# New anti Sine Wave pattern deliveries on Youtube



## Acronym

Unfortunately not very good, which seems to be a trend.

Sine wave is an up and down movement that was added into ITF patterns somewhere in the late 70s, early 80s to make it different from the Karate katas. It telegraphs the techniques and serves no no purpose other than to be different from Karate katas. It is not used in mitts practice or sparring.

So this is a branch that does it the old way, but not very good. There is no hip twist to the punches and the overall form is mediocre.


----------



## Acronym

I asked an ITF GM to post clips of pre sine wave and he said he would try and digg some up of himself doing it.

I'm guessing he knew to twist his hips, unlike the gentleman above who simply extends the arm.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Unfortunately not very good, which seems to be a trend.
> 
> Sine wave is an up and down movement that was added into ITF patterns somewhere in the late 70s, early 80s to make it different from the Karate katas. It telegraphs the techniques and serves no no purpose other than to be different from Karate katas. It is not used in mitts practice or sparring.


First  and foremost prior to introduction of the term "Sine Wave' which first appears in the encyclopedia we were still moving up and down, flexing our knees to generate power in hand techniques.   We then called it "Spring Style"  (Early 1970's) While the term is unique to General Choi and TKD making it a convenient metaphor to contrast with Flat wave (Level headed stepping exhibited in some Karate styles. and saw tooth wave, the concept is not unique to TKD, Many a boxing text describes flexing the knees / using the legs to generate power in hand techniques.   Is it exaggerated and stylized in patterns. Of course it is but so is a lot of other stuff.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> First  and foremost prior to introduction of the term "Sine Wave' which first appears in the encyclopedia we were still moving up and down, flexing our knees to generate power in hand techniques.   We then called it "Spring Style"  (Early 1970's) While the term is unique to General Choi and TKD making it a convenient metaphor to contrast with Flat wave (Level headed stepping exhibited in some Karate styles. and saw tooth wave, the concept is not unique to TKD, Many a boxing text describes flexing the knees / using the legs to generate power in hand techniques.   Is it exaggerated and stylized in patterns. Of course it is but so is a lot of other stuff.



Boxers transfer their weight forward and lift their supporting leg. In sinewave, the supporting leg is lifted, then put down, without any forward weight transfer, which of of course is guaranteed by putting down the supporting leg.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Acronym said:


> Boxers transfer their weight forward and lift their supporting leg. In sinewave, the supporting leg is lifted, then put down, without any forward weight transfer, which of of course is guaranteed by putting down the supporting leg.



I find it hilarious that you presume to lecture an ITF 9th Dan on how the ITF does sine wave.


----------



## Acronym

Dirty Dog said:


> I find it hilarious that you presume to lecture an ITF 9th Dan on how the ITF does sine wave.



The parameters are in the ITF encyclopedia


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> The parameters are in the ITF encyclopedia


You're quoting instructions. He's telling you how it actually works.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> You're quoting instructions. He's telling you how it actually works.



 I am quoting how it's done. I have been subject to it under an ITF GM for several years.


----------



## Acronym

The first punch sequences are a perfect example of illogical it is.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> The first punch sequences are a perfect example of illogical it is.



Suska is a great technician and athlete. Yet if you compare his performance to the ones in the videos with black background  you will find his motions more exagerated and IMO excessively so, however this does not negate that may motions in patterns are exaggerated.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> The parameters are in the ITF encyclopedia





Acronym said:


> Boxers transfer their weight forward and lift their supporting leg. *In sinewave, the supporting leg is lifted, then put down*, without any forward weight transfer, which of of course is guaranteed by putting down the supporting leg.


 Please give text volume and page of the encyclopedia where these parameters are listed. I must have overlooked it.  Please also point out where it appears in the Suska video you posted.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Please give text volume and page of the encyclopedia where these parameters are listed. I must have overlooked it.  Please also point out where it appears in the Suska video you posted.



It's very clearly put down at :0:04, and he is doing it by the book. There is no weight transfer and the hole point of lifting it in the first place is nullified when you put it down when you punch.


----------



## Acronym

Here is early 70s pattern by jong Soo park. He does not lift his supporting foot ever when punching from a static position.

If you call merely sinking your body Sine Wave, then karate has Sinewave too.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Dirty Dog said:


> I find it hilarious that you presume to lecture an ITF 9th Dan on how the ITF does sine wave.


The problem is Acronym reads or views stuff on the net and thinks it's all accurate.   I find a lot of people draw erroneous conclusions as to when and why SW as a term versus as a movement was introduced because they (as I was) are progeny of Pioneers who had the "Level Headed " Karate / Tang Soo do method of moving .   Many of those progeny may not have learned that was not how the system had them moving until long after it was introduced. Something  hard to appreciate now in the internet and video generation.   In the 1970's  VHS / Beta Max was not really available and private internet non existent.   So, many were late to update their techniques  and assumed that when they were introduced to it this was something new. .   The difference between Acronym and I is he reads peoples opinions as to what they think happened and I lived it.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> The problem is Acronym reads or views stuff on the net and thinks it's all accurate.   I find a lot of people draw erroneous conclusions as to when and why SW as a term versus as a movement was introduced because they (as I was) are progeny of Pioneers who had the "Level Headed " Karate / Tang Soo do method of moving .   Many of those progeny may not have learned that was not how the system had them moving until long after it was introduced. Something  hard to appreciate now in the internet and video generation.   In the 1970's  VHS / Beta Max was not really available and private internet non existent.   So, many were late to update their techniques  and assumed that when they were introduced to it this was something new. .   The difference between Acronym and I is he reads peoples opinions as to what they think happened and I lived it.



So forms world champion Suska is doing it wrong when he puts his supporting foot down when punching in the clip I posted?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Here is early 70s pattern by jong Soo park. He does not lift his supporting foot ever when punching from a static position.
> 
> If you call merely sinking your body Sine Wave, then karate has Sinewave too.
> 
> [
> I am acquainted with GM Park . Was at Several IICs where he as present.   Great Guy. Great athlete. CDK product. What you see in the old video is a result of the CDK roots.
> [QUOTE="]



I am acquainted with GM Park . Was at Several IICs where he as present.   Great Guy. Great athlete. CDK product. What you see in the old video is a result of the CDK roots.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> It's very clearly put down at :0:04, and he is doing it by the book. There is no weight transfer and the hole point of lifting it in the first place is nullified when you put it down when you punch.


:04 is a stationary  - non stepping punch - Do San #2.   He flexes the knees and lifts the heel of the rear foot to permit this flex of the rear leg.  Is that heel lift what you refer to as "Lifting the supporting leg" ?   Further it is not so much a weight transfer thing as using the knee flex to allow you to employ the musculature of the legs to generate power in hand techniques just as boxers do.   I knowing some parts of the text there is mention of weight transfer / change to generate power but that is only one factor.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> :04 is a stationary  - non stepping punch - Do San #2.   He flexes the knees and lifts the heel of the rear foot to permit this flex of the rear leg.  Is that heel lift what you refer to as "Lifting the supporting leg" ? .



Yes it is, and it doesn't make sense if you then drop it when you punch. You made the claim that boxers do the same. They do not put the rear foot down when punching.


----------



## Acronym

*I am acquainted with GM Park . WAs at Several IICs where he as present. Great Guy. Great athlete. CDK product. What you see in the old video is a result of the CDK roots. *

I don't know what CDK stands for but my point was that he was indeed exhibiting the old school mechanics in the early 70s, a time when you claim the shift had come.


----------



## Acronym

And yes, Jong Soo park is a great TaeKwonDo athlete and a favorite of mine. Although I would put a young
*Chang Keun Choi *above Jong Soo Park.


----------



## Acronym

Note the rear foot.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

It is amazing to me watching someone who trained ITF TKD in one school for 3 years trying to tell an ITF (I believe) grandmaster, that has trained at multiple schools and with the people involved in the discussion, for multiple decades, how those people do things, and what is considered the proper way of doing so, based on a youtube video.

The internet is really a crazy thing.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> It is amazing to me watching someone who trained ITF TKD in one school for 3 years trying to tell an ITF (I believe) grandmaster, that has trained at multiple schools and with the people involved in the discussion, for multiple decades, how those people do things, and what is considered the proper way of doing so, based on a youtube video.
> 
> The internet is really a crazy thing.



Based on a youtube video of the world champion in ITF forms.

It's even more amazing with someone who hasn't done it at all. 

I referenced the world champion in ITF forms. Weiss did NOT object to the rear foot being put down when punching. 

When I'm wrong I will admit to it. I am not wrong here. He is wrong about boxers though.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> It is amazing to me watching someone who trained ITF TKD in one school for 3 years.



That's 4 years and a red belt. Long enough to know whether the rear foot is down or up when punching in forms.


----------



## Acronym

The point of lifting the rear foot in boxing is to facilitate a weight transfer, which is why it doesn't drop when you actually deliver the punch on impact. If you put the rear foot down when you punch, you reverse the attempted transfer back to a planted rear foot position and no weight transfer has been accomplished. All you did was raise and lower your gravity=no weight transfer.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Based on a youtube video of the world champion in ITF forms.
> 
> It's even more amazing with someone who hasn't done it at all.
> 
> I referenced the world champion in ITF forms. Weiss did NOT object to the rear foot being put down when punching.
> 
> When I'm wrong I will admit to it. I am not wrong here. He is wrong about boxers though.


If the someone who hasn't done it at all is me, then you're missing something. I'm not saying who is right or wrong. I don't even know what sine wave is, or how it relates  to the rear foot, besides a few threads I've read on here. Just pointing out how crazy the internet is.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> If the someone who hasn't done it at all is me, then you're missing something. I'm not saying who is right or wrong. I don't even know what sine wave is, or how it relates  to the rear foot, besides a few threads I've read on here. Just pointing out how crazy the internet is.



There is nothing crazy about this discussion. This is basic stuff you learn day 1 in ITF. the argument is whether it is an any way analogous to boxing, and of course it isn't, and I explained why.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> There is nothing crazy about this discussion. This is basic stuff you learn day 1 in ITF. the argument is whether it is an any way analogous to boxing, and of course it isn't, and I explained why.


You changed the debate to that. Earl didn't mention boxers until post 17, after you did. And I don't find the discussion crazy, I find the internet crazy that it can have this discussion.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> You changed the debate to that. Earl didn't mention boxers until post 17, after you did. And I don't find the discussion crazy, I find the internet crazy that it can have this discussion.



Then I suggest you read post 3 again


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Then I suggest you read post 3 again


My bad, missed that he said that there. Doesn't really change my initial statement though.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> My bad, missed that he said that there. Doesn't really change my initial statement though.



Yes it does. It's clear one of the two here haven't boxed or else he wouldn't write that.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Yes it does. It's clear one of the two here haven't boxed or else he wouldn't write that.


My statement is how the internet is crazy. None of the contents of the discussion change that, as any discussion between the two of you proves how crazy the internet can be.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> My statement is how the internet is crazy. None of the contents of the discussion change that, as any discussion between the two of you proves how crazy the internet can be.



Because you and dirty dog resort to argument from authority. Just because Weiss is a gm and I'm a red belt doesn't automatically make him knowledgeable about boxing.

If you take a concept of boxing and then throw it in the pin the moment you actually strike, you are not using the principles of boxing, you are abusing them.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Because you and dirty dog resort to argument from authority. Just because Weiss is a gm and I'm a red belt doesn't automatically make him knowledgeable about boxing.
> 
> If you take a concept of boxing and then throw it in the pin the moment you actually strike, you are not using the principles of boxing, you are abusing them.


I'm not making any argument from authority. And I don't think he knows about boxing-he might, I've got no clue. My point was that, on the ITF side, you're invalidating his experiences through your own online research. And my larger point is that you guys can even have this conversation, which is crazy to me, and the internet is possible. I think you read a lot more into my posts than I'm saying sometimes. Unless my last theory is correct and you just look to see what arguments you can make.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I'm not making any argument from authority. And I don't think he knows about boxing-he might, I've got no clue. My point was that, on the ITF side, you're invalidating his experiences through your own online research. .



That is a delibrate misrepresentation. I trained for 4 years, in the dojang, under GM Yeo Chin Huat.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> That is a delibrate misrepresentation. I trained for 4 years, in the dojang, under GM Yeo Chin Huat.


I don't think I'm misrepresenting anything. You're taking limited experience, combining that with youtube to make an overarching claim, and invalidating his experience as you do so. But I'm like 95% sure with some of your recent threads that you're just trolling and trying to argue. So good luck.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I don't think I'm misrepresenting anything. You're taking limited experience, combining that with youtube to make an overarching claim, and invalidating his experience as you do so. But I'm like 95% sure with some of your recent threads that you're just trolling and trying to argue. So good luck.



What does experience have to do with what the textbook says? If it says to put down my rear foot when puncing, then that’s just as true when I'm white belt doing forms as when a GM is doing the same forms. 

Obfuscation tactics doesn't bite on me.


----------



## isshinryuronin

Acronym said:


> The point of lifting the rear foot in boxing is to facilitate a weight transfer, which is why it doesn't drop when you actually deliver the punch on impact. If you put the rear foot down when you punch, you reverse the attempted transfer back to a planted rear foot position and no weight transfer has been accomplished. All you did was raise and lower your gravity=no weight transfer.



Weight transfer is not the main issue - It's _power_ transfer to the opponent that's important. 

Weight transfer is just one way to generate power.  There are several others that keep the weight centered and rooted vertically, yet still transfer power horizontally, but that is a whole discussion in itself.



Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Just pointing out how crazy the internet is.



And yet, here we are.


----------



## Acronym

isshinryuronin said:


> Weight transfer is not the main issue - It's _power_ transfer to the opponent that's important.



Weight transfer is the difference between an arm punch and a punch with knockout power.


----------



## Raistlin

I don't have much experience with the ITF, however I had a friendly debate with an ITF master at a tournament once. We are both 7th Dans in our respective arts. His explanation of the sine wave was they are bringing their bodies up by coming onto the balls of their feet, then sinking into a lower stance. They use the energy of the downward movement created by gravity and redirect that energy into their techniques.

My response to this was, if you are waiting for gravity to pull you downward in order to redirect that energy, it is going to be very slow. We have always believed that much of our power is generated in the legs and core by explosively driving our bodies directly through the technique. The shortest distance between point A and point B is a straight line. By moving your body upward then downward before executing the technique, you are taking the scenic route. Just my 2 cents.

I do see value in utilizing the sine wave to do certain board/brick breaks, however, to use as a practical means of generating power in combat, I don't see the value.

I know many traditional arts practice certain techniques that on the surface don't appear to be very practical, but when you dig deeper they are executed in a specific way to create good habits etc. Perhaps someone far more knowledgeable in the ITF than I, like GM Weiss, can expand on my quick explanation of the sine wave?


