# TKD Historians:  Duk Son Song's Book



## dancingalone (Dec 13, 2010)

Korean Karate has been mentioned a few times recently here, so I pulled my copy of the bookshelf to browse through.  I'll admit I've never thought much of the book, but it's an interesting curio for anyone interested in tae kwon do.

Does anyone know if Duk Son Song was in fact the author of the book or did he just lend himself as a resource for the pictures and such?  There is a co-author listed named Robert J. Clark.


----------



## puunui (Dec 13, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Does anyone know if Duk Son Song was in fact the author of the book or did he just lend himself as a resource for the pictures and such?  There is a co-author listed named Robert J. Clark.




I can't say for sure, you have to probably ask Mr. Clark about that one, but I am pretty sure it was like any other collaborative book between an english is my second language speaker and an english speaker. They both contributed, but I sure there are lot of words or ideas placed in the book that came primarily from the english speaker. 

I'll give you one example. In GM YH Park, Sr.'s book, there is a short obligatory blurb about some Taekwondo history, which obviously was lifted from Corcoran and Farkas' work. Then people like Dakin Burdick quote that section and attribute it to GM Park. I used to see GM Park at USTU meetings and events all the time and he would speak about history matters to me once in a while. The conversations we had were nothing like what was written in his book, and it made me wonder whether he was even aware of that obligatory historical blurb.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 13, 2010)

puunui said:


> but I sure there are lot of words or ideas placed in the book that came primarily from the english speaker.



That would actually be reassuring to me.  I've come across one 'funny' bit in the book.  I wonder if there are others.


----------



## FieldDiscipline (Dec 13, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> I'll admit I've never thought much of the book, but it's an interesting curio for anyone interested in tae kwon do.



I have the book too, and a similar view of it.  



dancingalone said:


> I've come across one 'funny' bit in the book.  I wonder if there are others.



Which bit?


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 13, 2010)

FieldDiscipline said:


> Which bit?



Page 273 in my copy.  The text has a picture of someone in open-hand haiwan uke (that's the Shotokan term for the twin 'block' where the lead hand is in a side block and the rear hand is in an upper block - not sure what the Korean name is).  The book then argues that it is an impractical fighting stance and how it is vulnerable to a roundhouse kick.

This is an odd argument to make and makes me think the author knows little about the usages of stances and arm actions in the context of karate, if he thinks haiwan uke is a 'fighting stance'.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 13, 2010)

Really?  I've only read good reviews on it.  Can you elaborate?


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 13, 2010)

bluewaveschool said:


> Really?  I've only read good reviews on it.  Can you elaborate?



It's a rather ho-hum description of basic to intermediate Japanese kata for the most part.  The text and the pictures aren't laid out conveniently, so you have to do some flipping to correspond them to each other much of the time.  Like 99% of kata 'instructional' books, the book only describes the stances and movements statically, giving you only a shell of the form at best. 

The book is useful if you want to see how the Chung Do Kwan was running forms circa the late sixties.  Other than that, I don't see much utility in reading it, particularly if you don't practice the Japanese forms.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 13, 2010)

So it's strictly a form book?  What about his other book?  Not that I've found a copy of that for sale under $200, so I won't be getting it.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 14, 2010)

No, there's other stuff covered too like some basics, three steps, and sparring.  Don't let me keep you from buying the book if you wanted one.  I am _very_ jaded when it comes to martial arts books and videos.

The BB book is more of the same IMO.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 14, 2010)

Any out there that you do like?


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 14, 2010)

Depends on the topic.  In general, the more tightly focused books tend to be 'better' IMO with more in-depth coverage of its topic.

What kind of information are you seeking?


----------



## puunui (Dec 14, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Page 273 in my copy.  The text has a picture of someone in open-hand haiwan uke (that's the Shotokan term for the twin 'block' where the lead hand is in a side block and the rear hand is in an upper block - not sure what the Korean name is).  The book then argues that it is an impractical fighting stance and how it is vulnerable to a roundhouse kick. This is an odd argument to make and makes me think the author knows little about the usages of stances and arm actions in the context of karate, if he thinks haiwan uke is a 'fighting stance'.




I think we can attribute that one to GM Son himself, since he is in the photos demonstrating why that particular stance is impractical.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 14, 2010)

puunui said:


> I think we can attribute that one to GM Son himself, since he is in the photos demonstrating why that particular stance is impractical.



Well, I am speechless then.  This is like writing an article arguing that the Daniel Larusso 'crane kick' posture would be a bad fighting stance.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 15, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Depends on the topic.  In general, the more tightly focused books tend to be 'better' IMO with more in-depth coverage of its topic.
> 
> What kind of information are you seeking?




I prefer to focus on the basics in my classes, so anything focusing on stances/kicks/hand techs and the proper* way of doing then, that doesn't quickly dive into jumping/flying kicks.  I enjoy GM Cho's book on kicking, but his book on One and Three Step Sparring takes off into some crazy complicated SD techs pretty quick.  I also like SD techs.  I'd like to read anything by the old masters, which is why i was getting Duk Son Song's book.  Gen. Choi's first TKD book is also out there in reprint.  Not sure who else of the old old masters wrote a book.


*Proper being dependent on the writer, I like seeing what other people consider the proper way of doing things.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Dec 15, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Page 273 in my copy. The text has a picture of someone in open-hand haiwan uke (that's the Shotokan term for the twin 'block' where the lead hand is in a side block and the rear hand is in an upper block - not sure what the Korean name is). The book then argues that it is an impractical fighting stance and how it is vulnerable to a roundhouse kick.


 
That is odd. If one is going to use that position for a fighting stance there are many more reasons why it would be impractical than it just being vulnerable to a roundhouse kick. 



> This is an odd argument to make and makes me think the author knows little about the usages of stances and arm actions in the context of karate, if he thinks haiwan uke is a 'fighting stance'.


 
Does he demonstrate any sort of application for the block, even the usual defending against two opponents type of thing? 

Personally I find it hard to believe that he'd present it as a fighting stance instead of simply presenting it as a technique with a particular application or two. That's kind of like saying an inner forearm block is a bad fighting stance because your non-blocking hand is on your hip so you're leaving half your body open. (Sure you are, but you're also applying the technique against an attack instead of using it _as_ your fighting stance.) This could be the result of trying to convey information in what isn't your native language.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 15, 2010)

chrispillertkd said:


> That is odd. If one is going to use that position for a fighting stance there are many more reasons why it would be impractical than it just being vulnerable to a roundhouse kick.



Indeed.  It's much like setting up a premise that no one would take seriously at all and then proceeding to argue against it.  Well, obviously, Sherlock Holmes.



chrispillertkd said:


> Does he demonstrate any sort of application for the block, even the usual defending against two opponents type of thing?



Nope.



chrispillertkd said:


> Personally I find it hard to believe that he'd present it as a fighting stance instead of simply presenting it as a technique with a particular application or two. That's kind of like saying an inner forearm block is a bad fighting stance because your non-blocking hand is on your hip so you're leaving half your body open. (Sure you are, but you're also applying the technique against an attack instead of using it _as_ your fighting stance.) This could be the result of trying to convey information in what isn't your native language.



