No gups were practicing them yet, but the dans were being trained.  A few years later, the basics that were being introduced had replaced the basics that were normally tested at the chodan, eedan and samdan level.

Now it seems as if the progression I noticed back then has advanced quite a bit.  From my understanding of what is being posted, actual basic patters or new basic hyungs are being practiced.  This can only be part of the continuing effort to remake the system.  And for those of you who think this is just a rumor, let me share one little story with you...

Master Nelson is the regional examiner for MN, WI, Iowa, SD, and ND.  At a recent tournament he asked all of the sah bums and kyo sa's present how many of them STILL PRACTICED the old forms.  A good majority of those present, did not.

So apparently, depending on where you live, there is a choice that teachers can make.  The federation isn't neccesarily saying no, but they are definitely moving in that direction.


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 15, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Now it seems as if the progression I noticed back then has advanced quite a bit. From my understanding of what is being posted, actual basic patterns or new basic hyungs are being practiced. This can only be part of the continuing effort to remake the system.


 
That's a really interesting perspective, the new basics really are like little mini hyung.  They are not basics in the sense that we're used to.  More like a set of combinations.  To me, it seems like a step beyond Yuk Jin (which as I understand has different permutations in many schools, for us, the one command is Hu Gul sang dan soo do kong kyuk, tuel oh choong dan kong kyuk).  But each of these gets increasingly more complex and adds more additional moves to the combination.

So that leads me to a new question - what is their purpose?  Is it simply to prepare us for the higher hyung?



upnorthkyosa said:


> Master Nelson is the regional examiner for MN, WI, Iowa, SD, and ND. At a recent tournament he asked all of the sah bums and kyo sa's present how many of them STILL PRACTICED the old forms. A good majority of those present, did not.


 
We get that pretty frequently too, it comes up fairly often that the Pyahng ahns really aren't practiced much - but they are still "testable" curriculum.  Which is kind of difficult for the students....the forms aren't done often, they are really practiced, in tournaments, they are a death sentence......and yet, they are on the tests, and you are expected to know them cold, let alone knowing the applications.


----------



## exile (Mar 15, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> the Pyahng ahns really aren't practiced much - but they are still "testable" curriculum.  Which is kind of difficult for the students....the forms aren't done often, they are really practiced,* in tournaments, they are a death sentence.*.....and yet, they are on the tests, and you are expected to know them cold, let alone knowing the applications.



The idea is, you can't win performing one of the Pyung-Ahns, no matter how well you execute it?


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2008)

exile said:


> The idea is, you can't win performing one of the Pyung-Ahns, no matter how well you execute it?


 
I was recruited to judge at the latest tournament.  Most soobahkdoin performed a sbd hyung.  Of the few who did, they were marked lower because of it.  For example, one student performed bassai at a level that I thought was great.  My judging peers marked her a full point lower then what I saw.


----------



## exile (Mar 15, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> I was recruited to judge at the latest tournament.  Most soobahkdoin performed a sbd hyung.  Of the few who did, they were marked lower because of it.  For example, one student performed bassai at a level that I thought was great.  My judging peers marked her a full point lower then what I saw.



So once again... sigh... politics trumps excellence...


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 15, 2008)

exile said:


> The idea is, you can't win performing one of the Pyung-Ahns, no matter how well you execute it?


 
Put it like this....if you do a Chil Sung hyung decent, and a pyahn ahn hyung excellent, the chil sung will win.

If you do a Chil Sung horribly and a pyahn ahn perfect, then you've got a shot.


----------



## exile (Mar 15, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> Put it like this....if you do a Chil Sung hyung decent, and a pyahn ahn hyung excellent, the chil sung will win.
> 
> If you do a Chil Sung horribly and a pyahn ahn perfect, then you've got a shot.



Not good, not good. If they don't want you to do O/J-based forms, well, so be it&#8212;just _say_ so, eh? What's really objectionable is keeping up the pretense that there's no prejudice against the O/J forms&#8212;that it's strictly the merit of performance that counts&#8212;while making decisions based on party-line-agenda correctness.


----------



## JoelD (Mar 15, 2008)

One of the 13 year old girls from my dojang took fist in forms with Pyung Ahn Sam Dan at the regionals a couple weeks ago. I will admit though, she is exceptional at her forms, no matter which one she is doing.

I can't say that i really subscribe to the Pyung ahn  \ Chil sung theory mentioned a couple of posts ago (at least i hope it isnt that way)... BUT... i have only been to 2 tournaments so my view is somewhat limited at this point.