----------



## Acronym

Here is a TAGB member discussing the split from ITF and how the ITF changed since that time

Worth a watch for those wanting to learn more about TaeKwonDo


----------



## Acronym

I love the anti Olympic TKD attitude "does not want to be associated with them". Hard core!


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Based on a youtube video of the world champion in ITF forms.


Based on your interpretation of a YouTube video.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Because you and dirty dog resort to argument from authority. Just because Weiss is a gm and I'm a red belt doesn't automatically make him knowledgeable about boxing.
> 
> If you take a concept of boxing and then throw it in the pin the moment you actually strike, you are not using the principles of boxing, you are abusing them.


You're pivoting this to an argument about what is/is not in boxing. I thought you were making an angry point about TKD?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> That is a delibrate misrepresentation. I trained for 4 years, in the dojang, under GM Yeo Chin Huat.


um..........


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Weight transfer is the difference between an arm punch and a punch with knockout power.


Transfer of momentum to the opponent's head is what does that. It can be done with your weight primarily on your rear leg.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Transfer of momentum to the opponent's head is what does that. It can be done with your weight primarily on your rear leg.



It's nowhere near the power it would have been if it's on your rear leg. You are basically dependent on the actual step-in to generate the force, rather than your entire body driving into the target.

Note that I am not arguing for the boxing punch over Karate, just saying that if you are looking for power, boxing is the way to go.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> It's nowhere near the power it would have been if it's on your rear leg. You are basically dependent on the actual step-in to generate the force, rather than your entire body driving into the target.
> 
> Note that I am not arguing for the boxing punch over Karate, just saying that if you are looking for power, boxing is the way to go.


Boxers can also punch with power without having to move their weight over (or beyond) their front foot. That longer weight transfer is often because of the range needed.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Boxers can also punch with power without having to move their weight over (or beyond) their front foot. That longer weight transfer is often because of the range needed.



They have other shots such as the jab, which is not a power shot in the scoring precisely because it's just an arm and hip twist. It's called a power jab if you push off the back foot for the reason of weight transfer.

The travel path of the reverse punch in Karate is not shorter than the boxing straight right either. It will basically come down to which one you have learned to throw. If you can throw them both, the one you feel more comfortable with. 

For my money, in self defense, the karate reverse punch can be effective for a surprise body shot (especially since guard and head movement in karate competitions is questionable). The boxing straight right at full force to the body makes less sense to me, and it is usually not thrown from an orthodox position at full power.

Hooking punches in boxing are more suited for body shots, but those require close range, which you may not want.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> B
> 
> I referenced the world champion in ITF forms. Weiss did NOT object to the rear foot being put down when punching.
> 
> .


Sir, you are confusing 2 different things.   The heel is raised and the knee flexed to enable the legs to facilitate power in hand techniques.  This helps the arm extend forcefully forward. Placing the heel down as the fist reaches full extension is of little import since the power has already been generated and the purpose of doing this for patterns is to resume the Walking stance which is designed for stability to the front and rear.  This is the kinetic llnking principal.   The fist has already made contact before the heel is fully set down. National Geographics Fight Science kinetic linking - YouTube


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> The point of lifting the rear foot in boxing is to facilitate a weight transfer, which is why it doesn't drop when you actually deliver the punch on impact. If you put the rear foot down when you punch, you reverse the attempted transfer back to a planted rear foot position and no weight transfer has been accomplished. All you did was raise and lower your gravity=no weight transfer.


Well, yes and no. Lifting the rear heel in boxing also gives you greater reach.    Dropping it back down may or may not be done in order to move the head back.   You seem to feel keeping the rear foot on the ball of the foot is essential to power generation.   Many a technique can be done in different ways depending on varous factors. Which way is  "Better" depends on those factors.   Placing the heel back down is  to resume the stable walking stance . Will it lessen the reach? Quite possibly.   No one should ever think that pattern motions directly translate to "Sparring" , nor should they think Sparring directly translates to Combat.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, you are confusing 2 different things.   The heel is raised and the knee flexed to enable the legs to facilitate power in hand techniques.  This helps the arm extend forcefully forward. Placing the heel down as the fist reaches full extension is of little import since the power has already been generated and the purpose of doing this for patterns is to resume the Walking stance which is designed for stability to the front and rear.  This is the kinetic llnking principal.   The fist has already made contact before the heel is fully set down. National Geographics Fight Science kinetic linking - YouTube



 I will refer you to one of the encyclopedias:

Tkd Volume 3

"The heel of the rear foot should be raised slightly off the ground at the beginning of the motion and placed firmly on the ground at the moment of impact"


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Will it lessen the reach? Quite possibly.   No one should ever think that pattern motions directly translate to "Sparring" , nor should they think Sparring directly translates to Combat.



The burning point isn't the reach, it's that the weight is being transferred back when it's supposed to transfer forward. But of course that's just the tip of the iceberg. The bigger issue is that there is no forward lean so the weight isn't traveling anywhere, it's just going up and down.

I might also add that in boxing, the heal is raised and stays raised, regardless if you are shadow boxing or sparring. Forms relate to sparring in boxing, instead of being counter to them


----------



## dvcochran

Earl Weiss said:


> No one should ever think that pattern motions directly translate to "Sparring" , nor should they think Sparring directly translates to Combat.


Sir, would you please elaborate on this statement? I would like to hear your follow up before I frame any response.


----------



## Acronym

There's a saying in Chinese, be careful what you wish for.

 I asked for a hip twist and i got it in spades . 

This delivery is so tensed that I shiver.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No one should ever think that pattern motions directly translate to "Sparring" , .



There's no reson why they shouldn't, and the encyclopedias parameters for punching are based the mechanics of the forms. So a fair assumption is that Choi considered  the form mechanics to override the sparring mechanics when applied for combat/self defence


----------



## Earl Weiss

No one should ever think that pattern motions directly translate to "Sparring" , nor should they think Sparring directly translates to Combat.



dvcochran said:


> Sir, would you please elaborate on this statement? I would like to hear your follow up before I frame any response.


Naturally I cannot speak to every TMA system. So I will address how it is in the Chang Hon system. And my albeit limited observation of other pattern performances.   There is an aesthetic component to patterns. None of that aesthetic element is relevant to Sparring or combat.  Certainly patterns can develop traits that are applicable to Sparring or combat just as drills like hitting a peed bag or Jumping rope can help develop boxing skills.  Sparring has rules.   Most sparring has a goal of scoring points and possibly knocking out or submitting an opponent.   Points are irrelevant in combat. Goals are to survive or decimate the adversary.   While there is certainly an overlap the optimal training concentrates on the objective.   I would not expect a Pro MMA athlete to spend a lot of time doing patterns.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> There's no reson why they shouldn't, and the encyclopedias parameters for punching are based the mechanics of the forms. So a fair assumption is that Choi considered  the form mechanics to override the sparring mechanics when applied for combat/self defence


Sir, your assumption is mistaken . I will have to locate it in the text and get back to you but there is a place where he addresses "Standard" methods for performing techniques and adaptation for situations. It is difficult to comprehend that you would think he would really consider punching with pulling the opposite hand to the to be the overriding standard for combat.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, your assumption is mistaken .It is difficult to comprehend that you would think he would really consider punching with pulling the opposite hand to the to be the overriding standard for combat.



So you don't know the applications of withdrawing with the other hand?

Why is it difficult to comprehend that I have that interpretation, when the principles for punching outlined are Sine Wave proper mechanics.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Naturally I cannot speak to every TMA system. So I will address how it is in the Chang Hon system. And my albeit limited observation of other pattern performances.   There is an aesthetic component to patterns. None of that aesthetic element is relevant to Sparring or combat.  Certainly patterns can develop traits that are applicable to Sparring or combat just as drills like hitting a peed bag or Jumping rope can help develop boxing skills.  Sparring has rules.   Most sparring has a goal of scoring points and possibly knocking out or submitting an opponent.   Points are irrelevant in combat. Goals are to survive or decimate the adversary.   While there is certainly an overlap the optimal training concentrates on the objective.   I would not expect a Pro MMA athlete to spend a lot of time doing patterns.



Whenever I've seen black belt do breaking with SW, they place the heel down when striking as well. It's clearly done more harm than good, and I'm convinced this is based on a misconception from the person responsible for it, rather than an easthetical decision.


----------



## Acronym

A middle ground theory could be that Choi Hong Hi considered the hole concept of SW patterns aesthetics, but that is refuted by listing it along his principles of punching and his various lectures

It is curious seeing him refer to traditional blocks as "not making sense" , simply because they don't sink into them. I'm not sure how sinking into a block adds anything but excessive movement. It's supposed to parry an attack. Why would you raise and lower your gravity and then block? How does that make more sense then just blocking right away?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> A middle ground theory could be that Choi Hong Hi considered the hole concept of SW patterns aesthetics, but that is refuted by listing it along his principles of punching and his various lectures


No, not refuted at all.    General Choi taught the "Cycle (Composition) of TKD " Which includes the aspects of Fundamental Movements - Individual and Soldier Basic Training, Dallyon- Maintenance of equipment (Conditioning) Patterns, Sparring, Self defense- Actual combat.   Excerpting  single element and critiquing it as deficient is  a "Straw man" critique.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> There's no reson why they shouldn't, and the encyclopedias parameters for punching are based the mechanics of the forms. So a fair assumption is that Choi considered  the form mechanics to override the sparring mechanics when applied for combat/self defence


To the contrary, there is an explicit reason. Sparring is but one element of the Composition of TK-D and Patterns another. No one does it say either is a substitute for the other or complete in itself.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> So you don't know the applications of withdrawing with the other hand?
> 
> Why is it difficult to comprehend that I have that interpretation, when the principles for punching outlined are Sine Wave proper mechanics.


I know some, I teach some and had an article published in TKD Times on it.   Yet, for an intense combat situation I find most overly complicated.  It is likely I was dabbling in Alternate Applications' going to seminars with George Dilman (who sadly seemed to go off the deep end) some of his progeny, Vince Morris, Oyata and reading stuff like  Bubishi since you were merely a gleam in your father's eye.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Excerpting  single element and critiquing it as deficient is  a "Straw man" critique.



If you are transfering the weight back while punching, the hole concept fails. That is what they do, whether the rear foot is placed down or on it's way to be placed down when the punch lands is irrelevant to the critique  - it has the same consequence. And they do that even when breaking.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Yet, for an intense combat situation I find most overly complicated.




TaeKwonDo, as you know, took out all grappling content in it's sparring format. Maybe that's why you view it as overly complicated. Things you never do tend to be complicated.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> To the contrary, there is an explicit reason. Sparring is but one element of the Composition of TK-D and Patterns another. No one does it say either is a substitute for the other or complete in itself.



I didn't say that either. I was however critiquing this one thing that you seem to feel has cross-over value and likened it to boxing principles.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Isince you were merely a gleam in your father's eye.



I believe he won gold for Yugoslavia in kumite back then, in an art you may have heard of called Shotokan Karate.


----------



## Flying Crane

Acronym said:


> There's a saying in Chinese, be careful what you wish for.
> 
> I asked for a hip twist and i got it in spades .
> 
> This delivery is so tensed that I shiver.


Is this an example, in your opinion, of excessive hip twist?


----------



## Metal

Acronym said:


> I am quoting how it's done. I have been subject to it under an ITF GM for several years.



Was that the instructor who sold you EKF gloves?




Acronym said:


> I don't know what CDK stands for



Chung Do Kwan 청도관 - one of the first 9 Taekwondo Schools in Korea. 

I'd say it's best to take a break from Youtube every now and then and go to seminars (okay, not so easy at the moment), do some research via other sources and read and listen to others carefully. And be aware of the major differences of Taekwondo's basic motion and sparring.


----------



## Acronym

Metal said:


> Was that the instructor who sold you EKF gloves?



None of your business



Metal said:


> Chung Do Kwan 청도관 - one of the first 9 Taekwondo Schools in Korea.
> 
> I'd say it's best to take a break from Youtube every now and then and go to seminars (okay, not so easy at the moment), do some research via other sources and read and listen to others carefully. And be aware of the major differences of Taekwondo's basic motion and sparring.



No need to try and denegrate me. While mr Weiss was dabbling with bullshido artist George Dillman, my father won European gold in Shotokan karate as well as national championship in Yugoslavia, the parent art of the style we are discussing.

But I'm terribly sorry I wasn't conceived yet

Wanna try and denegrate me some more?

I also boxed, and sinking backwards while delivering the strike is the very opposite of sound boxing principles.


----------



## Acronym

Flying Crane said:


> Is this an example, in your opinion, of excessive hip twist?



@Flying Crane Excessive motions in general, not hip twist per se. He slips off his own center ( which is wrong in the pattern) by tensing so massively.


----------



## Flying Crane

Acronym said:


> @Flying Crane Excessive motions in general, not hip twist per se. He slips off his own center ( which is wrong in the pattern) by tensing so massively.


We actually rotate much more than that, in my system.  We do not tense up while doing it.  But we engage a full-body rotation that is much more pronounced than that example.  It is a training mechanism to practice with what could be called “exaggerated” movement, that helps ingrain the process into the body and makes it automatic.  In actual use, the movement is smaller and does not need to be so exaggerated, and yet retains the power gained from training with big movements.  In Chinese martial arts, often it is said “move big to become small”.  This is an example of that.  

I can’t speak to what the fellow in the video was doing.  But I am just adding contrast and context in terms of what different methods exist.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Flying Crane said:


> We actually rotate much more than that, in my system.  We do not tense up while doing it.  But we engage a full-body rotation that is much more pronounced than that example.


Agree!

I like to train my 3 punches combo in 2 different ways:

1. Power training - each punch takes 1 second to complete with full body rotation.
2. Speed training - all 3 punches are done within 1 second with minimum body rotation.

Here is a good example of full body rotation. The weight is shifted from the back leg to the front leg in great detail.


----------



## Acronym

Flying Crane said:


> We actually rotate much more than that, in my system.  We do not tense up while doing it.  But we engage a full-body rotation that is much more pronounced than that example.  It is a training mechanism to practice with what could be called “exaggerated” movement, that helps ingrain the process into the body and makes it automatic.  In actual use, the movement is smaller and does not need to be so exaggerated, and yet retains the power gained from training with big movements.  In Chinese martial arts, often it is said “move big to become small”.  This is an example of that.
> 
> I can’t speak to what the fellow in the video was doing.  But I am just adding contrast and context in terms of what different methods exist.



I can't speak to your methodology without any footage but the way he is doing it, he will gas very quickly in a fight if this is the muscle memory that he is ingraining. He is overdoing it tremendously and he is not in control of his body.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If you are transfering the weight back while punching, the hole concept fails. That is what they do, whether the rear foot is placed down or on it's way to be placed down when the punch lands is irrelevant to the critique  - it has the same consequence. And they do that even when breaking.