Believe it.  Here's the text:

_Figures 73.01 and 73.02 illustrate another *fighting stance* which might be fine in films or spy novels but is not very useful in Tae Kwon Do free-styling fighting.  The figure on the reader's right is wide open.  His whole body is unprotected and he is not even in a position to attack.  In order either to block or to attack, he has to move his hands to another position, which gives his opponent time to withdraw or counterattack before the attack itself is made.  In Figure 73.02, the figure on the reader's left has chosen to attack with a roundhouse kick to the head against which the right figure as no defense._

Painful stuff to read.  What makes the pictures even more ridiculous is that the performer holding haiwan uke is also sitting in a high shiko dachi (horse stance with knees bowed out to the sides).  Yes, that would be my first choice for a neutral sparring stance.  Um, not.


----------



## puunui (Dec 15, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> _Figures 73.01 and 73.02 illustrate another *fighting stance* which might be fine in films or spy novels but is not very useful in Tae Kwon Do free-styling fighting.  The figure on the reader's right is wide open.  His whole body is unprotected and he is not even in a position to attack.  In order either to block or to attack, he has to move his hands to another position, which gives his opponent time to withdraw or counterattack before the attack itself is made.  In Figure 73.02, the figure on the reader's left has chosen to attack with a roundhouse kick to the head against which the right figure as no defense._




And he has his hands up too. I wonder if GM Son feels that having your hands up like that will allow you to block punches to your face.


----------



## Miles (Dec 16, 2010)

I got this book to compare how GM Son performs the hyungs versus GM HC Hwang in the TSD book by his father, versus as shown in GM Funikoshi's Karatedo Kyohan.   I thought it would be interesting to see the similarities and the differences.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 16, 2010)

Miles said:


> I got this book to compare how GM Son performs the hyungs versus GM HC Hwang in the TSD book by his father, versus as shown in GM Funikoshi's Karatedo Kyohan.   I thought it would be interesting to see the similarities and the differences.



results?


----------



## FieldDiscipline (Dec 17, 2010)

dancingalone said:


> Page 273 in my copy.  The text has a picture of someone in open-hand haiwan uke (that's the Shotokan term for the twin 'block' where the lead hand is in a side block and the rear hand is in an upper block - not sure what the Korean name is).  The book then argues that it is an impractical fighting stance and how it is vulnerable to a roundhouse kick.
> 
> This is an odd argument to make and makes me think the author knows little about the usages of stances and arm actions in the context of karate, if he thinks haiwan uke is a 'fighting stance'.



I've re-read that bit a couple of times now and get the feeling he didn't mean it to be analysed like that.  By which I mean he is not saying it _is_ a fighting stance, but if it were it's no good.  Does that make sense?  Otherwise it would be odd.



dancingalone said:


> It's a rather ho-hum description of basic to intermediate Japanese kata for the most part.  The text and the pictures aren't laid out conveniently, so you have to do some flipping to correspond them to each other much of the time.  Like 99% of kata 'instructional' books, the book only describes the stances and movements statically, giving you only a shell of the form at best.
> 
> The book is useful if you want to see how the Chung Do Kwan was running forms circa the late sixties.  Other than that, I don't see much utility in reading it, particularly if you don't practice the Japanese forms.



I'd definately agree with that, and got it for similar reasons to Miles.  I'd also read good reviews.  It's a nice to have for historical purposes, but I wouldn't spend lots of money buying it.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 17, 2010)

FieldDiscipline said:


> I've re-read that bit a couple of times now and get the feeling he didn't mean it to be analysed like that.  By which I mean he is not saying it _is_ a fighting stance, but if it were it's no good.  Does that make sense?  Otherwise it would be odd.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd definately agree with that, and got it for similar reasons to Miles.  I'd also read good reviews.  It's a nice to have for historical purposes, but I wouldn't spend lots of money buying it.



Good thing someone else is buying it for me then.

Guess I'll use the cash I get on Choi's TDK Art of Self Defense reprint.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 18, 2010)

FieldDiscipline said:


> I've re-read that bit a couple of times now and get the feeling he didn't mean it to be analysed like that.  By which I mean he is not saying it _is_ a fighting stance, but if it were it's no good.  Does that make sense?  Otherwise it would be odd.



I'm not sure how else to parse it.  

It's not a big deal.  I can respect that he wrote a book about something that was very important to him.  It's rare that anything can be 100% awesome to everyone.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 26, 2010)

I find it very telling that GM Son does not make mention of his claim that he came up with the name TKD in his own books! 
What TKD historians must take into account is that he was very mad at Gen Choi because he was not allowed on the 1st TKD demo team to perform TKD outside of Korea. He was making allies with a leader of the Korean national assembly, trying to gain a leg up on the TKD leadership. He helped Gen Choi from the TKDsociation of Korea in 1957, with his political ally as the president, with Gen Choi as the VP & GM Son as the Secty Genl. This association did not last long & was superceeded in 1959 Sept, when Gen Choi formed the 1st Korean TKD Association, not to be confused with the Korean TaeSuDo Association formed in 1961 Sept.
GM Son then moved to the States in 1963, obviously losing the battle.

When judging the various accounts of TKD history, often made by competiting sides, one must also judge context & motives, along with what actually happened after their claims were made. Remember that all 3 he tried to expel from the CDK all played critical roles in both TK-D's & TKD's development


----------



## puunui (Dec 27, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> I find it very telling that GM Son does not make mention of his claim that he came up with the name TKD in his own books!



Well, he was there at the Naming Committee meeting, that much is certain. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> What TKD historians must take into account is that he was very mad at Gen Choi because he was not allowed on the 1st TKD demo team to perform TKD outside of Korea.



Sure he was mad, but that in itself does not mean that he was lying in his newspaper article.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 28, 2010)

puunui said:


> Well, he was there at the Naming Committee meeting, that much is certain.


I am aware of that well known fact. All that says it that he was in a position (physically) to suggest the name. Can you advise of any competent source or researcher that actually believes this claim by GM Son Duk Sung?
I again say that if he did come up with the name TKD, why did he not include that in any of the books or things that he has written? Why also are his books titled Korean Karate? 



puunui said:


> Sure he was mad, but that in itself does not mean that he was lying in his newspaper article.


I appreciate that newspaper article & do not really challenge much in it. I didn't say, nor did I imply he was lying.
I also like to draw some other possible inferences from it, like it shows that Gen Choi was playing a role in TKD in the 1950s, so much so, that it apparently warranted the issuance of an honorary 4th Dan certificate by an influence early kwan, that was an original kwan.
I also know that promotions that high were without physical tests. I believe Grandmaster Lee Chong Woo speaks to this issue. So possibly honorary was a term to reflect this & not like the honorary degrees presented today by many academic institutions to none students or graduates of their programs of study.
I accept that fact that Gen Choi was issued this honorary certificate & that it was revoked by the man who issued/signed it. I also understand that at the time the martial arts in Korea were in their infancy or "formative stage". I also understand that Gen Choi had a 4th Dan, also wanted a 6th dan. he was also listed as a 6th Dan in 1959 when he led the 1st TKD demo team abroad. I also understand that he was listed as a 7th Dan on KTA paperwork in 1965 & as a 9th Dan that same year in his own book, which was the 1st English book ever written on TKD.
I also understand that Great Grandmaster Lee Chong Woo's own words stated that he earned a 1st Dan in karate, then a 4th & was then made a 9th Dan in TKD. He basically says that he went from 1st degree to 9th degree.
I do not get too concerned with Dan rankings, as I know that the times & context of formative years was different that today's standards & way of looking at it. 
I do know that Gen Choi & GM Lee were accomplished martial artists.
I do know that many Koreans were advanced in rank fast, so much so that Japanese stylists and Americans complained often.
I mean how was GM Jhoon Rhee a master when he came to the USA as a 1st or 2nd degree?
Who promoted Master Lee Won Kuk to a level that he promoted 2 of his students to 10th Dan (Kang Suh Chong & Nam Tae Hi)? These men trained with him about 5 years max?