Heres something to consider as well with the pyung ahn/chil sung argument... at my level right now, i know the 3 basic forms, pyung ahn 1 & 3, and chil sung 1 & 2. It seems to me that the level of difficulty on the chil sungs (more Il Ro than Ee Ro) is higher than the 2 pyung ahns. There seems to be more nuances to be aware of with Il Ro in particular especially with the amount of neh gung involved and to a lesser degree with Ee Ro on the breathing between the kicks coming back southward. So, in my humble opinion the offset of points awarded for the higher difficulty is warranted. A good example of a similar concept is in Olympic skating... a program with a higher degree of diffuculty that has some minor mistakes will win over a perfect performance of a lesser program. Naturally, this depends on the amount of mistakes made but you all get the point.


----------



## JoelD (Mar 15, 2008)

Let me also make something clear as i dont want to insult any of the Karatekas on the board. I am not putting down the Pyung Ahn Form set in any way. They were created by another man who was equally influential in the martial arts as KJN Hwang Kee. KJN also obviously saw the importance of these forms and that is why they are in the Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do curriculum in the first place.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2008)

It really isn't that big of a deal because the federation doesn't teach application of either the chil sung or pyung ahn forms.  Thus, both sets really are more of a martial dance then anything else.  You can still learn things from both, but that is mostly going to be limited to intrinsic concepts.


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 15, 2008)

JoelD said:


> One of the 13 year old girls from my dojang took fist in forms with Pyung Ahn Sam Dan at the regionals a couple weeks ago. I will admit though, she is exceptional at her forms, no matter which one she is doing.
> 
> I can't say that i really subscribe to the Pyung ahn \ Chil sung theory mentioned a couple of posts ago (at least i hope it isnt that way)... BUT... i have only been to 2 tournaments so my view is somewhat limited at this point.
> 
> Heres something to consider as well with the pyung ahn/chil sung argument... at my level right now, i know the 3 basic forms, pyung ahn 1 & 3, and chil sung 1 & 2. It seems to me that the level of difficulty on the chil sungs (more Il Ro than Ee Ro) is higher than the 2 pyung ahns. There seems to be more nuances to be aware of with Il Ro in particular especially with the amount of neh gung involved and to a lesser degree with Ee Ro on the breathing between the kicks coming back southward. So, in my humble opinion the offset of points awarded for the higher difficulty is warranted. A good example of a similar concept is in Olympic skating... a program with a higher degree of diffuculty that has some minor mistakes will win over a perfect performance of a lesser program. Naturally, this depends on the amount of mistakes made but you all get the point.


 
That is true, you can definately still win with them - especially at the lower levels when you have fewer forms to choose from.  It is easier to do say Pyahn Ahn Sam Dan than Chil Sung Il Lo for a lower gup, because Il Lo requires so much control and muscle awareness.  

It is a very good point that the difficulty doesn't match up and I think that you're right.  In general, the Chil Sungs and Yuk Ros have more moves of a higher difficulty than the Pyahng Ahns.  My view is rather limited as well.  I am going off of what I saw at the tournament, between observing and judging myself, and what I have been told by the people in my school who have OFTEN been sold short due to form selection.  When it comes to matters of pure hyung performance....the precision with which you execute the forms should be the major consideration, difficulty should play some role, but I'm not sure that it should matter as much as it does.  I won with Jinto, but tied with a guy doing Jung Jol.....in my opinion, Jinto is MUCH more difficult than Jung Jul (Yuk Ro Ee Dan)....so my view is that jung jul will win you more points just based on the fact that you selected that particular form.

That reminds me...UpNorth - I was recently very surprised.  At Regionals, one of the Sa Boms went over some curriculum that he teaches in his school and it was all Hyung application.  Not the basics that I'm used to seeing, but much more advanced stuff, similar to what we were working on with Master Penfil.  SO, it is creeping its way into the Federation slowly through a few points - but it is essential that these higher level Masters continue to bring it into the curriculum - even if it is just in their school.  Eventually it will proliferate across the federation.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> That reminds me...UpNorth - I was recently very surprised. At Regionals, one of the Sa Boms went over some curriculum that he teaches in his school and it was all Hyung application. Not the basics that I'm used to seeing, but much more advanced stuff, similar to what we were working on with Master Penfil. SO, it is creeping its way into the Federation slowly through a few points - but it is essential that these higher level Masters continue to bring it into the curriculum - even if it is just in their school. Eventually it will proliferate across the federation.