I am sorry but you do not understand the motion, Raising and lowering the heel of the rear foot by  foot by having knee bend doe not transfer the weight  back / rearward, or at least it should not if done correctly the body should not move forward and back, only slightly up and down.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> TaeKwonDo, as you know, took out all grappling content in it's sparring format. Maybe that's why you view it as overly complicated. Things you never do tend to be complicated.


What do you know of my grappling experience? 
What do you think of this quote: " _“Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I _understand _the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.”" _


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I am sorry but you do not understand the motion, Raising and lowering the heel of the rear foot by  foot by having knee bend doe not transfer the weight  back / rearward, or at least it should not if done correctly the body should not move forward and back, only slightly up and down.



Your body has to sink back in order to put down the rear heel. It is humanly impossible not to do so.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If you are transfering the weight back while punching, the hole concept fails. .


I suggest you watch the Suska video again and see how much his head and body move rearword as he drops his heel.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I suggest you watch the Suska video again and see how much his head and body move rearword as he drops his heel.



Have a look yourself where you chest is in relation to the space coordinates when you lift the heel compared to when you put it down. It will inevitably move slightly forward during initiation and then slightly back when placing down the heel. If it doesn't even do that, then SW is an even more illogical concept, which I submit is not the case. 

There is a semi-rational concept half way although even if the heel stayed up, I would not classify it as based in boxing principles. There are too many factors missing.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> or at least it should not if done correctly the body should not move forward and back, only slightly up and down.



It went from miles away from Boxing textbooks to galaxies. The body mechanics of a baseball pitch has more in common with Boxing than Chois Sine Wave.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Your body has to sink back in order to put down the rear heel. It is humanly impossible not to do so.


I'd challenge you to look into the stack-and-tilt golf swing. You can absolutely raise and lower a heel without dropping weight into that foot.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> I'd challenge you to look into the stack-and-tilt golf swing. You can absolutely raise and lower a heel without dropping weight into that foot.



Yes but it makes no sense for a punch. The mechanics have nothing to do with boxing. Glad we put that to rest.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Yes but it makes no sense for a punch. The mechanics have nothing to do with boxing. Glad we put that to rest.


You're really stuck on boxing. You do recall this is a TKD forum, right?


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> You're really stuck on boxing. You do recall this is a TKD forum, right?



You do recall that Mr Weiss started the "Sine Wave is boxing rabbit hole"?


----------



## Acronym

My favorite Sine Wave quote uttered by my *** instructor is: "Sine Wave is physics!"

Well, duh!  Everything is physics!


----------



## Acronym

Btw, if ones reach is possibly shortened by putting the rear heel down, as Weiss said, how does that not lead to sinking backwards (some of the time)? If your reach is less than before, then you must have gone in an opposite direction,  If your fist at the same time is moving forward


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Btw, if ones reach is possibly shortened by putting the rear heel down, as Weiss said, how does that not lead to sinking backwards (some of the time)? If your reach is less than before, then you must have gone in an opposite direction,  If your fist at the same time is moving forward


The easiest way to think of this is in two static positions. Stand near a wall and do a punch with heel on the ground. Measure the distance from the fist to the wall.
Then simply raise the back heel up. For a number of reasons, the greatest being the angle of the back leg I think, your fist will move forward closer to the wall. 

Not trying to speak for Mr. Weiss, it is more complex than my simple answer in application however. There are a plethora of reasons why a person may want to have the heel off the ground and just as many why the heel needs to be planted. 

There just is not One answer to your query. I imagine every video you watch can lead to another question on the matter.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

dvcochran said:


> raise the back heel up.


Agree! If your opponent moves back, how will you be able to reach him if you don't raise your back heel up?

To assume that your opponent is always a static object is not a realistic assumption.


----------



## _Simon_

dvcochran said:


> Not trying to speak for Mr. Weiss, it is more complex than my simple answer in application however. There are a plethora of reasons why a person may want to have the heel off the ground and just as many why the heel needs to be planted.
> 
> There just is not One answer to your query. I imagine every video you watch can lead to another question on the matter.



Yep this! I just did some bagwork, tried back heel up, back heel down, felt mostly the same hitting the bag, and was still able to generate and drive power into the bag. I even stood on one leg and you can actually still generate power haha. Not overly recommended against a live opponent but who knows!

Heel up/heel down depends, and may even depend on what movement you're wanting to do AFTER the strike.

But anyways, onward!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

_Simon_ said:


> Heel up/heel down depends, ...


In some MA systems, it's wrong when you are in the

- beginner level, you punch with back heel up (you don't understand how to borrow the counter force from the ground)
- advance level, you punch with back heel down (you don't understand how to do running punch).

IMO, after the power has been generated from your back leg and reach to your hip. your back leg ground connection is no longer important.


----------



## Acronym

_Simon_ said:


> Yep this! I just did some bagwork, tried back heel up, back heel down, felt mostly the same hitting the bag,
> 
> But anyways, onward!



That in it self reveals that you aren't utiziling proper leverage. Heel up is a huge difference when done right. If all you do is Karate, you won't know that. What you write is  to be expected from someone with muscle memory that will overwrite any potential to change the muscle memory, because your body is hard-wired to punch in a certain way no matter what.


----------



## _Simon_

Acronym said:


> That in it self reveals that you aren't utiziling proper leverage. Heel up is a huge difference when done right. If all you do is Karate, you won't know that. What you write is  to be expected from someone with muscle memory that will overwrite any potential to change the muscle memory, because your body is hard-wired to punch in a certain way no matter what.



Interesting conclusion of finality you've jumped to there! ;D It was a quick play around on the bag, and moreso to say that not everything we do has to be 100% maximum power 100% of the time anyway. Like I said, I could stand on one leg and get some solid of power through knowing my own equilibrium and utilising what I call 'sinking' and tight hip wobble/compression, maintaining good structure and balance.

Each method of power generation/different body structures have pros and cons. Heel up vs heel down depends, it's a debate that seems to keep going on but they each have their own use.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

When you push a car, will your heels be up or down?

If your heels are

- down, why?
- up, why?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You do recall that Mr Weiss started the "Sine Wave is boxing rabbit hole"?



Sir, If I said that  (I think it a misquote)  I mis spoke.   What I say is the legs are used to generate punching power in Boxing.   This is done thru flexing the knees. This knee flexion is what causes the up / down (down / up / down) motion General Choi used the term "SW" to describe. (A metaphor convenient to contrast with Flat Wave and Saw Tooth Wave)   The idea of flexing the knees to generate punching power is not unique to TK-D.     You may see it as different I see it as the same notwithstanding pattern motions being stylized and exaggerated.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Btw, if ones reach is possibly shortened by putting the rear heel down, as Weiss said, how does that not lead to sinking backwards (some of the time)? If your reach is less than before, then you must have gone in an opposite direction,  If your fist at the same time is moving forward



Sir, perhaps your key is "Some of the time" Look at the Suska video again. Raising the rear heel CAN extend the reach but if flex the rear knee as you raise the heal there is no forward motion so if you straighten the knee as you drop the heel there is no rearward motion. Don't believe me - believe your own eyes.

Now, as far as "some of the time goes", if you keep the rear leg locked and raise the heel of that leg you will move forward and if  you then drop the heel you would move backward.   This is incorrect methodology.  This was specifically addressed by General Choi due to a direct question at one IIC.


----------



## Metal

Acronym said:


> None of your business



Then why did you post and ask about it on this forum instead of just giving your former instructor a call and ask about it?

Btw, you didn't answer my question in that thread.

Why did my ITF instructor give me EKF gloves?



Acronym said:


> No need to try and denegrate me. While mr Weiss was dabbling with bullshido artist George Dillman, my father won European gold in Shotokan karate as well as national championship in Yugoslavia, the parent art of the style we are discussing.
> 
> But I'm terribly sorry I wasn't conceived yet
> 
> Wanna try and denegrate me some more?
> 
> I also boxed, and sinking backwards while delivering the strike is the very opposite of sound boxing principles.



Sorry if you thought my intention was to denigrate you. My post was simply an advice to look beyond Youtube videos and if you look up your own posts, you'll realize that you post those a lot.

There are few things that need to be considered: 

- With a lot of techniques, there isn't just one 'right' way to execute them.
- Just because it's in a video and appears to be perfect in your eyes, does not mean that it's actually perfect
- Some things can't really be compared: Taekwondo Kibon Dongjak movements and a Boxer's in fight movements for example. 

Also: This is a discussion platform for Martial Arts, with this is the Taekwondo Section. Discussion does not mean repeating and insisting on your own opinion over and over and ignoring the objections and explanations of others.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, perhaps your key is "Some of the time" Look at the Suska video again. Raising the rear heel CAN extend the reach but if flex the rear knee as you raise the heal there is no forward motion so if you straighten the knee as you drop the heel there is no rearward motion. Don't believe me - believe your own eyes.
> 
> Now, as far as "some of the time goes", if you keep the rear leg locked and raise the heel of that leg you will move forward and if  you then drop the heel you would move backward.   This is incorrect methodology.  This was specifically addressed by General Choi due to a direct question at one IIC.



The knee flexion is purely symbolic if you are in the process of putting it back down when you punch. Not only have you failed to generate any extra power, since you are fixed in one position, you are guaranteeing this fixed stance by placing the heel down during the excecution phase. To add insult to injury, your reach will only be as good as the length of you arm.

You can't say that placing the heel down is purely to reach the default fighting stance in the kata, since Chois principles clearly state it in the encyclopedias that it should be placed firmly on the ground at the moment of impact, and makes no exception to this rule.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> The knee flexion is purely symbolic..............



Sir, I am sorry but you are mistaken
.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, I am sorry but you are mistaken
> .



Then why isn't sine wave taught in mitts and sparring in TaeKwonDo schools?


----------



## Acronym

Metal said:


> Then why did you post and ask about it on this forum instead of just giving your former instructor a call and ask about it?
> 
> Btw, you didn't answer my question in that thread.
> 
> Why did my ITF instructor give me EKF gloves?



You asked if It was an ITF school to my thread about my ITF instructor. What do you think the answer to that is?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> :04 is a stationary  - non stepping punch - Do San #2.   He flexes the knees and lifts the heel of the rear foot to permit this flex of the rear leg.  Is that heel lift what you refer to as "Lifting the supporting leg" ?   Further it is not so much a weight transfer thing as using the knee flex to allow you to employ the musculature of the legs to generate power in hand techniques just as boxers do.   I knowing some parts of the text there is mention of weight transfer / change to generate power but that is only one factor.



Just checked it again. He does in indeed sink back at 0:04.

If Suska can't avoid doing it, who can?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Then why isn't sine wave taught in mitts and sparring in TaeKwonDo schools?


Who says it's not?   If you flex your knees when delivering punches with your hands - that is SW.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Who says it's not?   If you flex your knees when delivering punches with your hands - that is SW.



I am saying that  because I quote: "here we twist our hips",  patterns we don't ". Uttered by a higher ranked ITF instructor than you. You will note that hip twist for punches  are removed from the encyclopedias parameters since the implementation of Sine Wave.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Just checked it again. He does in indeed sink back at 0:04.


If you think such a nominal amount if any is critically important there is nothing more to say.   BTW my take on Mr. Suska's performance is that it is outstanding and beyond what most could hope for - but not perfect.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I am saying that  because I quote: "here we twist our hips",  patterns we don't ". Uttered by a higher ranked ITF instructor than you. .


Well, suffice it to say a higher ranked ITF instructor than whom you quote taught and states :
 "The maximum body weight is applied with the motion of the turning of the hip. The large abdominal muscles are twisted  to provide additional body momentum. Thus the hip rotates in the same direction as the attacking or blocking tool. ...... " 
So if it is a question of rank prevailing whomever you quoted just lost.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Well, suffice it to say a higher ranked ITF instructor than whom you quote taught and states :
> "The maximum body weight is applied with the motion of the turning of the hip. The large abdominal muscles are twisted  to provide additional body momentum. Thus the hip rotates in the same direction as the attacking or blocking tool. ...... "
> So if it is a question of rank prevailing whomever you quoted just lost.



When and where is that quote from? If it's post SW, then Choi was going senile because he corrected someone attempting Sine Wave  saying "don't twist your hips".

And he removed hip twist from the principles parameters for punching.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> When and where is that quote from? If it's post SW, then Choi was going senile because he corrected someone attempting Sine Wave  saying "don't twist your hips".
> 
> And he removed hip twist from the principles parameters for punching.



The quote is from General Choi's encyclopedia Volume II page 33.. 

Once again if you refer to the clip where General Choi says "Don't twist your body"   (Note he says "body" not "Hips" ) I have seen it and you draw an erroneous conclusion from one snippet on the net where it seems he was critiquing an excessive shoulder upper body rotation.   I know what he taught consistently at IICs and various seminars I attended from 1990 to 2002. 
 Your "Senile" comment is also highly insulting. I have yet to see any ITF instructor (and I have trained with many) who have  been able to quote details from the text as well as he could even up until a few months before his death.   I saw him answer hundreds of questions and only refer to the text twice.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> The quote is from General Choi's encyclopedia Volume II page 33..
> 
> Once again if you refer to the clip where General Choi says "Don't twist your body"   (Note he says "body" not "Hips" ) I have seen it and you draw an erroneous conclusion from one snippet on the net where it seems he was critiquing an excessive shoulder upper body rotation.   I know what he taught consistently at IICs and various seminars I attended from 1990 to 2002.
> Your "Senile" comment is also highly insulting. I have yet to see any ITF instructor (and I have trained with many) who have  been able to quote details from the text as well as he could even up until a few months before his death.   I saw him answer hundreds of questions and only refer to the text twice.



If Choi was advocating hip twist with you and other instructors in private, yet removed it from the encyclopedias punching principles, what conclusion is to be drawn about him cognitively then? He is at the very least being inconsistent about a rather straightforward matter. One either twists their hips or they don't.


----------



## oftheherd11

Earl Weiss said:


> The problem is Acronym reads or views stuff on the net and thinks it's all accurate.   I find a lot of people draw erroneous conclusions as to when and why SW as a term versus as a movement was introduced because they (as I was) are progeny of Pioneers who had the "Level Headed " Karate / Tang Soo do method of moving .   Many of those progeny may not have learned that was not how the system had them moving until long after it was introduced. Something  hard to appreciate now in the internet and video generation.   In the 1970's  VHS / Beta Max was not really available and private internet non existent.   So, many were late to update their techniques  and assumed that when they were introduced to it this was something new. .   The difference between Acronym and I is he reads peoples opinions as to what they think happened and I lived it.




That is painfully obvious from his comments in the Hapkido thread.  Worse, he cannot see truth when it is pointed out to him.  I don't mind him living in his ignorance, just how he might affect others who seek truth and instead run into his posts.


----------



## Acronym

oftheherd11 said:


> That is painfully obvious from his comments in the Hapkido thread.  Worse, he cannot see truth when it is pointed out to him.  I don't mind him living in his ignorance, just how he might affect others who seek truth and instead run into his posts.