----------



## puunui (Dec 28, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> I am aware of that well known fact. All that says it that he was in a position (physically) to suggest the name. Can you advise of any competent source or researcher that actually believes this claim by GM Son Duk Sung?



I don't think so. And the claim by GM Son might have been a mistranslation of his actual role in the creation of the Taekwondo name.




KarateMomUSA said:


> I again say that if he did come up with the name TKD, why did he not include that in any of the books or things that he has written? Why also are his books titled Korean Karate?



I think at the time (1968) Karate was more well known to the general public, so for marketing purposes he named his book "Korean Karate", just like GM Henry Cho. I don't think we can read too much more into the book title. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> I also like to draw some other possible inferences from it, like it shows that Gen Choi was playing a role in TKD in the 1950s, so much so, that it apparently warranted the issuance of an honorary 4th Dan certificate by an influence early kwan, that was an original kwan.



I don't think anyone disputes that General Choi worked hard to make Taekwondo training mandatory in the ROK Army. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> I also know that promotions that high were without physical tests. I believe Grandmaster Lee Chong Woo speaks to this issue.



I don't think so. The Modern History book does speak about promotion tests in the 50's and early 60's, and they were all physical tests. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> So possibly honorary was a term to reflect this & not like the honorary degrees presented today by many academic institutions to none students or graduates of their programs of study.



In that newspaper ad, GM Son tells us exactly why he issued the Honorary 4th Dan to General Choi: "NAM Tae Hi asked me to give a dan certificate to 29th Infantry Division commander CHOI Hong Hi, who had some experience in martial art (Sado), so we could use his military authority to spread the Chung Do Kwan. To contribute to Taekwondo's development, I gave an Honorary 4th Dan certificate signed by myself, SON Duk Sung, to CHOI Hong Hi in front of the 3rd Army commander in 1955."




KarateMomUSA said:


> I also understand that he was listed as a 7th Dan on KTA paperwork in 1965 & as a 9th Dan that same year in his own book, which was the 1st English book ever written on TKD.



Where did you get your understanding that General Choi had a KTA 7th Dan? 





KarateMomUSA said:


> I also understand that Great Grandmaster Lee Chong Woo's own words stated that he earned a 1st Dan in karate, then a 4th & was then made a 9th Dan in TKD. He basically says that he went from 1st degree to 9th degree.



Who told you GM Lee said that? Because the Chung Do Kwan people, including GM LEE Won Kuk, dispute that. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> I do know that many Koreans were advanced in rank fast, so much so that Japanese stylists and Americans complained often.



The Japanese stylists might have been complaining because their dan system often ended at 5th Dan, while Korean styles did not. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> I mean how was GM Jhoon Rhee a master when he came to the USA as a 1st or 2nd degree? Who promoted Master Lee Won Kuk to a level that he promoted 2 of his students to 10th Dan (Kang Suh Chong & Nam Tae Hi)? These men trained with him about 5 years max?



I heard that GM Jhoon Rhee was a Chung Do Kwan 3rd Dan when he arrived in the US in 1956. Also I don't know if GM LEE Won Kuk promoted GM Nam to 10th Dan; but I do know that he did promote GM KANG Suh Chong and GM UHM Woon Kyu to that rank. As for who promoted GM Lee, I believe that the only people who gave GM Lee dan rank was FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei and his son Yoshitaka Sensei. I vaguely remember some mention about promotion to higher dan after he returned to Japan in 1950, but it is not clear in my mind. I can ask his son about that. I know his sons received Shotokan dan rank while living in Japan.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 28, 2010)

Who would really argue with GM Lee Won Kuk about whom he promoted and to what degree?   I mean, it's not like he founded the first kwan, started what we practice or anything.


----------



## puunui (Dec 28, 2010)

bluewaveschool said:


> Who would really argue with GM Lee Won Kuk about whom he promoted and to what degree?




Lots of people.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 28, 2010)

puunui said:


> Lots of people.



Was he too modest to say 'Screw you, I invented it, I'll do whatever I damn well please'?


Because if he did, that would be awesome, since for some reason I have in my head that all the first GM were the humble 'Mr. Miyagi' type, totally peaceful yet could kick your *** at the drop of a hat.


----------



## puunui (Dec 28, 2010)

bluewaveschool said:


> Was he too modest to say 'Screw you, I invented it, I'll do whatever I damn well please'?




I don't think GM LEE Won Kuk cared what people thought when he did what he did. So if they did criticize him, it would be like water off a duck.


----------



## bluewaveschool (Dec 28, 2010)

Since you were able to know him later in life, was he still practicing?


----------



## puunui (Dec 29, 2010)

bluewaveschool said:


> Since you were able to know him later in life, was he still practicing?



no.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 29, 2010)

puunui said:


> I think at the time (1968) Karate was more well known to the general public, so for marketing purposes he named his book "Korean Karate", just like GM Henry Cho. I don't think we can read too much more into the book title.


Yes of course, but this misses & fails to address my bigger point: Why did he not take credit for coming up with the name TKD in any of his writtings?

You see, some years later GM Son claimed that he passed a note to Gen Choi with the name of TKD on it, taking credit for coming up with the name, which no serious TKD leader or researching has ever supported to my understanding. Yet this has taken on a sense of credibility as it has been repeated on the net & elsewhere by detractors of Gen Choi, so much so that some think it is the gospel truth, when I see no evidence to support this.
Have you ever found support for this claim?
Do you believe it yourself?


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 29, 2010)

puunui said:


> I don't think so. The Modern History book does speak about promotion tests in the 50's and early 60's, and they were all physical tests.
> Who told you GM Lee said that? Because the Chung Do Kwan people, including GM LEE Won Kuk, dispute that.


Yes but have you read the Yook interview of GM Lee?



puunui said:


> The Japanese stylists might have been complaining because their dan system often ended at 5th Dan, while Korean styles did not.


Yes but this does not address the fast, speedy promotions of so many Koreans to high ranks when they went overseas. This was what a big complaint & concern was back in the 1970s.



puunui said:


> I heard that GM Jhoon Rhee was a Chung Do Kwan 3rd Dan when he arrived in the US in 1956. Also I don't know if GM LEE Won Kuk promoted GM Nam to 10th Dan; but I do know that he did promote GM KANG Suh Chong and GM UHM Woon Kyu to that rank. As for who promoted GM Lee, I believe that the only people who gave GM Lee dan rank was FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei and his son Yoshitaka Sensei. I vaguely remember some mention about promotion to higher dan after he returned to Japan in 1950, but it is not clear in my mind. I can ask his son about that. I know his sons received Shotokan dan rank while living in Japan.