 
Do you remember this sabum's name?  I'm curious because I've been contacted by a fellow on myspace who is very interested in the videos I've posted there.  TSD people tell me all of the time that they've never seen application like that and they are very interested in them.

This is why I'm considering throwing my support behind Penfil-san and his organization.  With his rank and his connections, I think he stands a good chance of really making in-roads for this material into other organizations.  

As far as bunkai-jutsu ever making it way to becoming an official part of the federation, I'm skeptical.  I can easily see it growing to become an underground movement, but I think that the TAC and the SAC would move to squelch it.  I can see two rank tests coming out of this.  One that is done "in-house" and one that is done by the federation.  You can guess at the one that will "really" matter.

The federation's leadership is going to have to have a major change of heart...or change of leadership before anything like this makes any major headway.


----------



## exile (Mar 15, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> *As far as bunkai-jutsu ever making it way to becoming an official part of the federation, I'm skeptical.*  I can easily see it growing to become an underground movement, but I think that the TAC and the SAC would move to squelch it.



This is something I don't understand at all&#8212;why would _any_ MA federation  that had formal patterns as part of its official curriculum discourage the analysis of those forms for combat application? I mean, most MAs like to stress the self-defense effectiveness of their technique set, whatever else they have to say about it. That goes for CMAs, FMAs and just about anything else you can think of, so even if you're trying to completely uproot the karate basis of your art, why would you want to eliminate the component which taught students to read forms as practical guidelines for use of the art's technique set in actual violent conflicts? Surely the decryption of forms into strategic concepts and their tactical realization is hardly karate-specific, even if the word _bunkai_ is Japanese, eh?


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 15, 2008)

I'm really not sure how much of it is discouraged and how much is just left out.  No one flat out says that you can't do the stuff, most people are just "non-believers" I think.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2008)

The answer is unfortunately simple.  Business.  Exile, as soon as you begin to incorporate this thinking into you curriculum, you are compelled to change just about everything about the way you think about your art.  In a way, people who have been awarded various ranks and degrees would have to admit that they weren't as "expert" as they thought.  There is a large chance that students could be lost.

I know this seems superficial, but I have had several experiences and have heard several stories of other experiences that have convinced me of its "truthiness" at least.

For example, one master who I started showing this stuff too told me flat out that he could never do this because he was afraid it would lead to an outright dojang rebellion.  This is the problem when you build entire organizations off of misconceptions and then codify them into dogma.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja (Mar 15, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> I was recruited to judge at the latest tournament.  Most soobahkdoin performed a sbd hyung.  Of the few who did, they were marked lower because of it.  For example, one student performed bassai at a level that I thought was great.  My judging peers marked her a full point lower then what I saw.



Well that's bad news for anyone from an ITF school, isn't it? We don't do the chil sung/yuk ro hyung. 

Politics is a horrible thing to have invade a tournament; every time I go to the National All-Martial Arts Tournament that the ITF sponsors, there's every reminder not to be biased toward TSD. In fact, just the opposite is common. While sitting in the stands last year, I overheard a couple talking with their daughter, who does TKD, and they said, "I hear that if your uniform doesn't say C. S. Kim, you don't win anything." To which I promptly turned around and responded that  it's usually the ones not doing TSD that win, especially in forms. Maybe the cause is that most of the judges and most of the contestants are TSD, so it gets boring seeing a million different iterations of the same forms.

Btw, someone mentioned "basics" that are actually combinations, specifically yuk jin. For us, that's hugul yup mahki followed by a short reverse punch in hugul jaseh. These types of moves are always a bit baffling, because their names are not analyzable directly as "______+block/kick/strike". For instance, we have a move called yuk soo (kong kyuk), for which I don't know the translation, except that it's usually described in English as "defense, punch." The move consists of a one-handed middle-knife hand block in sa go rip jaseh, followed by a reverse punch, twisting into chungul jaseh. It's considered as a single unit in combinations ("yuk soo kong kyuk, choong dan soo do mahko, sang dan mahkee," et al). Those two are really the only moves like that, and as such they stand out and usually come last when doing basic drills ("marching the floor"). 

This might warrant another thread, but has _anyone_, in TSD or SBD, ever heard of yuk soo (kong kyuk) as I've described it?

Anyway, really interesting to hear about the "de-Japanification" you suspect is going on; I can't tell if it's affecting my federation (like I said, the only forms that Hwang Kee actually created are the ones we don't do), but I can understand the sentiment.


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 15, 2008)

JT_the_Ninja said:


> This might warrant another thread, but has _anyone_, in TSD or SBD, ever heard of yuk soo (kong kyuk) as I've described it?