Yes, I'm so wrong! Tkd Volume 3


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Yes, I'm so wrong! Tkd Volume 3


You really need to get you head out of books and off the internet more. Sorry, but you are certainly making your self look prideful and quite stupid. 
Being ignorant is normal. We are all ignorant of certain things. When you do not acknowledge this fact is when you cross the line to stupid. You stepped over that line several posts back.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> You really need to get you head out of books and off the internet more. Sorry, but you are certainly making your self look prideful and quite stupid.
> Being ignorant is normal. We are all ignorant of certain things. When you do not acknowledge this fact is when you cross the line to stupid. You stepped over that line several posts back.



Guess who wrote it?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss cherry picking a quote from Choi doesn't change the fact that hip twist was deleted from principles of punching section. A point which used to exist prior to knee spring/SW in the encyclopedias.

And yes, General Choi is the author of them.

Game, set, match.


----------



## oftheherd11

Acronym said:


> Yes, I'm so wrong! Tkd Volume 3



Well, I am sure you have figured the obvious; I am not a TKD guy, although I did study it for a little over a year a long time in the past.  We did not use a sine wave then anyway, and would have thought it inefficient.  I there are those who can use a sine wave attack and make work, more power to them.  I the Hapkido I studied, I punched as I learned back then and my GM did not correct me.

But as to your post above, it looks like you are quoting someone who believes in sine wave.  So be it.  I just don't.  But I seldom put down people simply because they disagree with me.  Sadly, you on the other hand seen to wish to put down anyone who doesn't accept every little detail you espouse.  You will miss a lot of opportunities to learn with attitudes like that.


----------



## oftheherd11

Acronym said:


> Earl Weiss cherry picking a quote from Choi doesn't change the fact that hip twist was deleted from principles of punching section. A point which used to exist prior to knee spring/SW in the encyclopedias.
> 
> And yes, General Choi is the author of them.
> 
> Game, set, match.



I was going to drop out of posting to you but I can't let this go.  I don't have the foggiest idea who your GM was/is, and probably wouldn't recognize his name if you told me.  But I would think very poorly of him if he agrees with you disrespecting another GM the way you have.  He would have no honor for me to respect.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Earl Weiss cherry picking a quote from Choi doesn't change the fact that hip twist was deleted from principles of punching section. A point which used to exist prior to knee spring/SW in the encyclopedias.
> 
> And yes, General Choi is the author of them.
> 
> Game, set, match.



Keep digging the hole. It is already pretty deep. 

When I said ‘you’ I meant You @Acronym. Is that clear enough for you?


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Keep digging the hole. It is already pretty deep.
> 
> When I said ‘you’ I meant You @Acronym. Is that clear enough for you?



What are these things I'm wrong about?

I was previously challenged to produce encyclopedia footage of Karate blocks in the TKD encyclopedia and did so, from the very first Korean addition.


----------



## dvcochran

oftheherd11 said:


> I was going to drop out of posting to you but I can't let this go.  I don't have the foggiest idea who your GM was/is, and probably wouldn't recognize his name if you told me.  But I would think very poorly of him if he agrees with you disrespecting another GM the way you have.  He would have no honor for me to respect.


His ‘instructor’ is Grandmaster YouTube.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> His ‘instructor’ is Grandmaster YouTube.



My grandmaster is a thing called facts. But my red belt apparently renders them false.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> My grandmaster is a thing called facts. But my red belt apparently renders them false.


Hmm, a red belt arguing with a well known 9th Dan and other high ranking people. Smart. 

For your sake I hope your red belt is legitimate and well earned. You certainly don’t make it sound that way.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If Choi was advocating hip twist with you and other instructors in private, yet removed it from the encyclopedias punching principles, what conclusion is to be drawn about him cognitively then? He is at the very least being inconsistent about a rather straightforward matter. One either twists their hips or they don't.


Sir, I suggest you read my post gain >>>> The quote is from General Choi's encyclopedia Volume II page 33..<<<<<<<< Where I give you volume and page of the text that contains the >>>The large abdominal muscles are twisted to provide additional body momentum. Thus the hip rotates in the same direction as the attacking or blocking tool. ...... "<<< This is the same encyclopedia that contains SW, so your premise is faulty.   Sorry I see you admitted error at post #111. I will keep this here in case anyone misses it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Earl Weiss cherry picking a quote from Choi doesn't change the fact that hip twist was deleted from principles of punching section. A point which used to exist prior to knee spring/SW in the encyclopedias.
> 
> And yes, General Choi is the author of them.
> 
> Game, set, match.


Sir, Now, I am confused - At post 111 you provide a link to Volume III which again mentions the hip twist yet you still think you are correct?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> You do recall that Mr Weiss started the "Sine Wave is boxing rabbit hole"?


Yes, and you may recall that you're replying to someone else, and I didn't tie things to boxing (nor, really, did he tie it to boxing in the manner you're implying).


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> That in it self reveals that you aren't utiziling proper leverage. Heel up is a huge difference when done right. If all you do is Karate, you won't know that. What you write is  to be expected from someone with muscle memory that will overwrite any potential to change the muscle memory, because your body is hard-wired to punch in a certain way no matter what.


And your response tells me much about what you don't understand of those mechanics. I've no idea what's taught in TKD (one of the arts I've never dabbled in), but there's not such a dramatic difference between down and up, when you use good mechanics for each.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Metal said:


> Discussion does not mean repeating and insisting on your own opinion over and over and ignoring the objections and explanations of others.


To him, it kinda does.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> You asked if It was an ITF school to my thread about my ITF instructor. What do you think the answer to that is?


Probably something like "none of your business".


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> If Choi was advocating hip twist with you and other instructors in private, yet removed it from the encyclopedias punching principles, what conclusion is to be drawn about him cognitively then? He is at the very least being inconsistent about a rather straightforward matter. One either twists their hips or they don't.


And here we have it. You've decided something. And it doesn't matter what the facts are, nor what anyone else says or has said about it. You believe the sine wave to be one specific thing, and that this is what was meant by the snippets you quote from the manual. If the person mostly responsible for that manual explained it differently than you interpreted the manual, he's the one who's wrong - not you.

Your arrogance is impressive.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Now, I am confused - At post 111 you provide a link to Volume III which again mentions the hip twist yet you still think you are correct?



It does not mention a hip twist. It says jerk the hip and abdomen.

Please provide the full context for the quote you cherry picked. Page 33 of the free volume online does not have your quote


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> And here we have it. You've decided something. And it doesn't matter what the facts are, nor what anyone else says or has said about it. You believe the sine wave to be one specific thing, and that this is what was meant by the snippets you quote from the manual. If the person mostly responsible for that manual explained it differently than you interpreted the manual, he's the one who's wrong - not you.
> 
> Your arrogance is impressive.



He's wrong, as I'm about to show you all yet again. The victory speech you gave here was premature.


----------



## Acronym

Stuart Anslow makes the following classifications:

*
Rayners Lane Taekwon-do Academy

there are now three main variations on the ITF tuls (when I refer to ITF I am not referring to any organisation, but to the style of Taekwon-do, ie. Chang-hon, which is mostly referred to as 'ITF style' whether correct or not)

These three main variations can be seen as:

1.Very old, almost Karate type performance - emphasising lots of hip twist, off-turned shoulders & no knee-spring or sine-wave motions

2.Original, emphasising both hip twist & knee spring, but not sine-wave per se.

3.New, emphasising little or no hip twist or knee spring & lots of sine wave (as it is now taught!)*


----------



## Acronym

The quote Earl Weiss cherry picked has the headline: Mass (zilyang). General Choi did lots of writings on physics by simply quoting or paraphrasing someone else, including Newton.

The reference I gave were parameters for the actual punching entitled "common principles".


----------



## dvcochran

gpseymour said:


> And here we have it. You've decided something. And it doesn't matter what the facts are, nor what anyone else says or has said about it. You believe the sine wave to be one specific thing, and that this is what was meant by the snippets you quote from the manual. If the person mostly responsible for that manual explained it differently than you interpreted the manual, he's the one who's wrong - not you.
> 
> Your arrogance is impressive.


Calling it arrogance is being nice.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> The quote Earl Weiss cherry picked has the headline: Mass (zilyang). General Choi did lots of writings on physics by simply quoting or paraphrasing someone else, including Newton.
> 
> The reference I gave were parameters for the actual punching entitled "common principles".



Physics, while fully accepted as a principal, is still a theory. Anyone applying a part of the principal is 'using Physics'. General Choi was no different. 
My best guess with you is that several things have gotten lost in translation, you then made your own conclusions and refuse to listen to sound reason and vast amounts of direct experience. 
Compound that with little real world application and it is easy to see how you are lost as a goose. 

Refer back to my posts #121 and little lower.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Calling it arrogance is being nice.



I would prefer the term straight-shooter. To single out rank in all of this is morally abhorrent. My attitude is abrasive regardless of who'm I'm addressing, and it doesn't make it any more wrong (if one takes that view) than if I talked this way to a hobo on the street.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Physics, while fully accepted as a principal, is still a theory. Anyone applying a part of the principal is 'using Physics'. General Choi was no different..



My point is that Choi's "Theory of power" was quoting and paraphrasing someone elses formulas and theories. This seems to be a pattern in his line of work, if you know what I'm saying


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> My point is that Choi's "Theory of power" was quoting and paraphrasing someone elses formulas and theories. This seems to be a pattern in his line of work, if you know what I'm saying


Exactly my point to referencing physics. Everyone does it when it applies to the topic. That does not create an opportunity to nit pick about it.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I would prefer the term straight-shooter. To single out rank in all of this is morally abhorrent. My attitude is abrasive regardless of who'm I'm addressing, and it doesn't make it any more wrong (if one takes that view) than if I talked this way to a hobo on the street.


I am much the same way. But I have the good sense to see when I am wrong. 

Like I said before, you crossed that line several posts back.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Exactly my point to referencing physics. Everyone does it when it applies to the topic. That does not create an opportunity to nit pick about it.



I do nitpick about people within the ITF saying that he added a theory a power to TaeKwonDo, when he did nothing but reference existing theories. Theories most educated people knew about anyway.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Just try to understand the term SW and hip twist, will you call this SW and hip twist?


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> I am much the same way. But I have the good sense to see when I am wrong.
> .



Well I am not wrong. Jerking and twisting is not neccesarily the same thing.


----------



## Acronym

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Just try to understand the term SW and hip twist, will you call this SW and hip twist?



No. In the sitting stance, the mechanics for SW is down - up - down.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I do nitpick about people within the ITF saying that he added a theory a power to TaeKwonDo, when he did nothing but reference existing theories. Theories most educated people knew about anyway.


How many posts have you made talking about this? Yea, everyone would say you are nit picking.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> How many posts have you made talking about this? .



First one


----------



## Acronym

I will reference this once again.

If General Choi wanted twisting *of any kind *when punching, he wouldn't use the term body, when saying: don't twist your body. He would instead say don't twist your shoulders or whatever it is he is objecting to


----------



## Acronym

SW advocates are so embarrassed by his hip twist removal that they will go to any lengths, including cherry-picking old quotes out of context to try and argue that it is still present.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I will reference this once again.
> 
> If General Choi wanted twisting *of any kind *when punching, he wouldn't use the term body, when saying: don't twist your body. He would instead say don't twist your shoulders or whatever it is he is objecting to


Now you are just crossing some weird semantics line. Who are you or I so speak for the General? More so to try and change what he is saying?


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Now you are just crossing some weird semantics line. Who are you or I so speak for the General? More so to try and change what he is saying?



Body means everything. I assume he knows the meaning of the words. He did have an undergraduate degree in English


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> I would prefer the term straight-shooter. To single out rank in all of this is morally abhorrent. My attitude is abrasive regardless of who'm I'm addressing, and it doesn't make it any more wrong (if one takes that view) than if I talked this way to a hobo on the street.


I'd only use the term "straight shooter" where the person appears to be speaking truth others wouldn't. You seem to be trying to present your arguments as reasoned, by ignoring anything that might conflict and reorting to insults to deflect. Not much straight about that shooting.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> My point is that Choi's "Theory of power" was quoting and paraphrasing someone elses formulas and theories. This seems to be a pattern in his line of work, if you know what I'm saying


Quoting others is a good practice, where it lets folks go back and look at other sources or otherwise facilitates comprehension. There's nothing especially useful in a brand new phrase, where an existing one already does that job.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> I'd only use the term "straight shooter" where the person appears to be speaking truth others wouldn't. You seem to be trying to present your arguments as reasoned, by ignoring anything that might conflict and reorting to insults to deflect. Not much straight about that shooting.



Does it look to you from the clip I just referenced that General Choi wanted twisting of the hip for punches? Does it look to you that he wants it when he demonstrates his concept himself?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> I will reference this once again.
> 
> If General Choi wanted twisting *of any kind *when punching, he wouldn't use the term body, when saying: don't twist your body. He would instead say don't twist your shoulders or whatever it is he is objecting to


What I find interesting is that I have no idea what the heck sine wave is in this context, but even I can see that the term "don't twist your body" could have several meanings in this context. It's not as black-and-white as you make out.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Does it look to you from the clip I just referenced that General Choi wanted twisting of the hip for punches? Does it look to you that he wants it when he demonstrates his concept himself?


I'd have to look at a larger body of his teaching, and hear what he taught from folks who learned from him. Thus far, the only person I know of with the latter experience has stated quite clearly that Gen. Choi taught hip twist for as long as he was teaching.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> What I find interesting is that I have no idea what the heck sine wave is in this context, but even I can see that the term "don't twist your body" could have several meanings in this context. It's not as black-and-white as you make out.



If he meant shoulders, he would have said shoulders. He knows the word for shoulders in english.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> I'd have to look at a larger body of his teaching, and hear what he taught from folks who learned from him. Thus far, the only person I know of with the latter experience has stated quite clearly that Gen. Choi taught hip twist for as long as he was teaching.



Which could be a sign of dementia. A condition characterized by confusion, conflictedness and ambiguity. Or they misunderstood the context he was talking about.

Or somebody else was running the show behind the scenes in opposition to Choi and removed hip twist from the punching principles of his own encyclopedia

I would bet on explanation two followed by the first one. The last one extremely far fetched


----------



## Acronym

You tell me whether this is evidence of dementia or not:

Choi described the olympic TKD style as a bunch of imposters in one interview, then in another one how happy he was to see TKD in the olympics and that belts should transfer up until 4th dan.

Choi said in one lecture that you should not retract your hand after punching . "that's karate!"

Then in his own book advocating retracting the hand after punching in the encyclopedia as one of the basic principles of punching (1987).


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> You tell me whether this is evidence of dementia or not:
> 
> Choi described the olympic TKD style as a bunch of imposters in one interview, then in another one how happy he was to see TKD in the olympics and that belts should transfer up until 4th dan.
> 
> Choi said in one lecture that you should not retract your hand after punching . "that's karate!"
> 
> Then in his own book advocating retracting the hand after punching in the encyclopedia as one of the basic principles of punching (1987).