Yes I think he did give 10th Dan to Nam Tae Hi. I also heard that Kang Suh Chong was the 1st person he gave 10th dan to, is that true?


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 29, 2010)

Quote:Originally Posted by *KarateMomUSA* 

 
_ I also understand that he was  listed as a 7th Dan on KTA paperwork in 1965 & as a 9th Dan that  same year in his own book, which was the 1st English book ever written  on TKD._


puunui said:


> Where did you get your understanding that General Choi had a KTA 7th Dan?


No no no Sir, that was not what I said. I did not say that he got a 7th Dan from the KTA. I saw it on paperwork of the KTA from 1965. We know that in 1965 Gen Choi was the 3rd president of the KTA. We also know that he wrote the 1st books on TKD, coming out with his 1st English one in 1965. This book that he wrote has him listed as a 9th dan, the highest in the world. However in that same year I recently saw a I Dan KTA certificate issued when Gen Choi was president. Under his title or signature, it clearly listed him as a 7th Dan. Please do not take this as evidence to support that he was a 7th Dan. But rather I highlight it to illustrate the race to the top & how so many were promoted, elevated etc so fast in those days.
Earlier on many leaders were all made 4th Dan. GM Lee Chong Woo says he was I Dan in karate. Then made his way to 4th dan, without a physical test for 4th, as he was sick. Then when they made TKD he became a 9th dan. I have no problem with much of this. What i strongly object to is the double standard that is often applied to Gen Choi fast, faster, fastest rise to his top. Whats good for the goose in my eyes, must also be good for the gander.
I concern myself very little with ranking, especially that which occurred in the formative years. Once the current rank advancement was codified by ITF & KKW (WTF) I think then you can clearly see if someone cheated or jumped unfairly etc. However post-occupation period, all the founders & future leaders were junior students of the martial art that they were taking. It was the efforts of these important Koreans that made possible what so many around the world do today. They were the leaders & innovators that created this martial art (sport). So those in the beginning simply in my view, can not be judged by the standards of today. In a sense it was their vision & creativity that made them grandmasters


----------



## puunui (Dec 29, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> Yes I think he did give 10th Dan to Nam Tae Hi. I also heard that Kang Suh Chong was the 1st person he gave 10th dan to, is that true?




I think GM UHM Woon Kyu was the first. GM Kang came around 2001 or after I believe. GM Lee mentioned that GM Kang came to see him for 10th Dan. If GM Nam got 10th Dan from GM Lee, it was probably after GM Kang.


----------



## puunui (Dec 29, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> We know that in 1965 Gen Choi was the 3rd president of the KTA. We also know that he wrote the 1st books on TKD, coming out with his 1st English one in 1965.



I'm not so sure about the 1965 date. Some believe that the book was actually published in 1968. The Modern History book has a bibliography and it lists the book as being published in 1969. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> This book that he wrote has him listed as a 9th dan, the highest in the world. However in that same year I recently saw a I Dan KTA certificate issued when Gen Choi was president. Under his title or signature, it clearly listed him as a 7th Dan. Please do not take this as evidence to support that he was a 7th Dan.



Really. All the KTA dan certificates that I saw didn't have anyone's signature on it. 




KarateMomUSA said:


> Earlier on many leaders were all made 4th Dan. GM Lee Chong Woo says he was I Dan in karate. Then made his way to 4th dan, without a physical test for 4th, as he was sick.



That's not exactly what the Modern History book says. Try and read it again.




KarateMomUSA said:


> Then when they made TKD he became a 9th dan.



I don't think the jumps where that extreme. I don't think the pioneers skipped dan ranks at all. I know I saw a listing of GM LEE Chong Woo in Black Belt magazine from the 60's, I want to say 1967 or so, and it listed him as 7th Dan. I know all the Kwan Jang and other seniors were promoted to Kukkiwon 9th Dan in 1975. I don't think they took a test though for that one.


----------



## puunui (Dec 29, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> You see, some years later GM Son claimed that he passed a note to Gen Choi with the name of TKD on it, taking credit for coming up with the name, which no serious TKD leader or researching has ever supported to my understanding. Yet this has taken on a sense of credibility as it has been repeated on the net & elsewhere by detractors of Gen Choi, so much so that some think it is the gospel truth, when I see no evidence to support this. Have you ever found support for this claim? Do you believe it yourself?




I remember reading that and thinking it didn't sound right. I know that GM LEE Won Kuk described GM Son as a "kangpae" or gangster, the implication being that he didn't feel GM Son was educated. He did speak highly of GM Nam, who he said was an office worker at the Chung Do Kwan who kept the paperwork organized. 

If I had to guess, not knowing all the facts, I would say either GM Nam or General Choi came up with the name, being the educated creative ones who would be more interested in that sort of endeavor. GM Son would be a lower probability choice for me because of the gangpae commentary by GM Lee and also the fact that it doesn't seem like GM Son's style has changed or evolved at all. He doesn't look or feel like he is into creativity, which probably hindered his ability move Taekwondo or the Chung Do Kwan into the direction that it needed and wanted to go. 

Does that make sense?


----------



## puunui (Dec 29, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> Yes but have you read the Yook interview of GM Lee?



I don't think so. Which yook interview of which GM Lee?




KarateMomUSA said:


> Yes but this does not address the fast, speedy promotions of so many Koreans to high ranks when they went overseas. This was what a big complaint & concern was back in the 1970s.



I'm sure they were concerned because it seemed like there was an endless supply of Korean born instructors coming over in an endless series of waves which severely affected their dojo businesses.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 29, 2010)

puunui said:


> I'm not so sure about the 1965 date. Some believe that the book was actually published in 1968. The Modern History book has a bibliography and it lists the book as being published in 1969.


No there is no doubt that is was 1965. There may have been more than 1 printing though. This book was rushed so they would have it for the 1965 Kukki TKD Goodwill tour sponsored by the south Korean govt. Gen Choi led that team in the fall of 1965. He gave out copies of this book when he went on that tour. It was 1 of the reasons he used to try & persuade them to change the name to TKD from TaeSuDo.


puunui said:


> Really. All the KTA dan certificates that I saw didn't have anyone's signature on it.


Yes #4395, which may have been the wallet size card is the one that had 7th Degree on it. It had 2 signatures, Gen Choi & the director, whose name I can not make out. I also saw, but can not find the copy of a full size one, which had only Gen Choi's signature as president on it, but I do not remember it having a rank listed for Gen Choi


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 29, 2010)

Quote:Originally Posted by *KarateMomUSA* 

 
_Earlier on many leaders were all  made 4th Dan. GM Lee Chong Woo says he was I Dan in karate. Then made  his way to 4th dan, without a physical test for 4th, as he was sick.
_


puunui said:


> That's not exactly what the Modern History book says. Try and read it again.


No sorry again for the confusion. Things get mixed up with all the exchange of info & the needed follow, sorry. I was only saying that GM Lee said that. It is in the link below of an interview he gave.


puunui said:


> I don't think the jumps where that extreme. I don't think the pioneers skipped dan ranks at all. I know I saw a listing of GM LEE Chong Woo in Black Belt magazine from the 60's, I want to say 1967 or so, and it listed him as 7th Dan. I know all the Kwan Jang and other seniors were promoted to Kukkiwon 9th Dan in 1975. I don't think they took a test though for that one.