 
This is how I learned Yuk Soo (do) Kun Kyuk.

I throw my hands up in the air when it comes to cross organization terminology.  Everyone had their Korean so screwed up that I wish that people would just stop pretending and speak english.  It would be a lot more honest.

Anyway, JT, I'm not really familiar with the ITF.  How does it connect to the Moo Duk Kwan?  Does it at all?


----------



## JT_the_Ninja (Mar 15, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> This is how I learned Yuk Soo (do) Kun Kyuk.
> 
> I throw my hands up in the air when it comes to cross organization terminology.  Everyone had their Korean so screwed up that I wish that people would just stop pretending and speak english.  It would be a lot more honest.
> 
> Anyway, JT, I'm not really familiar with the ITF.  How does it connect to the Moo Duk Kwan?  Does it at all?



We used to have "Moo Duk Kwan" on the backs of our doboks. I suspect we stopped that, and changed them to say "International Tang Soo Do Federation," because the SBD people got protective of the name. Don't know if we can really claim MDK lineage, but Choong Jae Nim C. S. Kim did train under GM Hwang Kee, in some way or another. The ITF was founded in Spring 1984, in an attempt to preserve the traditional teaching of TSD. 

I'd agree that we should just use English, except that (1) that loses a bit of the heritage aspect and (2) different schools use different English names -- same logic for using Latin/Greek for scientific names.

Btw, in relation to the video, we just refer to that as a ridge hand attack. In the gup manual, that's written (via romanization) as "Yok Soo Do." The move I described is listed as "Yuk Soo," sometimes referred to as "Yuk Soo Kong Kyuk," especially if it's in a combination.


----------



## JoelD (Mar 15, 2008)

Kyo Sa, As my instructor tells me, (she knows Grandmaster Kim) he used to be a part of the Soo Bahk Do/Tang Soo Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation until he decided to take his own path and start the ITF. She speaks very highly of him as a person and instructor.

BTW. in SBD the Yuk Soo Do Kong Kyuk is reverse knife hand attack, commonly called a ridgehand strike.

almost forgot. Kyo Sa, the instructor Craig mentioned that was showing the form applications at our tourney was Sa Bom Nim Steve Lemner


----------



## e ship yuk (Mar 15, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> I throw my hands up in the air when it comes to cross organization terminology.  Everyone had their Korean so screwed up that I wish that people would just stop pretending and speak english.  It would be a lot more honest.



My school, belonging to a mostly Japanese tournament organization, used a few Japanese terms: kata, gi, bo, sensei... that's really it, I think.  When we decided to try to get back to a more Korean art, we used to get teased a bit by some of the other instructors in our new organization.  Once, at a seminar, the instructor called out a Korean term, demonstrated the technique, looked at my instructor and said, "I don't know the Japanese term for it.  What do you call it?"  My instructor shrugged and said, "Ridgehand."  Got a good laugh.

We do all technique names in English.  We give a few basic commands in Korean: attention, bow, ready, end, rest... everything else is in English.


----------



## MBuzzy (Mar 16, 2008)

I used to train with ITF years ago and they are basically the same as the other TSD split offs.  CS Kim did used to be a member of the SBD MDK, in fact, it doesn't take too much looking to find pictures of him with Hwang Kee and KJN HC Hwang.  Though they took the MDK off of their names, it is still a direct descendent art.  A lot of those organizations never really started using the Chil Sungs or Yuk Ros because of the copyright battles over the forms and name usage.  I really doubt that the ITF will ever seek to get rid of any Japanese influence.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja (Mar 16, 2008)

MBuzzy said:


> I used to train with ITF years ago and they are basically the same as the other TSD split offs.  CS Kim did used to be a member of the SBD MDK, in fact, it doesn't take too much looking to find pictures of him with Hwang Kee and KJN HC Hwang.  Though they took the MDK off of their names, it is still a direct descendent art.  A lot of those organizations never really started using the Chil Sungs or Yuk Ros because of the copyright battles over the forms and name usage.  I really doubt that the ITF will ever seek to get rid of any Japanese influence.



Or admit that it's there other than passingly. We don't really play up the origins of the hyung, we just teach them and their application. Nobody's going to deny anything, I don't think, but what's more important is what the forms mean and how you apply them. I won't get into a debate about the importance of looking up the roots, though, so don't start one.

According to my sa bom nim, he learned up through chil sung sam ro before they stopped teaching and doing them. That would have been quite a while before I even started.


----------