Nope. I've seen statements that had a similar appearance of contradiction from folks who were clearly not suffering from dementia. Sometimes context clears it up, sometimes folks change their minds, and sometimes they're just not good at communicating a given idea.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Nope. I've seen statements that had a similar appearance of contradiction from folks who were clearly not suffering from dementia. Sometimes context clears it up, sometimes folks change their minds, and sometimes they're just not good at communicating a given idea.



I don't consider it conclusive, but I don't believe for a moment that he was a phony. He caused himself a lot of problems standing up for things he believed in. So I fully believe Choi believed the things he said, at the time he said them. Taken collectively however, he does give the impression of either being a confused and conflicted elderly person, or someone suffering from massive mood swings and shifting opinions.

The fact that he could remember events and dates long ago is not in anyway incompatible with being senile, as Weiss suggested.


----------



## Acronym

I might add that while I respect the Olympic branch of TKD, I consider it a betrayal to loyal ITFers for Choi to embrace the Kukkiwon after decades of bashing them.

Indeed, part of the reason I hate his 180 degree turn is due to the treatment he and his federation were subjected to, by both kicking him out and banning ITF schools in South Korea, and rewriting and erasing history


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> It does not mention a hip twist. It says jerk the hip and abdomen.
> 
> Please provide the full context for the quote you cherry picked. Page 33 of the free volume online does not have your quote


Sir, see volume Volume  II under "Mass" in my first edition but you  can also look at Vol 3 you linked to. Now you want to differentiate "jerk" and "twist" but Volume  II uses the term "Twist"   I don't know what site you have linked to for the edition you are using.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> The quote Earl Weiss cherry picked has the headline: Mass (zilyang). General Choi did lots of writings on physics by simply quoting or paraphrasing someone else, including Newton.
> 
> The reference I gave were parameters for the actual punching entitled "common principles".


Sir, if you think there is a difference between the "Twist" and "Jerk' so be it Please explain what you think he meant by "Jerk" .


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> .
> 
> The fact that he could remember events and dates long ago is not in anyway incompatible with being senile, as Weiss suggested.


Sir, I never said any such thing bout his recall of events and dates long ago. It was his detailed recollection of items in the text.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> The quote Earl Weiss cherry picked has the headline: Mass (zilyang). General Choi did lots of writings on physics by simply quoting or paraphrasing someone else, including Newton.
> 
> .


Sir, I see you...  pull snippets from internet posts and have semantic issues with "Jerk' and "Twist"   but when I pull something from the text to refute a claim that hip twist was eliminated when SW was introduced coupled with over 150 classroom hours with the author I am cherry picking.  OK - got it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I would prefer the term straight-shooter. To single out rank in all of this is morally abhorrent. .


Sir, was it morally abhorrent when you claimed  to quote some authority that should prevail over what I said because he outranked me?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, I see you...  pull snippets from internet posts and have semantic issues with "Jerk' and "Twist"   but when I pull something from the text to refute a claim that hip twist was eliminated when SW was introduced coupled with over 150 classroom hours with the author I am cherry picking.  OK - got it.



Mr Weiss, sir, your quote was not pertaining to the context discussed. You know full well what the principles of punching read prior to the inclusion of knee spring, and that they were the same as for Shotokan Karate.

I don't think it's hard to speculate what he meant by jerking the hip and abdomen for any experienced martial artist. A sudden tensing/crunching of the stomach prior to delivering a strike is a well known resource used to generate kinetic energy, regardless of whether the hip twists or not.

The definition for the verb jerk is: "_a quick, sharp, sudden movement".
_
As you know, there are at least two ways we punch in TaeKwonDo classes, and we are debating the way done in the tuls, as referenced in the encyclopedias section *Principles Of Punching*. It is very evident that it does not reference the way we punch on mitts, since there is no mention of guard, set-ups, sparring tactics, etc.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, was it morally abhorrent when you claimed  to quote some authority that should prevail over what I said because he outranked me?



Not at all, but to take exception with the way I'm addressing you simply because you are a GM is morally abhorrent, and backfires on the person preaching morality.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> coupled with over 150 classroom hours with the author I am cherry picking.  OK - got it.



General Choi emphasizing hip twist is in and of itself uncontroversial. If he emphasized it as it relates to Sine Wave and punching, it is however a problem. A problem for the students trying to make sense of his mechanics, where he clearly does not want his students to twist their body when punching, and does not twist himself in his own exhibits


----------



## Acronym

For those who believe Mr Weiss over me

Here's is a pattern delivery approved by General Choi himself.

Zero hip twist punching...


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> General Choi emphasizing hip twist is in and of itself uncontroversial. If he emphasized it as it relates to Sine Wave and punching, it is however a problem. A problem for the students trying to make sense of his mechanics, where he clearly does not want his students to twist their body when punching, and does not twist himself in his own exhibits


Even in his quick, casual demonstration in the video you posted, there is hip twist.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> For those who believe Mr Weiss over me
> 
> Here's is a pattern delivery approved by General Choi himself.
> 
> Zero hip twist punching...


Not zero, to my eyes.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Not zero, to my eyes.



Not only is it void of hip twist, it lacks any power output whatsoever. General Choi naturally eats it up since the Karate fundamentals have been eradicated. His mission has been accomplished.

My next book should be titled: *Sine Wave; the killing of the hip twist. A tale of Karate extinction.*


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Not zero, to my eyes.



Close to zero. He had a slip up once, in the third sequence, and almost threw a reasonable punch. And another slip up close to the end.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Even in his quick, casual demonstration in the video you posted, there is hip twist.



Low high low. that's it.

I guess the originator forgot the part where you twist the hips.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> For those who believe Mr Weiss over me
> 
> Here's is a pattern delivery approved by General Choi himself.
> 
> Zero hip twist punching...


Ah, so you're blind. This all makes a lot more sense now.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Ah, so you're blind. This all makes a lot more sense now.



You think that's a good display of hip twist?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> You think that's a good display of hip twist?


Good display, not according to my style. But it's definitely there.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Good display, not according to my style. But it's definitely there.



Not consistently it isn't.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Not consistently it isn't.


So you went from zero, to close to zero, to not being consistent.


----------



## Metal

Acronym said:


> Not only is it void of hip twist, it lacks any power output whatsoever. General Choi naturally eats it up since the Karate fundamentals have been eradicated. His mission has been accomplished.
> 
> My next book should be titled: *Sine Wave; the killing of the hip twist. A tale of Karate extinction.*



So what was the title of your last book? ;-)

And what's your age and for how long have you been learning Taekwon-Do?

With your inability to discuss topics properly, listen to and understand what others are saying, failure to properly analyze movements in videos - sorry for being rude, but those are things you need to work on - you at least got one Choi Hong Hi's intentions right. His mission was to make Taekwon-Do a purely Korean art and eradicate traces of Karate. And he wanted his Taekwondo-Do to be different from the KTA's (and then later Kukkiwon) Taekwondo. So that everyone could easily distinguish 'both' versions of Taekwondo and point out which one is real and which ones are the 'imitators'.

Eradicating traces of Karate influence has been the same for other branches of Taekwondo though.

And for Choi the sine-wave movements was the last big step after creating an own set of forms, creating and improving an own uniform design, as well as changing the Terminology from Sino-Korean to pure Korean. One step to distinguish Choi's Taekwon-Do from Karate was reducing the hip twist. Excessive hip twist is Karate. According to Choi, Taekwon-Do needs only a minimal hip twist, as he would call it 'jerk'.

Is the hip twist absent in the video of Choi Hong Hi explaining the correct sinewave motion?
Yes!

Is this a perfect demonstration of how to perform techniques or how to move when performing a Teul?
No!

His intention in that short clip is pointing out the basic principles of the sinewave motion, nothing more. What else do you wanna see in this clip? That his punches aren't powerful? That there's no proper focus in his techniques?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Not consistently it isn't.


I think I recall that you have 4 years of instruction in TKD. Assuming your schedule was like most (2-5 hours/week) during that time, it's unsurprising you don't see the hip twist. It's not much, but it's there. Subtleties are hard to learn to see.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> For those who believe Mr Weiss over me
> 
> Here's is a pattern delivery approved by General Choi himself.
> 
> Zero hip twist punching...


Sir, You must be looking at a different video. GM Lu's hip moves in the direction of the punch. I will leave it for others to state what they see  (one person already has) . If you see this and  you don't think this is "Hip Twist" them perhaps you misunderstand what hip twist means.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Low high low. that's it.
> 
> I guess the originator forgot the part where you twist the hips.



So, an instructor demonstrates to make a certain point and you forget everything else they teach.   Here is a  true story I tell my students. Friend had a truck driving school with simulators which taught student how to shift.   Then they would go out in the yard to do it on actual trucks they drove.   Students starts driving and shifting without steering.   Instructor starts yelling at the student saying "you have to steer". Student says "I didn't have to steer on that thing inside".   Same, if I teach a sparring technique and have my hands down so I can see students and they can hear me better, someone could see the clip and claim I am teaching them to spar with my hands down.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Earl Weiss said:


> So, an instructor demonstrates to make a certain point and you forget everything else they teach.   Here is a  true story I tell my students. Friend had a truck driving school with simulators which taught student how to shift.   Then they would go out in the yard to do it on actual trucks they drove.   Students starts driving and shifting without steering.   Instructor starts yelling at the student saying "you have to steer". Student says "I didn't have to steer on that thing inside".   Same, if I teach a sparring technique and have my hands down so I can see students and they can hear me better, someone could see the clip and claim I am teaching them to spar with my hands down.


Agreed. Most demonstrations (and many drills) focus on specific principles, so may (purposely or not) leave others out. There are footwork drills I've done that specfically require the hands down, so you HAVE to move enough to get out of the way of the "attack".


----------



## Acronym

Metal said:


> His intention in that short clip is pointing out the basic principles of the sinewave motion, nothing more.



And they do not contain hip twist as you can see. Performers kept it in at varying degrees despite the fact that he removed it from his own parameters.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> So, an instructor demonstrates to make a certain point and you forget everything else they teach.   Here is a  true story I tell my students. Friend had a truck driving school with simulators which taught student how to shift.   Then they would go out in the yard to do it on actual trucks they drove.   Students starts driving and shifting without steering.   Instructor starts yelling at the student saying "you have to steer". Student says "I didn't have to steer on that thing inside".   Same, if I teach a sparring technique and have my hands down so I can see students and they can hear me better, someone could see the clip and claim I am teaching them to spar with my hands down.



I do not believe for a moment that General Choi advocated hip twisting punches for Sine Wave in his instructor seminars. Are you going to tell us that he did?


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> I think I recall that you have 4 years of instruction in TKD. Assuming your schedule was like most (2-5 hours/week) during that time, it's unsurprising you don't see the hip twist. It's not much, but it's there. Subtleties are hard to learn to see.



There are several times it's not there at all.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> There are several times it's not there at all.


There are times he's isolating specific components for demonstration, so yes. But that's not the same as the "zero" you earlier claimed. I can demonstrate parts of a punch, too, and each "part" leaves out part of the mechanics. That in no way supposes that I don't encourage or teach those mechanics. I've even had students (who were having trouble with a specific part of the punch) purposely leave out other parts they were using to compensate for the lack. Where you see him trying to teach how the sine wave movement works, he may in fact purposely be limiting hip twist so folks will focus on the part he's trying to correct.


----------



## Metal

Acronym said:


> And they do not contain hip twist as you can see. Performers kept it in at varying degrees despite the fact that he removed it from his own parameters.



[IRONY]So the correct way to perform ITF Taekwon-Do is wearing leather shoes, a nice shirt and dress pants? And there is no power nor speed in the correct punching and blocking when applying the SineWave?

It's crazy that so many Masters didn't notice and realize all this. Thanks for finding valuable sources on YouTube and spreading the truth!


[/IRONY]


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. Most demonstrations (and many drills) focus on specific principles, so may (purposely or not) leave others out. There are footwork drills I've done that specfically require the hands down, so you HAVE to move enough to get out of the way of the "attack".



 The exhibit wasn't about footwork but it was about punching. Your analogy fails. You should think about a career as lawyer because the excuses for General Chois complete disregard for hip twist are getting more and more elaborate.


----------



## Metal

Acronym said:


> The exhibit wasn't about footwork but it was about punching. Your analogy fails. [...]



You don't think the exhibit was about moving the body down before going up and then going down again?
Instead of just raising and then lowering the body?

Also he's showing a block. And different stances... I don't understand how this was about punching.


----------



## Acronym

Metal said:


> You don't think the exhibit was about moving the body down before going up and then going down again?
> Instead of just raising and then lowering the body?
> 
> Also he's showing a block. And different stances... I don't understand how this was about punching.



If hip twist was an automatic part of that motion for him, he would do it even if the point raised was about sinking and raising, since It would be part of his muscle memory.  His exhibit is very incriminating evidence.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> For those who believe Mr Weiss over me
> 
> Here's is a pattern delivery approved by General Choi himself.
> 
> Zero hip twist punching...


The quickest and easiest way to verify this is to simply watch the belt. The belt he is wearing is relatively short and appears rather stiff, possibly newer. Regardless, the belt still moves as a reaction to the hip twist motion.

Your assertion is completely false.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> And they do not contain hip twist as you can see. Performers kept it in at varying degrees despite the fact that he removed it from his own parameters.


No sir, he did not. You are mistaken.   As I have pointed out the text still mentions it  and as you can see of the  video you post with GM Lu it's still there. I have no idea where you got this mistaken impression from aside from stating someone senior to me told you so.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I do not believe for a moment that General Choi advocated hip twisting punches for Sine Wave in his instructor seminars. Are you going to tell us that he did?


There is no doubt about it .   He covered it several times in each Instructor course.   I took notes during each IIC I attended.   This entry appears several times.   If you don't "believe" it  them you must have interviewed several people with different experience.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> And they do not contain hip twist as you can see. Performers kept it in at varying degrees despite the fact that he removed it from his own parameters.


Sir, This is totally false. I am acquainted with many performers in the videos with the Black background and to somehow claim they kept something General Choi removed is disingenuous.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If hip twist was an automatic part of that motion for him, he would do it even if the point raised was about sinking and raising, since It would be part of his muscle memory.  His exhibit is very incriminating evidence.


Sir, do you just make this stuff up on the spur of the moment or do these fabrications take you a little time to come up with?   I think most if not all instructors on here will state that they isolate motions all the time when teaching - some already have. 
While I have been trying to provide you with information establishing your  rash generalizations based on limited observations are erroneous I am quickly coming to the conclusion it's hopeless.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, do you just make this stuff up on the spur of the moment or do these fabrications take you a little time to come up with?   .



You were the one erroneously equating "jerking the hip and abdomen" with twisting it, and then moved on. 

If he meant twist, he would have written twist. But nothing is to going to convince you. If it doesn't say what you want it to say, you will reconstruct it to do so, or pull a quote out of context. 