I would be curious & would be appreciative of your feedback on this article. Thank you sir.
http://www.tkdreform.com/yook_article.pdf


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 29, 2010)

puunui said:


> I remember reading that and thinking it didn't sound right. I know that GM LEE Won Kuk described GM Son as a "kangpae" or gangster, the implication being that he didn't feel GM Son was educated. He did speak highly of GM Nam, who he said was an office worker at the Chung Do Kwan who kept the paperwork organized.
> If I had to guess, not knowing all the facts, I would say either GM Nam or General Choi came up with the name, being the educated creative ones who would be more interested in that sort of endeavor. GM Son would be a lower probability choice for me because of the gangpae commentary by GM Lee and also the fact that it doesn't seem like GM Son's style has changed or evolved at all. He doesn't look or feel like he is into creativity, which probably hindered his ability move Taekwondo or the Chung Do Kwan into the direction that it needed and wanted to go.
> Does that make sense?


Yes it does. It also jives with my understanding that the term TKD came from Chinese characters that educated Koreans used. Gen Choi, an educated man, also had deep understanding of Chinese because of his caligraphy skills & training. This was why Gen Choi had President Seungman Rhee do his calligraphy in Chinese.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 29, 2010)

puunui said:


> I don't think so. Which yook interview of which GM Lee?


Please see above post #41.


puunui said:


> I'm sure they were concerned because it seemed like there was an endless supply of Korean born instructors coming over in an endless series of waves which severely affected their dojo businesses.


Yes of course, but it doesn't address that they were promoting fast. Maybe the Japanese system was not as quick with advancement, but when you have all these young Korean masters dropping in all over the place as high Dan level black belts, all the general public knows is you have 4 stripes on your belt & I have 7, so I must be better


----------



## puunui (Dec 30, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> I would be curious & would be appreciative of your feedback on this article. Thank you sir.
> http://www.tkdreform.com/yook_article.pdf



I did read that. Dr. Dong Ja Yang really hates GM LEE Chong Woo.  Dr. Yang's wife actually slapped GM Lee's face. Dr. Yang was trying to run for WTF President back in the late 80's, and ended up getting suspended, demoted from Kukkiwon 9th Dan to 8th Dan, and eventually kicked out all together. Dr. Yang was the USTU's equivalent to GM LEE Chong Woo. 

I think GM Lee, like anyone else, gears the conversation to the level of his audience, which in this case is a non-taekwondoin. When I spoke to him, he had a different perspective and a different view, although we covered different topics. There was a lot cut out from the interview, I would like to hear the entire recording. But GM Lee is quite a character, which comes from being hands down the most brilliant pioneer of them all, out shined by only Dr. Kim himself. GM Lee is like a 100 watt light bulb, and everyone else looks like either a small candle or a match in comparison. I could spend all day everyday for years listening and learning from him, just like I could Dr. Kim, and Dr. Yang too.


----------



## puunui (Dec 30, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> This was why Gen Choi had President Seungman Rhee do his calligraphy in Chinese.




All the calligraphy back then was done in hanmoon. the ability to read and write in hanmoon (chinese) characters is what distinguished the educated from the non-educated back then. I ate lunch at a sushi place today, run by Korean borns. There was a sign in Chinese characters and I asked the lady behind the counter what it said. She read it and explain what it said (it had to do with the type of rice they used, which was given to them by the rice company). We started talking and she said that the people of her generation (50 and over) all learned how to read and write in hanmoon, but that the young kids of today only know hangul.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 30, 2010)

Quote:Originally Posted by *KarateMomUSA* 

 
_This was why Gen Choi had President Seungman Rhee do his calligraphy in Chinese._


puunui said:


> All the calligraphy back then was done in hanmoon. the ability to read and write in hanmoon (chinese) characters is what distinguished the educated from the non-educated back then. I ate lunch at a sushi place today, run by Korean borns. There was a sign in Chinese characters and I asked the lady behind the counter what it said. She read it and explain what it said (it had to do with the type of rice they used, which was given to them by the rice company). We started talking and she said that the people of her generation (50 and over) all learned how to read and write in hanmoon, but that the young kids of today only know hangul.


Not sure how that addresses my point
????????


----------



## puunui (Dec 30, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> Quote:Originally Posted by *KarateMomUSA*
> 
> 
> _This was why Gen Choi had President Seungman Rhee do his calligraphy in Chinese._
> ...



The reason why the calligraphy (which no one saw by the way) was in chinese wasn't because of General Choi, but rather because all calligraphy was done in chinese characters back then.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 30, 2010)

puunui said:


> The reason why the calligraphy (which no one saw by the way) was in chinese wasn't because of General Choi, but rather because all calligraphy was done in chinese characters back then.


Sorry I don't agree & I do believe that you saw it. Maybe you didn't realize it. but didn't you say that you had the 1st TKD book ever written, the 1959 book written by Gen Choi? If you did, it is in there!
Problem is that when he exiled himself to Canada, he told no one, but his wife. he was going on a TKD trip & could only take a few items, as not to raise suspicion, impractical, etc. The scroll was left hanging in his office. Sadly never recovered or preserved for history, exactly because of the nasty politics that played heavily in TKD's history. It is a shame for all TKDin, even those not yet born, that such an important piece of history was not saved.

But of course his detractors, among them GM Lee Chong Woo, did not realize that proof was in this book, also copies of which were not embraced in Korea because of politics. There of course was a blacklisting of Gen Choi in south Korea & he was almost written out of history. That is all changing. In fact, people in south Korea think ITF TKD is communist TKD or TKD from north Korea, with many not realizing it came from their own ROK Army. I am sure you heard of the TKD Monument on Jeju Island that was hidden from the dictator & only put up in recent years?


----------



## puunui (Dec 30, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> Sorry I don't agree & I do believe that you saw it. Maybe you didn't realize it. but didn't you say that you had the 1st TKD book ever written, the 1959 book written by Gen Choi? If you did, it is in there!




That looks like General Choi's calligraphy. In that Yook article, GM Lee speaks about never seeing President RHEE Syngman's calligraphy.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 30, 2010)

puunui said:


> That looks like General Choi's calligraphy. In that Yook article, GM Lee speaks about never seeing President RHEE Syngman's calligraphy.


No it is actually signed by Mr Rhee, the puppet president. Yes of course GM Lee says that. He was of course speaking out against a traitor. This is part of the problem, but I guess he didn't realize that there was evidence


----------



## puunui (Dec 30, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> No it is actually signed by Mr Rhee, the puppet president.




I don't know why you insist on calling all the ROK presidents by these adjectives. Really.


----------



## puunui (Dec 30, 2010)

KarateMomUSA said:


> But of course his detractors, among them GM Lee Chong Woo, did not realize that proof was in this book, also copies of which were not embraced in Korea because of politics. There of course was a blacklisting of Gen Choi in south Korea & he was almost written out of history. That is all changing. In fact, people in south Korea think ITF TKD is communist TKD or TKD from north Korea, with many not realizing it came from their own ROK Army. I am sure you heard of the TKD Monument on Jeju Island that was hidden from the dictator & only put up in recent years?