So, I will bow out.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> If hip twist was an automatic part of that motion for him, he would do it even if the point raised was about sinking and raising, since It would be part of his muscle memory.  His exhibit is very incriminating evidence.


Ah, since you can't separate motions and use them independently, nobody can. Got it.


----------



## Acronym

And "don't twist your body" was reconstructed by the lawyer to mean don't twist your shoulders.

There, I''m done.


----------



## Flying Crane

Acronym said:


> But nothing is to going to convince you. If it doesn't say what you want it to say, you will reconstruct it to do so, or pull a quote out of context.
> .


Pot, meet Kettle...


----------



## Acronym

Flying Crane said:


> Pot, meet Kettle...



If a cop orders you to not move your body, would you still move your hips?

I am done with Earl but I can still have fun with his followers in their hopeless cause.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You were the one erroneously equating "jerking the hip and abdomen" with twisting it, and then moved on.
> 
> If he meant twist, he would have written twist. But nothing is to going to convince you. If it doesn't say what you want it to say, you will reconstruct it to do so, or pull a quote out of context.
> 
> So, I will bow out.


1. It was not erroneous. You make a distinction without a difference.
2. How do you know what he meant and what he had written? You are saying he eliminated "Twist" when he instituted SW so I expect you will point me to an earlier text where Hip twist was specified and does not appear in the later text.  Please let us know.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If a cop orders you to not move your body, would you still move your hips?
> 
> I am done with Earl but I can still have fun with his followers in their hopeless cause.


Sir, For the record.  I do not consider any on this thread to be my "Follower".   Some it seems are not even TKD people, and others not ITF people and have come to the same conclusion about your erroneous conclusions  based on limited knowledge and experience.    Some time ago at an IIC conducted  after General Choi's death some of the Instructors were debating a difference between "Stamping"  and "Stomping"   Not surprisingly English / American was not their first language. Perhaps some of your issues with the language in the text is based on the same issue.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, For the record.  I do not consider any on this thread to be my "Follower".   Some it seems are not even TKD people, and others not ITF people and have come to the same conclusion about your erroneous conclusions  based on limited knowledge and experience.    Some time ago at an IIC conducted  after General Choi's death some of the Instructors were debating a difference between "Stamping"  and "Stomping"   Not surprisingly English / American was not their first language. Perhaps some of your issues with the language in the text is based on the same issue.



Well I am a TKD man as you know and we probably agree on 99% of the topics of ITF and TKD, but not this one.

Did you read the article I linked by Stuart Anslow which chronicles the evolution of punching mechanics in Chang Hon? Did you read the final stage of its evolution: "Little to no hip twist."?

This is actually a bigger problem for you than it is for me because both of you are high ranking instructors that have the responsibility of grading students. And one of you got it wrong.


----------



## Acronym

I happen to think both of you are wrong but that Stuart is closer to the truth. He simply needs to delete the word "little"


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> ? You are saying he eliminated "Twist" when he instituted SW so I expect you will point me to an earlier text where Hip twist was specified and does not appear in the later text.  Please let us know.



We need a Korean translator for the first encyclopedia.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> There is no doubt about it .   He covered it several times in each Instructor course.   I took notes during each IIC I attended.   This entry appears several times.   If you don't "believe" it  them you must have interviewed several people with different experience.



Yet no mention of that to the student that the tried to manually get to do a SW motion, and a clear don't twist your body description. 

I find that highly curious.


----------



## Acronym

Here's proof. Mr Weiss' quote about twisting the attacking tool used to be in punching technique principles got replaced by knee spring.

*2 was instead moved to the next page in the newer edition

Old one...







Knee spring replacement...







"Twisting" moved to general attack (kicks included


*2


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> You were the one erroneously equating "jerking the hip and abdomen" with twisting it, and then moved on.
> 
> If he meant twist, he would have written twist. But nothing is to going to convince you. If it doesn't say what you want it to say, you will reconstruct it to do so, or pull a quote out of context.
> 
> So, I will bow out.


You are definitely the pot calling the kettle black here. Dude you are so far into stupid I officially feel sorry for you. 

I use 'dude' since you have repeatedly proven you deserve no respect. Much the opposite even though great respect and patience has been shown to you. 
It is well past time for you to eat your humble pie and listen and learn.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> You are definitely the pot calling the kettle black here. Dude you are so far into stupid I officially feel sorry for you.
> 
> I use 'dude' since you have repeatedly proven you deserve no respect. Much the opposite even though great respect and patience has been shown to you.
> It is well past time for you to eat your humble pie and listen and learn.



I am not going to address ad hominem attacks.


----------



## Acronym

,


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I am not going to address ad hominem attacks.


Fine, whatever. As long as you stop addressing the other stuff you are arguing against; in complete futility by the way.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Fine, whatever. As long as you stop addressing the other stuff you are arguing against; in complete futility by the way.



What is your rank in ITF?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Did you read the article I linked by Stuart Anslow which chronicles the evolution of punching mechanics in Chang Hon? Did you read the final stage of its evolution: "Little to no hip twist."?


I am well acquainted with Mr. Anslow. He has published a couple of dozen articles on mine in his magazine. I have the utmost respect for him. Suffice it to say we do not agree on everything.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> What is your rank in ITF?


No rank in ITF although I have worked out with ITF folks a good bit. And I have the encyclopedia; compliments of Mr. Weiss I believe.
 A lot of your failed argument is universal in Tae Kwon Do.

What is your rank; in anything?
What high level instructors have you trained with? No, change that. What instructors of any recognized black belt level have you trained with period? In person, in a real physical dojo/dojang. Not on YouTube or similar.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Here's proof. Mr Weiss' quote about twisting the attacking tool used to be in punching technique principles got replaced by knee spring.


Sorry, read this 5 times and have no idea what you are talking about.   "Twisting the attacking tool" refers to the "Tool"  like the forefist or footsword and has nothing to so with the motion of the hips or knee spring.   Raising and Lowering the hips was referenced in the 1972 Text   and the term Knee spring was referenced later. 1983 Edition Vol II (Same edition Sine wave terminology forts used still states under "Hand Techniques"  (page 16)   "1 Turn the Hip and abdomen"   etc as stated above.   Now, are you going to complaint that "Turn the Hip" is different than " Twist the hip"   

Contrary to what you indicated it was not    turning  the hip (Hip twist) was not removed   (Seems it was always called "Turn the hip". )


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Yet no mention of that to the student that the tried to manually get to do a SW motion, and a clear don't twist your body description.
> 
> I find that highly curious.


Curious only do to your limited   experience. But not unique. I experienced numerous instances where people would say or think "That must be OK because General Choi did not correct it. "    I may have thought the same initially but later realized he had a certain amount of material to get through and if he tried to fix everything we would never finish.  I came to realize he "Put out the hottest fires first" and at successive course where performance seemed to improve across the board details covered became more intricate.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> We need a Korean translator for the first encyclopedia.


What year would that have been published?   As far as i know the first edition of the 15 Volume encyclopedia was in English.


----------



## dvcochran

Earl Weiss said:


> Curious only do to your limited   experience. But not unique. I experienced numerous instances where people would say or think "That must be OK because General Choi did not correct it. "    I may have thought the same initially but later realized he had a certain amount of material to get through and if he tried to fix everything we would never finish.  I came to realize he "Put out the hottest fires first" and at successive course where performance seemed to improve across the board details covered became more intricate.



Not trying to teach everything at one time is very hard for some new instructors to learn. Been there myself. 
I find the biggest challenge sometimes is just conveying material in a way(s) that everyone can understand and benefit from. Too many times I have thought "I will just show them" only to find that it just doesn't work for everyone. People learn differently.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> ,


That may be your most thoughtful post.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Earl Weiss said:


> Curious only do to your limited   experience. But not unique. I experienced numerous instances where people would say or think "That must be OK because General Choi did not correct it. "    I may have thought the same initially but later realized he had a certain amount of material to get through and if he tried to fix everything we would never finish.  I came to realize he "Put out the hottest fires first" and at successive course where performance seemed to improve across the board details covered became more intricate.


This is a common issue for all instructors. Can’t fix everything you see at the same time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

dvcochran said:


> Not trying to teach everything at one time is very hard for some new instructors to learn. Been there myself.
> I find the biggest challenge sometimes is just conveying material in a way(s) that everyone can understand and benefit from. Too many times I have thought "I will just show them" only to find that it just doesn't work for everyone. People learn differently.


And every person will see something slightly different in the demonstration.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sorry, read this 5 times and have no idea what you are talking about.   "Twisting the attacking tool" refers to the "Tool"  like the forefist or footsword and has nothing to so with the motion of the hips or knee spring.   Raising and Lowering the hips was referenced in the 1972 Text   and the term Knee spring was referenced later. 1983 Edition Vol II (Same edition Sine wave terminology forts used still states under "Hand Techniques"  (page 16)   "1 Turn the Hip and abdomen"   etc as stated above.   Now, are you going to complaint that "Turn the Hip" is different than " Twist the hip"
> 
> Contrary to what you indicated it was not    turning  the hip (Hip twist) was not removed   (Seems it was always called "Turn the hip". )



Turn the hip only refers to where you are pointed towards


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Curious only do to your limited   experience. But not unique. I experienced numerous instances where people would say or think "That must be OK because General Choi did not correct it. "    I may have thought the same initially but later realized he had a certain amount of material to get through and if he tried to fix everything we would never finish.  I came to realize he "Put out the hottest fires first" and at successive course where performance seemed to improve across the board details covered became more intricate.



Certain amount of material to get through? There is no more to this particular theory of his but a possible hip twist, which he left out, suspiciously.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I am well acquainted with Mr. Anslow. He has published a couple of dozen articles on mine in his magazine. I have the utmost respect for him. Suffice it to say we do not agree on everything.



So your standpoint is that SW, as taught by General Choi, has the same amount hip twist as before any knee spring?


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> This is a common issue for all instructors. Can’t fix everything you see at the same time.



Hard to fix a hip twist if you tell the student to not twist his body


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Suffice it to say we do not agree on everything.



Why is that you disagree, if General Choi emphasized hip twists in his lectures...?


----------



## Buka

gpseymour said:


> And every person will see something slightly different in the demonstration.



Some people know how to read a room.

Some people like to be the smartest person in the room.

Some people wouldn't be the smartest person in the room even if they walked into an empty one.

Some people just need to be dragged into the woodshed.


----------



## Flying Crane

Buka said:


> Some people know how to read a room.
> 
> Some people like to be the smartest person in the room.
> 
> Some people wouldn't be the smartest person in the room even if they walked into an empty one.
> 
> Some people just need to be dragged into the woodshed.


Holy ****, dismemberment...


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> If a cop orders you to not move your body, would you still move your hips?
> 
> I am done with Earl but I can still have fun with his followers in their hopeless cause.




That's the definition of trolling.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Turn the hip only refers to where you are pointed towards


Sir, Again, you misunderstand.   Or perhaps you refuse to understand.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Certain amount of material to get through? There is no more to this particular theory of his but a possible hip twist, which he left out, suspiciously.


Sir, again you misunderstand.  There was an agenda for courses and Seminars.   It was important to complete  the agenda.  Going into eztreme detil on too many items ould mean that other things would not be covered.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Why is that you disagree, if General Choi emphasized hip twists in his lectures...?


Sir, I am not aware that Mr. Anslow ever attended a session with General Choi. Are you?  He may have.   If so, what did it consist of?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Hard to fix a hip twist if you tell the student to not twist his body


Sir, not if you understand the point he was making - granted not always easy to understand a point an instructor is making with only a brief encounter.   It would be like complaining about the name of the Chang Hon "U" shape block   when it looks more like a "C"  because if you look at a video of the Village people doing "YMCA" it's definitely a "C".


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> So your standpoint is that SW, as taught by General Choi, has the same amount hip twist as before any knee spring?


Sir, I can only answer from my personal experience which was a brief session in the 1970's and then my first IIC in 1990. - Last one in 2002  No change in Hip Twist.  I have no doubt that progeny of various pioneers may have exhibited different habits.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Hard to fix a hip twist if you tell the student to not twist his body


Language is imperfect.   I have had students question something I said and realized how what I said was misinterpreted.   Sometimes I was able to refine the language.  Sometimes it's nearly impossible to avoid any misinterpretation. At some IICs  General Choi would say something and I did not understand the point.  I would ask other seniors and sometimes get an explanation and sometimes not. Other times as the questions and discussions continued I was able to grasp the point he was making.   I was not alone in this and quite frankly I have experienced this with other instructors as well.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, I am not aware that Mr. Anslow ever attended a session with General Choi. Are you?  He may have.   If so, what did it consist of?



 Them how come the sine wave deliveries against a black background that Choi  approved of had little to no hip twist, exactly like Anslow wrote


----------



## Flying Crane

Acronym said:


> If a cop orders you to not move your body, would you still move your hips?
> 
> I am done with Earl but I can still have fun with his followers in their hopeless cause.


I don’t know who you think Earl’s “followers” are.  I’m not a TKD guy, I don’t generally engage in TKD discussions much, and Earl and I hardly interact here.  It’s nothing personal, it’s  just that we tend to engage in discussions in different subjects.  

So, you do what you want, but your presentation here in the forums is a mess.  I’m just looking in and watching your slow-motion train wreck.


----------



## Acronym

Flying Crane said:


> I don’t know who you think Earl’s “followers” are.  I’m not a TKD guy, I don’t generally engage in TKD discussions much, and Earl and I hardly interact here.  It’s nothing personal, it’s  just that we tend to engage in discussions in different subjects.
> 
> So, you do what you want, but your presentation here in the forums is a mess.  I’m just looking in and watching your slow-motion train wreck.



I know you know absolutely nothing about the subject, which makes you even more foolish than you already are. 

But you of course side with the GM nonetheless, true to to your sheep nature.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Language is imperfect.   I have had students question something I said and realized how what I said was misinterpreted.   Sometimes I was able to refine the language.  Sometimes it's nearly impossible to avoid any misinterpretation. At some IICs  General Choi would say something and I did not understand the point.  I would ask other seniors and sometimes get an explanation and sometimes not. Other times as the questions and discussions continued I was able to grasp the point he was making.   I was not alone in this and quite frankly I have experienced this with other instructors as well.



That's why you're a lawyer. This is what you people do. I will believe you when I see one mention of it from Choi, on tape, preferrably part of an exhibit.


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> I know you know absolutely nothing about the subject, which makes you even more foolish than you already are.
> 
> But you of course side with the GM nonetheless, true to to your sheep nature.



The definition now of a personal attack.


----------



## Flying Crane

Acronym said:


> I know you know absolutely nothing about the subject, which makes you even more foolish than you already are.
> 
> But you of course side with the GM nonetheless, true to to your sheep nature.