GM LEE Chong Woo isn't a "detractor". He tried to work with General Choi but he was too much. And why wouldn't GM Lee have seen the calligraphy, as it was hanging in General Choi's office? General Choi wasn't written out of the history more so than his role in the history isn't all the significant, other than to be a negative influence. No one's name is mentioned in any of the official history of Kukki Taekwondo. No, I haven't heard about the Taekwondo Monument on Jeju Island that was hidden from "the" dictator.

By the way, this would be an example of you trying to blend General Choi history with everyone elses, instead of keeping them separate.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 30, 2010)

puunui said:


> I don't know why you insist on calling all the ROK presidents by these adjectives. Really.


I added puppet president as you said Mr Rhee was a worse dictator that Gen Park. I wanted to acknowledge that yes his govt was corrupt & yes you can be corrupt & a puppet, think present day Irag & Afganastan


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Dec 30, 2010)

puunui said:


> GM LEE Chong Woo isn't a "detractor". He tried to work with General Choi but he was too much. And why wouldn't GM Lee have seen the calligraphy, as it was hanging in General Choi's office? General Choi wasn't written out of the history more so than his role in the history isn't all the significant, other than to be a negative influence. No one's name is mentioned in any of the official history of Kukki Taekwondo. No, I haven't heard about the Taekwondo Monument on Jeju Island that was hidden from "the" dictator.
> 
> By the way, this would be an example of you trying to blend General Choi history with everyone elses, instead of keeping them separate.


Yes you may be right about the spillover of the mix, but it is hard to keep somethings completely separate. You see there is doubt about who came up with the name & that Gen Choi got it approved. But the KKW prominently displays the calligraphy from Gen Park (you know the dictator)  that was penned in 1971. Sadly the Kukki TKD history does not address the 1954/55 naming. When searching for the truth, if that is what is sought, one must evaluate all sources & motivations. Many people will look to critique Gen Choi as a self promoter, but few understand the motivation & methods his political opponents took. I try my best to take in your valuable contributions.
The Jeju Island monument was hidden from one of the dictator's brother & was only found & restored many years later. Those villagers that restored it, said it was done as Gen Choi's name was persona non grata, but they were proud to restore it, as their home played a vital role in TKD's formative years.


----------



## puunui (Jan 4, 2011)

KarateMomUSA said:


> You see there is doubt about who came up with the name & that Gen Choi got it approved. But the KKW prominently displays the calligraphy from Gen Park (you know the dictator)  that was penned in 1971. Sadly the Kukki TKD history does not address the 1954/55 naming.



So you think that because of the Kukki Taekwondo calligraphy of President Park which was done in 1971, that he somehow is taking credit for the name Taekwondo?


----------



## masterchase (Jan 5, 2011)

Here is a scan from a card issued in 1965


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 5, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Here is a scan from a card issued in 1965


 
Very cool. Thanks for the post. Is there any way you can tell me who is listed as the "Director"? I am afraid I can't decipher that signature.

BTW, is that the certificate of the Master Bruce Twing who was profiled in _Taekwon-Do Times_ some years ago? He was based in New England and had a Chung Do Kwan school. I remember reading he passed away a few years ago if it's the same man.

Thanks again.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (Jan 5, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Here is a scan from a card issued in 1965




Do you have a scan of the actual certificate? By the way, I recognize the signature on the right, and I am sure you do too.


----------



## masterchase (Jan 5, 2011)

I think it's GM Woon Kyu Uhm.   Below is his signature 43 years later.





Master Bruce V. Twing was my instructor.    Founder of Blue Wave TKD in Vermont.   Named after his orignal school at Osan Air force base in South Korea.... Chung Do Kwan
His instructor was GM Tae Sung Lee.  
GM Tae Sung Lee travels from S. Korea about once a year and teaches at our dojangs for a couple of weeks every year.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 5, 2011)

KarateMomUSA said:


> I added puppet president as you said Mr Rhee was a worse dictator that Gen Park. I wanted to acknowledge that yes his govt was corrupt & yes you can be corrupt & a puppet, think present day Irag & Afganastan


How about we just stick with people's names?

Daniel


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 6, 2011)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *KarateMomUSA* 

 
_You see there is doubt about who came up with the name & that Gen Choi got it approved. But the KKW prominently displays the calligraphy from Gen Park (you know the dictator)  that was penned in 1971. Sadly the Kukki TKD history does not address the 1954/55 naming._




puunui said:


> So you think that because of the Kukki Taekwondo calligraphy of President Park which was done in 1971, that he somehow is taking credit for the name Taekwondo?


No Sir, not at all. How can you come to that conclusion from what I posted? Unless you are just joking with me. 
I just think that from an historical point of view that they should also address that the 1st president did the same thing 16 years earlier, thats all


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> How about we just stick with people's names?
> Daniel


People's names in these cases simply do not relay enough info. South Korea was led by a fierce anti-communist that was the 1st Korean to ever earn a PhD in the USA. Many of the other leaders vying for the top position were leftists, with some being communist. The USA did not want to risk losing their half of Korea that they were adminstering according to the UN mandate, so they went with Dr Rhee Seungman. There was an election & he ruled for 12 years until corruption forced him out when the students led an uprising in April of 1960. It was said that he led with a strong hand & was viewed by many as being a puppet of the US. Remember that is was this president that ran GM Lee Won Kuk out of the country.
The next 3 leaders were military generals, with Park & Chun being aboslute dictators, with Roh winning an election that was not trusted & the opposition was split. However once his single 5 year term ended, south Korea embarked on a series of civilian elected leaders. To understand the development of TKD, one must also know the history of Korean, their poliitcs, as they educate us to the context of the times when TKD came into being.  
Descriptors are needed.


----------



## rmclain (Jan 6, 2011)

puunui said:


> I'm not so sure about the 1965 date. Some believe that the book was actually published in 1968.
> 
> I have this 1965 book by Choi Hong-hi. It is copyrighted in 1965. My father bought it brand new when on leave in New York City in 1965. Published by Daeha Publication Company: Seoul, Korea. Printed by Hwasong Printing Company. Ohara Publications is listed as the exclusive distributor in North America.
> 
> ...


----------



## masterchase (Jan 7, 2011)

Interesting that he would sign a KTA certificate on or after at least April 15, 1965 with a the rank displayed as 7th degree and the March 1965 book contain a different rank.   

Below:  The first card contains my instructors promotion date, and the second lists the generals rank as 7th Degree.  These cards were most likely issued at the same time.

PS.  How 'bout that 'Karate' referance...


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 7, 2011)

KarateMomUSA said:


> People's names in these cases simply do not relay enough info. South Korea was led by a fierce anti-communist that was the 1st Korean to ever earn a PhD in the USA. Many of the other leaders vying for the top position were leftists, with some being communist. The USA did not want to risk losing their half of Korea that they were adminstering according to the UN mandate, so they went with Dr Rhee Seungman. There was an election & he ruled for 12 years until corruption forced him out when the students led an uprising in April of 1960. It was said that he led with a strong hand & was viewed by many as being a puppet of the US. Remember that is was this president that ran GM Lee Won Kuk out of the country.
> The next 3 leaders were military generals, with Park & Chun being aboslute dictators, with Roh winning an election that was not trusted & the opposition was split. However once his single 5 year term ended, south Korea embarked on a series of civilian elected leaders. To understand the development of TKD, one must also know the history of Korean, their poliitcs, as they educate us to the context of the times when TKD came into being.
> Descriptors are needed.