I’m not “siding with” anyone.  I do find Earl to be the more credible source when the topic is TKD history.  He has been around for a long time.  You have barely gotten your feet wet.  You are not a credible source on the topic, no matter how much you want to be.  Train hard for another 30 years or so, get to know who is who, spend some time being part of the history, and you might start to get some respect.  You are doing yourself no favors by posting the way that you do.


----------



## Acronym

Flying Crane said:


> I’m not “siding with” anyone.  I do find Earl to be the more credible source when the topic is TKD history.  He has been around for a long time.  You have barely gotten your feet wet.  You are not a credible source on the topic, no matter how much you want to be.  Train hard for another 30 years or so, get to know who is who, spend some time being part of the history, and you might start to get some respect.  You are doing yourself no favors by posting the way that you do.



There are people more experienced than Earl who are under a different impression as to what SW does and does not contain.


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> There are people more experienced than Earl who are under a different impression as to what SW does and does not contain.




Maybe, maybe not but for sure you aren't one of those experienced people. You are just an ignorant tyro.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Why is that you disagree, if General Choi emphasized hip twists in his lectures...?


Sir, I don't know that we disagree or agree on this issue and I don't know that Mr. Anslow ever attended a course with General Choi. he may very well have.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Them how come the sine wave deliveries against a black background that Choi  approved of had little to no hip twist, exactly like Anslow wrote


Please don't change the narrative.   The issue was some claim by you that General Choi eliminated hip twist when he introduced Sine Wave. he did not. The text in the books is virtually the same (Although Knee Spring was added.. )   The fact that some may have reduced the amount they twisted their hips after  refining their technique to what General Choi wanted only means they were doing it incorrectly before they learned what he wanted.   I readily admit that from the first IIC my note contained many things I needed to fix. My first impression when I heard him say somethings was that he was wrong or stuff changed.  After reviewing the texts it was clear I had been taught incorrectly carrying over various habits from those who came before me.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> There are people more experienced than Earl who are under a different impression as to what SW does and does not contain.


Interesting.   Name 3 and provide a source as to their "Experience" in the classroom with General Choi. Listing courses attended etc.  My Resume lists the 7 Instructor courses I attended with him (Hosting One) as well as some additional seminars   There are definitely people out there with more classroom experience than I.   I am probably acquainted with most of them.


----------



## Earl Weiss

I think some will find this story entertaining.   I frequently get visitors from other countries. Some are more open minded than others.  On one occasion I corrected a student and his response was:   My instructor is an 8th Dan and he is a personal student of General Choi (Outranked me by one at the time)  and he said the technique should be done like this. "   I didn't say anything but I photocopied the page from the text and presented it to him at the next classs and said "Book written by 9th Dan your instructor loses."   He was more open minded after that.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Please don't change the narrative.   The issue was some claim by you that General Choi eliminated hip twist when he introduced Sine Wave. he did not. The text in the books is virtually the same (Although Knee Spring was added.. )   e.



There is no mention of hip twist in his Sine Wave parameters. 

It states:

"1. turn the hip and abdomen in the same direction as the attacking tool. "

That means face the target with your hip and abdomen pointing towards the target. (it has to mean the the since the SW resource come next). You can't hip twist before the SW motion has started. 

2. The heel of the rear foot should be raised sightly off the ground at the beginning of the motion and placed firmly on the ground at the moment of impact in all cases

3. Raise the body sightly at the beginning of the motion, and lower it at the moment of impact

Nowhere does he mention a hip twist in his own parameters.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I think some will find this story entertaining.   I frequently get visitors from other countries. Some are more open minded than others.  On one occasion I corrected a student and his response was:   My instructor is an 8th Dan and he is a personal student of General Choi (Outranked me by one at the time)  and he said the technique should be done like this. "   I didn't say anything but I photocopied the page from the text and presented it to him at the next classs and said "Book written by 9th Dan your instructor loses."   He was more open minded after that.



You claimed that Jong Soo Park, in 1970, showed residuals of CDK, when he had been in General Chois demo team since the 60s. Do yo realise then that your SW claim dating back to the early 70s is false? The man is on the Generals team, travels with him, is tucked in at night along with the other demo players. Is his "poster boy". Etc etc

Jong Soo Park left somewhere after 1973, having yet to be introduced to SW. That is a fact.  Alex Gillis testifies to this having been one of Parks students.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Interesting.   Name 3 and provide a source as to their "Experience" in the classroom with General Choi. Listing courses attended etc.  My Resume lists the 7 Instructor courses I attended with him (Hosting One) as well as some additional seminars   There are definitely people out there with more classroom experience than I.   I am probably acquainted with most of them.



I will refer you to Yeo Chin Huat, who when asked how he used to punch in forms prior to SW illustrated a hip twist. He did that to a user you are currently debating.

Yeo is a former president of ITF in Sweden, referee, examiner, Grandmaster, and was a personal friend of General Choi.

Also the author of this book, with a foreword/endorsement written by General Choi


----------



## Flying Crane

Acronym said:


> There are people more experienced than Earl who are under a different impression as to what SW does and does not contain.


Well, you don’t strike me as the kind of fellow who would ever take advice from anyone.


----------



## Acronym

Flying Crane said:


> Well, you don’t strike me as the kind of fellow who would ever take advice from anyone.



That has nothing to do with anything. It was in response to the fact that Weiss is right and I'm wrong because he has more experience, according to your logic


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> That has nothing to do with anything. It was in response to the fact that Weiss is right and I'm wrong because he has more experience, according to your logic


No, Mr. Weiss is 'right' because his very patient explanation to you is correct. The only thing you have proven is that whatever is said by whoever says it is going to be wrong in you eyes. 
Another way to put this is that you are in a very, very small minority with your opinion. One to be exact. 

I feel very bad for you and your trainer. People who will not empty themselves and learn usually do not stay in training very long.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> There is no mention of hip twist in his Sine Wave parameters.
> 
> It states:
> 
> "1. turn the hip and abdomen in the same direction as the attacking tool. "
> 
> That means face the target with your hip and abdomen pointing towards the target. (it has to mean the the since the SW resource come next). You can't hip twist before the SW motion has started.
> 
> .


Sir, Once again you are mistaken.  I don't know how you come up with "That means face the target with your hip and abdomen pointing towards the target"  It applies even if you are already facing the target.   I can't tell if you really believe this strained interpretation or are just trying to find something to support your unfounded contention.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You claimed that Jong Soo Park, in 1970, showed residuals of CDK, when he had been in General Chois demo team since the 60s. Do yo realise then that your SW claim dating back to the early 70s is false? The man is on the Generals team, travels with him, is tucked in at night along with the other demo players. Is his "poster boy". Etc etc
> 
> Jong Soo Park left somewhere after 1973, having yet to be introduced to SW. That is a fact.  Alex Gillis testifies to this having been one of Parks students.


No, you misinterpret what I said.    The term "Sine Wave" does not appear until the 1983 edition.  However, the up and down motion which later was called SW was called "Spring Style" in the 1970's.   Raising and lowering the hip appears in editions before the term SW was introduced.   GM Park was among the "Korean Supermen General Choi chose for demonstrations knowing their physical feats would impress people and encourage them to train in TKD.   

As far as GM Park leaving somewhere after 1973 you need to be updated. He returned . 
The first I saw him was at a a technical conference in 1996, and later he attended IICs   where I saw him in Newfoundland and Colorado he was there to update and refine his knowledge.    When he came to Chicago for a wedding he called me to meet him for coffee between the ceremony and reception.   It was a wedding for the Daughter of Han Cha Kyo sadly who had died before then, and GM Nam Tae Hi and others went for coffee as well.   Anything else you would like to tell me about GM Park Jong Soo?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Once again you are mistaken.  I don't know how you come up with "That means face the target with your hip and abdomen pointing towards the target"  It applies even if you are already facing the target.   I can't tell if you really believe this strained interpretation or are just trying to find something to support your unfounded contention.



It goes without saying that to you don't hip twist before Sine Wave has been initiated, assuming you do twist at all (which you claim). The supposed twist of which you speak would have to follow #2, not preceed it


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I will refer you to Yeo Chin Huat, who when asked how he used to punch in forms prior to SW illustrated a hip twist. He did that to a user you are currently debating.
> 
> View attachment 23512


That is one - I asked for 3. Not acquainted with this person Sadly I could not find his resume on line . Do you have a link listing courses attended and promotion dates?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No, you misinterpret what I said.    The term "Sine Wave" does not appear until the 1983 edition.  However, the up and down motion which later was called SW was called "Spring Style" in the 1970's.   Raising and lowering the hip appears in editions before the term SW was introduced.   GM Park was among the "Korean Supermen General Choi chose for demonstrations knowing their physical feats would impress people and encourage them to train in TKD.
> 
> As far as GM Park leaving somewhere after 1973 you need to be updated. He returned .
> The first I saw him was at a a technical conference in 1996, and later he attended IICs   where I saw him in Newfoundland and Colorado he was there to update and refine his knowledge.    When he came to Chicago for a wedding he called me to meet him for coffee between the ceremony and reception.   It was a wedding for the Daughter of Han Cha Kyo sadly who had died before then, and GM Nam Tae Hi and others went for coffee as well.   Anything else you would like to tell me about GM Park Jong Soo?



You wrote that Jong Soo Park showed his CDK roots, agreeing that he did not in fact display "spring style" in the clip, or did you mean he displayed both? Very curious that he would still show roots from something he did 10-15 years ago....

I know that Park later returned but that's irrelevant to the point.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> It goes without saying that to you don't hip twist before Sine Wave has been initiated, assuming you do twist at all (which you claim). The supposed twist of which you speak would have to follow #2, not preceed it


No, it all flows together It's not an either or plus  it depend on the prior position.   If you are in a half facing position and then punch the hip only moves from the half to the full face position. Similarly if stepping the rear leg hip side is slightly back and becomes full facing.  If in sitting stance as you know punches begin with slight rearword motion and the hip moves rearward with it.   You are creating a false premise to support your point.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Very curious that he would still show roots from something he did 10-15 years ago....


Not curious at all. Old habits die hard.(Guess how I know)  As General Choi would teach "You need to teach your students correctly from the beginning.  If they make a mistake for one day, it takes a day to fix. If they make a mistake for a month, it takes a month to fix, if they make a mistake for a year - Hopeless."


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I know that Park later returned but that's irrelevant to the point.


No, it's relevant because he sat thru at least 2 IICs I am aware of learning from General Choi.


----------



## Flying Crane

Acronym said:


> That has nothing to do with anything. It was in response to the fact that Weiss is right and I'm wrong because he has more experience, according to your logic


Enjoy your stay.


----------



## oftheherd11

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, if you think there is a difference between the "Twist" and "Jerk' so be it Please explain what you think he meant by "Jerk" .



Oh my soul, be nice and silent.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No, it all flows together It's not an either or plus  it depend on the prior position.   If you are in a half facing position and then punch the hip only moves from the half to the full face position. Similarly if stepping the rear leg hip side is slightly back and becomes full facing.  If in sitting stance as you know punches begin with slight rearword motion and the hip moves rearward with it.   You are creating a false premise to support your point.



Rearward motion in L stance is not turning the hip and abdomen towards the target but rather the opposite. Same in the sitting stance. This also happens after 1 and is covered in (3), which in boxing is  known as telegraphing (but not necessarily bad ).

You get into position (1), then 2 and 3 follows.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Not curious at all. Old habits die hard.(Guess how I know)  As General Choi would teach "You need to teach your students correctly from the beginning.  If they make a mistake for one day, it takes a day to fix. If they make a mistake for a month, it takes a month to fix, if they make a mistake for a year - Hopeless."



But the issue isn't even that...Park didn't know knee spring at all when leaving Choi. When he returned it was called Sine Wave and he did eventually adopt it in his school, as far as I know.

Does this disprove that Choi was toying around with the idea in his head? No of course not. But to claim that it was part of ITF TKD in the early 70s is very questionable if his own demo team weren't introduced to it.


----------



## Acronym

While we are on the subject of Jong Soo Park, his display here is 100% TaeKwonDo.






You might label his punches in tuls as Karate (the ITF splinter groups would call it traditional TaeKwondo). but I see his  kicking by this point as fully integrated TaeKwonDo mechanics.

You can see Parks postures and hip alignment in the 65 encyclopedia, and it's not pretty.. Very bad in fact... A modern-day student kicks better passed yellow belt.

Then he became a monster in the 70s..


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> B
> Does this disprove that Choi was toying around with the idea in his head? No of course not. .


Well at last you acknowledge it doesn't prove or disprove anything. Of course I can only speak from experience.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> .
> 
> You get into position (1), then 2 and 3 follows.


No sir, it all happens at the same time.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I will refer you to Yeo Chin Huat, who when asked how he used to punch in forms prior to SW illustrated a hip twist. He did that to a user you are currently debating.


To be clear I know nothing about this person other than what has been posted.   I also don't know if he stated what you say. if he misspoke, or if the recollection is accurate.   What I do know is based upon communications issues apparent on this thread all of the above are open to question.   Which does not mean I question the knowledge or experience of  Yeo Chin Huat, only that I have requested more information.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No sir, it all happens at the same time.



That is not how SW is usually performed and would entail one hip twist for cocking and another up on impact.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> To be clear I know nothing about this person other than what has been posted.   I also don't know if he stated what you say. if he misspoke, or if the recollection is accurate.   What I do know is based upon communications issues apparent on this thread all of the above are open to question.   Which does not mean I question the knowledge or experience of  Yeo Chin Huat, only that I have requested more information.



GM Yeo in addition to the merits mentioned was also appointed technical advisor by General Choi.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That is not how SW is usually performed and would entail one hip twist for cocking and another up on impact.



Sorry, I do not understand  the above explanation. Can you elaborate?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> GM Yeo in addition to the merits mentioned was also appointed technical advisor by General Choi.


Link to source please.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Link to source please.



I don't have that information available. You would have to email him about the specifics.

This might be of interest


----------



## Ivan

Acronym said:


> Unfortunately not very good, which seems to be a trend.
> 
> Sine wave is an up and down movement that was added into ITF patterns somewhere in the late 70s, early 80s to make it different from the Karate katas. It telegraphs the techniques and serves no no purpose other than to be different from Karate katas. It is not used in mitts practice or sparring.
> 
> So this is a branch that does it the old way, but not very good. There is no hip twist to the punches and the overall form is mediocre.


What's interesting to me about the sine wave theory is how it completely differs to the theory I was taught by my old Shorinji Kempo Sensei. We use this same Sine Wave Motion in my ITF Club, but if I am honest, I despise it:




It feels very unnatural for me to bob up and down after almost every technique or movement in a form. In contrast, Shorinji Kempo emphasised on keeping the top of your head at a consistent level regardless of your movement, so when we stepped forwards we would bring our feet together half way through the step, and maintain an odd squatting position - then we proceeded.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Ivan said:


> What's interesting to me about the sine wave theory is how it completely differs to the theory I was taught by my old Shorinji Kempo Sensei. We use this same Sine Wave Motion in my ITF Club, but if I am honest, I despise it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It feels very unnatural for me to bob up and down after almost every technique or movement in a form. In contrast, Shorinji Kempo emphasised on keeping the top of your head at a consistent level regardless of your movement, so when we stepped forwards we would bring our feet together half way through the step, and maintain an odd squatting position - then we proceeded.