I am aware of who he was.  If descriptions are needed, then Adolph Hitler should have a good many pejoratives preceding his name.  He doesn't; you hear Adolph Hitler and nothing more need be said.  It would be one thing if you were in a discussion with people who were unfamiliar with the topic, but you are not.

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Jan 7, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Interesting that he would sign a KTA certificate on or after at least April 15, 1965 with a the rank displayed as 7th degree and the March 1965 book contain a different rank.   Below:  The first card contains my instructors promotion date, and the second lists the generals rank as 7th Degree.  These cards were most likely issued at the same time.



Which is one of the reasons why some questioned whether the 1965 book was really printed in 1965. Also, General Choi is not listed in the Kukkiwon dan promotion records. The Kukkiwon incorporates and includes promotions from the KTA era. 




masterchase said:


> PS.  How 'bout that 'Karate' referance...



That I believe is reference to the location of the school, which may have been in a designated karate facility on base. I know that there was a Japanese or Okinawan Karate club at Osan which predates the Chung Do Kwan club.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 8, 2011)

puunui said:


> I'm not so sure about the 1965 date. Some believe that the book was actually published in 1968.
> 
> 
> rmclain said:
> ...


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 8, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Interesting that he would sign a KTA certificate on or after at least April 15, 1965 with a the rank displayed as 7th degree and the March 1965 book contain a different rank.
> 
> Below:  The first card contains my instructors promotion date, and the second lists the generals rank as 7th Degree.  These cards were most likely issued at the same time.
> 
> PS.  How 'bout that 'Karate' referance...


Yes rank was used for self promotion. I also notice that the CDK was TaeSuDo, but the KTA was T-K-D. I think that since he was an American GI, karate was the term that so many were using, especially the Americans, as it was just really starting to hit the west, but didn't really take off yet.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 8, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I am aware of who he was.  If descriptions are needed, then Adolph Hitler should have a good many pejoratives preceding his name.  He doesn't; you hear Adolph Hitler and nothing more need be said.  It would be one thing if you were in a discussion with people who were unfamiliar with the topic, but you are not.
> 
> Daniel


Sorry Sir, but since this is a public forum, many that stop by from time to time may not be as knowledgeable as some regular contributors who may be better informed, so I do repeat it so anyone checking in can see a single post & get the concept that I am trying to relay.


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Interesting that he would sign a KTA certificate on or after at least April 15, 1965 with a the rank displayed as 7th degree and the March 1965 book contain a different rank.
> 
> Below:  The first card contains my instructors promotion date, and the second lists the generals rank as 7th Degree.  These cards were most likely issued at the same time.
> 
> PS.  How 'bout that 'Karate' referance...



I don't know if this is an official KTA dan or membership card. I don't think so. I have a copy of GM Twing's Chung Do Kwan 1st Dan and it has the same number 4395 (given to me by your senior years ago). This might be a some sort of Chung Do Kwan 1st Dan card. I was also looking at issue #1 of the KTA magazine at it says that the name was changed from Taesoodo to Taekwondo in August 1965. That would coincide with what the Modern History book said about how GM Uhm and GM Lee forced General Choi out of the KTA.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 13, 2011)

puunui said:


> I don't know if this is an official KTA dan or membership card. I don't think so. I have a copy of GM Twing's Chung Do Kwan 1st Dan and it has the same number 4395 (given to me by your senior years ago). This might be a some sort of Chung Do Kwan 1st Dan card. I was also looking at issue #1 of the KTA magazine at it says that the name was changed from Taesoodo to Taekwondo in August 1965. That would coincide with what the Modern History book said about how GM Uhm and GM Lee forced General Choi out of the KTA.


Sir does that certificate say TKD or Tae Soo Do?
Also please give us the date of that 1st KTA magazine?


----------



## masterchase (Jan 13, 2011)

It definitely says Tae Soo Do.




This is my instructor at his Osan AFB dojang in 1965.


----------



## masterchase (Jan 13, 2011)

Sorry, 
Rereading you post, I think you were asking what it said on his
Chung Do Kwan certificate. 
Yes. It says Tae Soo Do Chung Do Kwan


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 13, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Sorry,
> Rereading you post, I think you were asking what it said on his
> Chung Do Kwan certificate.
> Yes. It says Tae Soo Do Chung Do Kwan


Yes it is pretty clear to me that few outside of Gen Choi's circle were using the TKD name, even the CDK as we see here in this example. We also know that they did not want to take them name in 1965, but Gen Choi won out. We also know that this played a part in GMs Uon Kyu Um & Lee Chong Woo in forcing him out. So I am not sure why people are hesitant to acknowledge that TKD was 1st applied to a system that was developed in the military led by Gen Choi. This is what history tells us.


----------



## masterchase (Jan 13, 2011)

I would disagree.   
My lineage is GM Won Kuk Lee, GM Chong Suh Kang, GM Tae Sung Lee, GM Bruce V. Twing.    

Ive seen in another post the following:

_In 1959, H.U. Lee and some of his classmates under GM Kang (Myong Kil Kim and Tae Sung Lee) got a job at Osan AFB, and while there, they opened up the Osan Chung Do Kwan._

Our Vermont association was an ITF school until 1986 when Master Twing was reunited with GM Tae Sung Lee after losing contact after leaving military service.    

Master Twing Called GM Myong Kil Kim his instructor until 1978.

So I dont have all of the facts as to whether that Osan Dojang was under General Choi or not, but since we were ITF until 1986 I would assume so.   But its risky using the word assume.    

When GM Tae Sung Lee reunited with Master Twing we switched to Kukkiwon and have been ever since.


----------



## puunui (Jan 13, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Sorry,
> Rereading you post, I think you were asking what it said on his
> Chung Do Kwan certificate.
> Yes. It says Tae Soo Do Chung Do Kwan



Why cut off the certificate, especially the part with the certificate number?


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 13, 2011)

masterchase said:


> My lineage is GM Won Kuk Lee, GM Chong Suh Kang, GM Tae Sung Lee, GM Bruce V. Twing.




Interesting. I assume this is the GM Chong Suh Kang who founded the Kuk Mu Kwan? Do you know about the relationship of the Kuk Mu Kwan to the Chung Do Kwan? Has GM Tae Sung Lee ever mentioned the Kuk Mu Kwan?

Pax,

Chris


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 13, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> [/size][/font][/font][/size]
> 
> Interesting. I assume this is the GM Chong Suh Kang who founded the Kuk Mu Kwan? Do you know about the relationship of the Kuk Mu Kwan to the Chung Do Kwan? Has GM Tae Sung Lee ever mentioned the Kuk Mu Kwan?
> 
> ...


GM Kang was a senior member of the Chung Do Kwan. However he may have been younger, not as aggressive & may not have promoted as fast as some of the others. The CDK produces many important & influential martial artists.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 13, 2011)

KarateMomUSA said:


> GM Kang was a senior member of the Chung Do Kwan. However he may have been younger, not as aggressive & may not have promoted as fast as some of the others. The CDK produces many important & influential martial artists.


 
Yes, I know. He was apparently a very early CDK black belt. But he also formed his own Kwan, the Kuk Mu Kwan (in the early 1950s, IIRC). *If* this is the same GM Kang that was mentioned before I'd be interested as to why GM Tae Sung Lee traces his lineage to the Chung Do Kwan and not the Kuk Mu Kwan.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Yes, I know. He was apparently a very early CDK black belt. But he also formed his own Kwan, the Kuk Mu Kwan (in the early 1950s, IIRC).



You recall incorrectly.


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

masterchase said:


> My lineage is GM Won Kuk Lee, GM Chong Suh Kang, GM Tae Sung Lee, GM Bruce V. Twing.




That's GM KANG Suh Chong, or GM Suh Chong KANG.


----------



## masterchase (Jan 14, 2011)

I hope to get the chance to get this cleared up when he visits in March.
Maybe I've got it all wrong.   Some posts I've read on this site and others seem to point to Kang Suh Chong as his instructor.   
Master Gordon White took notes after quizzing GM Tae Sung Lee about his early training and did not ask him about the spelling of his instructors name.  He wrote down what he heard.... "Kong Sa Chong"    So maybe I'm taking too big a leap and assuming that this "Kong Sa Chong" is "Kang Suh Chong" 

Here is the note Master White wrote down:
1953: Grandmaster Lee Tae Sung started training Taekwondo in Incheon  Korea with a military squad that allowed civilians to join in. The  instructors name was Kong Sa Chong.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 14, 2011)

puunui said:


> You recall incorrectly.


 
Oh, thanks for clearing that up, Glenn. I've seen 1953 as the date for the founding of Kuk Mu Kwan as well as 1963. But you've certainly been your usual helpful self 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

masterchase said:


> Maybe I've got it all wrong.   Some posts I've read on this site and others seem to point to Kang Suh Chong as his instructor.   Master Gordon White took notes after quizzing GM Tae Sung Lee about his early training and did not ask him about the spelling of his instructors name.  He wrote down what he heard.... "Kong Sa Chong"    So maybe I'm taking too big a leap and assuming that this "Kong Sa Chong" is "Kang Suh Chong"




No you got it right. It's the same person. He romanized his name differently at different times, just like GM Uhm's name is romanized differently today than in the 60's. 

The Incheon area was a rally point for refugees from North Korea back then, in the early fifties. The picture that comes to mind is Cuban refugees in Florida.  GM Kang was I believe the Taekwondo instructor for the ROK Navy UDT training facility at the time. I understand that GM LEE Haeng Ung (who was I believe a North Korean refugee) got a job at Osan AFB and so he moved from Incheon to Osan. Others from Incheon (including GM LEE Tae Sung I believe) also got jobs at Osan and that is how the Osan Chung Do Kwan got started.


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Oh, thanks for clearing that up, Glenn. I've seen 1953 as the date for the founding of Kuk Mu Kwan as well as 1963. But you've certainly been your usual helpful self




No problem. Which of those two dates do you believe is the correct date? Or is it another date? Also, are you assuming that GM Kang was the Chodae Kwan Jang of the Kuk Mu Kwan?


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 14, 2011)

puunui said:


> No you got it right. It's the same person. He romanized his name differently at different times, just like GM Uhm's name is romanized differently today than in the 60's.
> 
> The Incheon area was a rally point for refugees from North Korea back then, in the early fifties. The picture that comes to mind is Cuban refugees in Florida.  GM Kang was I believe the Taekwondo instructor for the ROK Navy UDT training facility at the time. I understand that GM LEE Haeng Ung (who was I believe a North Korean refugee) got a job at Osan AFB and so he moved from Incheon to Osan. Others from Incheon (including GM LEE Tae Sung I believe) also got jobs at Osan and that is how the Osan Chung Do Kwan got started.


At some point GM Kang was also assigned to military intelligence under Gen Choi. I believe he was a non-commissioned officer with the rank of Sgt.


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

KarateMomUSA said:


> At some point GM Kang was also assigned to military intelligence under Gen Choi. I believe he was a non-commissioned officer with the rank of Sgt.




Where did you read that, in General Choi's autobiography?


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 14, 2011)

puunui said:


> No problem. Which of those two dates do you believe is the correct date? Or is it another date? Also, are you assuming that GM Kang was the Chodae Kwan Jang of the Kuk Mu Kwan?


 
I'm not assuming either of those two dates is correct. I stated that I had heard both as the dates of the founding of the Kuk Mu Kwan. Nor am I assuming GM Kang was the first Kwan Jang. He said he is the _founder_ of the Kuk Mu Kwan. If you want to say that doesn't equate to being Cho Dae Kwan Jang that's fine.

Again, helpful as ever Glenn 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> I'm not assuming either of those two dates is correct. I stated that I had heard both as the dates of the founding of the Kuk Mu Kwan.



I didn't ask you if you assumed either of those dates were correct. I asked this: Which of those two dates do  you believe is the correct date? Or is it another date? But don't worry, you don't have to answer. 




chrispillertkd said:


> Nor am I assuming GM Kang was the first Kwan Jang. He said he is the _founder_ of the Kuk Mu Kwan. If you want to say that doesn't equate to being Cho Dae Kwan Jang that's fine.



Where does he say he is the founder of the Kuk Mu Kwan? I was unaware that he gave any sort of interview or made any sort of statement to that effect. On second thought, you don't have to answer. I can go search google myself to find out where you got your answer. 





chrispillertkd said:


> Again, helpful as ever Glenn


 
I wish I could say the same for you.


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

Did a quick google search and found the two pages. One is a facebook page which states Kuk Mu Kwan was founded in 1953, and the other is GM Kang's son whose says Kuk Mu Kwan was founded in 1963. I see a page for GM Kang's son which states that his father was founder of Kuk Mu Kwan, but I didn't see anything where GM Kang states this directly.


----------



## KarateMomUSA (Jan 14, 2011)

puunui said:


> Where did you read that, in General Choi's autobiography?


No I do not think that Gen Choi mentioned that. I think I came across it in personal conversations & interviews. GM Kang is still alive & I think that at least 2 of his 3 sons are still active in teaching TKD for a living. One was just on the cover of TKD Times magazine not too long ago.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 14, 2011)

puunui said:


> I didn't ask you if you assumed either of those dates were correct. I asked this: Which of those two dates do you believe is the correct date? Or is it another date? But don't worry, you don't have to answer.


 
I don't believe either date is correct. I don't have an opinion one way or the other on the matter. I had heard two conflicting dates and so didn't have any opinion on the matter. You said it wasn't 1953 and since I have no reason to believe or disbelieve you I still have no opinion on the matter.  



> Where does he say he is the founder of the Kuk Mu Kwan? I was unaware that he gave any sort of interview or made any sort of statement to that effect. On second thought, you don't have to answer. I can go search google myself to find out where you got your answer.


 
Have at it, Glenn! :lol: 



> I wish I could say the same for you.


 
:lol: Yes, I'm sure you do :lol:

Helpful as ever, brother 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (Jan 14, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Helpful as ever, brother




Glad to be of service kid.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 15, 2011)

:lol: Haven't been called a kid in 20 years. Thanks!

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (Jan 15, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> :lol: Haven't been called a kid in 20 years. Thanks!




You're welcome kid.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Jan 15, 2011)

puunui said:


> You're welcome kid.


 
:lol: Haven't been called a kid in 20 years. Thanks!

Pax,

Chris


----------