I think you included a bad image link here, just fyi.


----------



## Ivan

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I think you included a bad image link here, just fyi.


Sorry. It seems to be working for me. I will sort it out if I can.


----------



## Acronym

Here is another pre knee spring/Sine Wave  representation.

His walking stance is lower than what you would normally see in ITF. His Round kicks are too squared for my liking but this varies between individuals. There can be such a thing as too upright!

It seems most US splinter groups did not adopt Sine Wave.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That is not how SW is usually performed and would entail one hip twist for cocking and another up on impact.


Perhaps therein lies the difference. and explains why we are talking past each other.   Problem being "Cocking" or rearward motion of the hip and then moving it forward.   This is not needed if the position prior to the punch is half face. The hip is already back and only needs to move forward to full face.  Now, if the Hips are full facing, the SW motion is a slight relax / down. then up and down to the beginning of the motion.   During - not sperate from or before or after- the initial relax / down and then up he hip moves slightly rearward and from the peak to the final position coordinated with the extension of the arm the hip moves forward.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Here is another pre knee spring/Sine Wave  representation.
> 
> His walking stance is lower than what you would normally see in ITF. His Round kicks are too squared for my liking but this varies between individuals. There can be such a thing as too upright!
> 
> It seems most US splinter groups did not adopt Sine Wave.


Interesting performance. _ see how he leans as part of move  #1. This is something I saw in progeny of Han Cha Kyo. Never understood it.   Asked the General's son about it since I knew he trained under GM Han for a time. he was incredulous. sadly GM Han died before I could ask about it.   But I had a chance to ask GM Nam if he knew anything about this variation and he said "That's Han Cha Kyo's technique. " so it seems it was something GM Han did to make it his own.  Sadly, his progeny had no idea that is what they were doing.  I would no be surprised if this person had strong CDK roots.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Perhaps therein lies the difference. and explains why we are talking past each other.   Problem being "Cocking" or rearward motion of the hip and then moving it forward.   This is not needed if the position prior to the punch is half face. The hip is already back and only needs to move forward to full face.  Now, if the Hips are full facing, the SW motion is a slight relax / down. then up and down to the beginning of the motion.   During - not sperate from or before or after- the initial relax / down and then up he hip moves slightly rearward and from the peak to the final position coordinated with the extension of the arm the hip moves forward.



I don't agree that the rear wood motion in L stance constitutes a hip twist but even if you would argue that it does, that only proves that (1) does not mean what you think it does, because it does not apply to walking stance reverse punch. and (1) was a general principle.

Choi in fact guarantees that it does not mean that, since he does not want the body twisted when raising and lowering in walking stance, as he told the student.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I don't agree that the rear wood motion in L stance constitutes a hip twist but even if you would argue that it does, that only proves that (1) does not mean what you think it does, because it does not apply to walking stance reverse punch. and (1) was a general principle.
> 
> Choi in fact guarantees that it does not mean that, since he does not want the body twisted when raising and lowering in walking stance, as he told the student.


You misstate what I said. I did not state "rear wood motion in L stance constitutes a hip twist "    I said if you are in a half facing stance which could be L or walking stance and you are going to be doing a rear hand punch then the hip moving forward from half to full face is the hip twist.   Now, if you think that every punch irrespective of the starting hip position required some reward and then forward motion of the hip and this was eliminated I think what you are seeing was elimination of something that was from previous systems and carried over into General Choi's system but was never what he intended or taught.
So the first problem is to define what you mean by the allegedly eliminated "Hip Twist"   Was that always a required rearward (Cocking) and then forward motion of the hip irrespective of initial hip position?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Interesting performance. _ see how he leans as part of move  #1. This is something I saw in progeny of Han Cha Kyo. Never understood it.   Asked the General's son about it since I knew he trained under GM Han for a time. he was incredulous. sadly GM Han died before I could ask about it.   But I had a chance to ask GM Nam if he knew anything about this variation and he said "That's Han Cha Kyo's technique. " so it seems it was something GM Han did to make it his own.  Sadly, his progeny had no idea that is what they were doing.  I would no be surprised if this person had strong CDK roots.



I don't know what you are referring to but I would say that particular Chang Hon of-shoot is about as far removed from the ITF as I've seen, including 70s ITF. To me he is doing Karate rythm with TKD forms.

This pattern delivery still has an overall TKD flavor to it, even though a lay person might not see it.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> So the first problem is to define what you mean by the allegedly eliminated "Hip Twist"   Was that always a required rearward (Cocking) and then forward motion of the hip irrespective of initial hip position?




I'm referring to hip twist at point of impact. Whether (3) was part and parcel of the original system doesn't make your or me anymore right in this discussion. 

What I tried conveying is that you don't hip twist cocking a strike, especially not if you intend to hip twist on impact.  It would result in a very jerky rhythm that bares no resemblance to Sine Wave. 

Merely turning slightly back (cocking) and then forward does not render the strike a hip twist. You can throw a push punch from that same sequence of moves. 

You will note that jerking the hip is absent from the SW parameters, but is present in the general attack technique parameters.


----------



## dvcochran

I could be a little critical of the stance work (I feel that is systemic differences). But those kicks are legit.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> I could be a little critical of the stance work (I feel that is systemic differences). But those kicks are legit.



Which clip are you referring to?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> This pattern delivery still has an overall TKD flavor to it, even though a lay person might not see it.
> 
> [


I never notice before but Yul Guk move #1 he steps with the wrong - right foot and it should be the left foot!


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Which clip are you referring to?


Hwa Rang Hyung


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I never notice before but Yul Guk move #1 he steps with the wrong - right foot and it should be the left foot!



I notice in these 70s clip that power is greater but control is neglected. There are no side kick holdouts, kicking form isn't as disciplined post kick, rechambers are sloppier. This goes hand in hand with a power focus. You normally need to make a decision between form and power. If you commit everything to the first strike, your body is not in position to follow it up.

My instructor is very old school and wants full commitment into strikes and does not care about combinations.  He would just line us up to blast  turning punches, dolyo chagis and back kicks as hard as we can on kicking shields.

The one thing I didn't get from ITF that I was warned beforehand about is the throws. 

I didn't expect judo classes but  we never covered throws at all, which was a bummer. I know why and it's the same reason BJJ schools avoid them and that's due to no break fall training and basketball surfaces... So all we is do joint manipulation and takedowns but no throws.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Hard to fix a hip twist if you tell the student to not twist his body


I honestly can't decide if you're arrogant, ignorant, or purposely obtuse. It seems a combination of at least two are present.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Why is that you disagree, if General Choi emphasized hip twists in his lectures...?


Do you really not know that sometimes folks disagree about how to interpret and apply principles?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Earl Weiss said:


> Language is imperfect.   I have had students question something I said and realized how what I said was misinterpreted.   Sometimes I was able to refine the language.  Sometimes it's nearly impossible to avoid any misinterpretation. At some IICs  General Choi would say something and I did not understand the point.  I would ask other seniors and sometimes get an explanation and sometimes not. Other times as the questions and discussions continued I was able to grasp the point he was making.   I was not alone in this and quite frankly I have experienced this with other instructors as well.


Both of my first instructors in my primary art loved to tell stories of students who - a few years in - suddenly understood something they'd been told for years. Sometimes, the students can only absorb a portion of what's taught, and the rest has to be worked out later.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> There is no mention of hip twist in his Sine Wave parameters.
> 
> It states:
> 
> "1. turn the hip and abdomen in the same direction as the attacking tool. "
> 
> That means face the target with your hip and abdomen pointing towards the target. (it has to mean the the since the SW resource come next). You can't hip twist before the SW motion has started.
> 
> 2. The heel of the rear foot should be raised sightly off the ground at the beginning of the motion and placed firmly on the ground at the moment of impact in all cases
> 
> 3. Raise the body sightly at the beginning of the motion, and lower it at the moment of impact
> 
> Nowhere does he mention a hip twist in his own parameters.


You're making a strong assertion that 1 comes before 2. But 2 and 3 are clearly simultaneous, so it seems likely the three are all meant to overlap.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> That has nothing to do with anything. It was in response to the fact that Weiss is right and I'm wrong because he has more experience, according to your logic


You don't really read to understand, do you? You just look for something to argue about, to deflect from the possibility of having to admit there's a point to the other argument.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> You wrote that Jong Soo Park showed his CDK roots, agreeing that he did not in fact display "spring style" in the clip, or did you mean he displayed both? Very curious that he would still show roots from something he did 10-15 years ago....
> 
> I know that Park later returned but that's irrelevant to the point.


If you think someone's roots vanish over a decade or so, you're mistaken. I still show my Judo roots (first grappling I trained in), and I haven't trained in Judo in 30 years.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> You're making a strong assertion that 1 comes before 2. But 2 and 3 are clearly simultaneous, so it seems likely the three are all meant to overlap.



Why are you butting into this? You said that you don't even understand what SW is


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> Why are you butting into this? You said that you don't even understand what SW is




Well, that will be two of you then.


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


> Well, that will be two of you then.



No, I hold a rank passed intermediate and have 6 years of training, of which 4 are in the dojang


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> No, I hold a rank passed intermediate and have 6 years of training, of which 4 are in the dojang



Oh wow, I am singularly unimpressed. 

You aren't actually much past a beginner, four years under an instructor simply isn't long enough to build up the base of knowledge that would entitle you to criticise senior instructors. There is nothing, of course, that entitled you to be rude, obnoxious and arrogant nor to make personal attacks which are not allowed on here.

For a short while it was amusing watching you trying to justify your posts, much like watching a drunk staggering up an icy slope but it becomes tedious when it's clear that the drunk is whinging and full of feacal matter. The chaps here are far more polite than I and put up with more nonsense than most posters on other sites do but I'm a grumpy old woman who will quite happily tell you that your manner is embarrassing. It doesn't matter whether you are correct about sine wave or not, the way you address people is bang out of order, you don't discuss you harangue and belittle. It's getting you nowhere, unless you count bumping up your post count.
Now run along and play nicely.


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


> Oh wow, I am singularly unimpressed.
> 
> You aren't actually much past a beginner, four years under an instructor simply isn't long enough to build up the base of knowledge that would entitle you to criticise senior instructors. There is nothing, of course, that entitled you to be rude, obnoxious and arrogant nor to make personal attacks which are not allowed on here.
> 
> .



As far as I understand I compete with black belts, if I compete. That's an advanced level.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Why are you butting into this? You said that you don't even understand what SW is


No, but I can spot hip twist that you apparently cannot.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> No, I hold a rank passed intermediate and have 6 years of training, of which 4 are in the dojang


You might be surprised to find that 4 years of formal training isn't much by typical standards around here.


----------



## skribs

gpseymour said:


> You might be surprised to find that 4 years of formal training isn't much by typical standards around here.



I've got over a dozen years of formal training, and for half of that I've been doing formal training 15+ hours/week.  And people still look down on me as a kid or a newbie.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> No, but I can spot hip twist that you apparently cannot.



You said that General Choi hip twsted in the clip with the student. Point me to where he did


----------



## _Simon_

Tez3 said:


> much like watching a drunk staggering up an icy slope but it becomes tedious when it's clear that the drunk is whinging and full of feacal matter.



Hahahaha that was great, you poet you ;D


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> As far as I understand I compete with black belts, if I compete. That's an advanced level.


Sir, Some understand it differently. How does General Choi classify First Dan?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> You said that General Choi hip twsted in the clip with the student. Point me to where he did


Right there in the video. You posted it - why do you need me to point you to the video?


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> As far as I understand I compete with black belts, if I compete. That's an advanced level.




Many places put beginners in with the black belts as the beginners do less damage that way. The black belts have the control and ability to spar etc with the beginners without matching them in their zeal to throw punches wildly.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> As far as I understand I compete with black belts, if I compete. That's an advanced level.


Black belt being the sign of advanced level is probably the most dubious claim you've made yet.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> You said that General Choi hip twsted in the clip with the student. Point me to where he did


Just to make sure I'm looking at the right video, which video/what post number of the video are you referring to?


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Black belt being the sign of advanced level is probably the most dubious claim you've made yet.



There are no dan grade distinctions in competitions.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Right there in the video. You posted it - why do you need me to point you to the video?



because it isn't there.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> There are no dan grade distinctions in competitions.


That seems irrelevant. I thought you were just explaining how you are advanced because you would enter bb rank if you entered competitions.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> That seems irrelevant. I thought you were just explaining how you are advanced because you would enter bb rank if you entered competitions.



Yes, since I would be competing with people who in your eyes are advanced.

I would also say that my hip mechanics are advanced. There are masters who don't have this form, and there are red belts who do. So belts are very relative...


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


> Many places put beginners in with the black belts as the beginners do less damage that way..



Not in my martial art they don't, unless there simply aren't enough competitors.


----------



## Acronym

At the end of the day we only compete against ourselves. We weren't born equal. 

Whoever reaches master level, is only a master in relation to where the person was originally.


----------



## Acronym

If we can get back on track for just a second. One of the things I object to about Sine Wave is that it emphasizes something we naturally do anyway, that is rise and sink into motions. In order to distinguish Chois concept then, it has to be more pronounced and that's why it's self-defeating and unnatural.

Just my 50 cents..


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> There are no dan grade distinctions in competitions.


That is incorrect.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Yes, since I would be competing with people who in your eyes are advanced.
> 
> I would also say that my hip mechanics are advanced. There are masters who don't have this form, and there are red belts who do. So belts are very relative...


Yea, you just passed yourself. That is officially the dumbest thing you have said on this forum. And you have said a lot of dumb stuff.


----------



## Acronym

here is a red belt with an instructional of kicking ones gravity *away *from the heavy bag,

and he ends it with "good job".

Belts mean nothing


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> here is a red belt with an instructional of kicking ones gravity *away *from the heavy bag,
> 
> and he ends it with "good job".
> 
> Belts mean nothing


One video out of a bazillion.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> here is a red belt with an instructional of kicking ones gravity *away *from the heavy bag,
> 
> and he ends it with "good job".
> 
> Belts mean nothing


That was the point I made that you disagreed with. That belts, including black belts, mean nothing, so competing with them is not a sign of you being advanced.


----------



## _Simon_

Oh maaan I am SO anti sine!!!! Cosine too that's the literal worst! Now tangent...... is much more my flavour!


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> That was the point I made that you disagreed with. That belts, including black belts, mean nothing, so competing with them is not a sign of you being advanced.



I'm in the advanced realm according to the original standard which very few TKD and Karate instructors uphold.

For instance, if someone trains to red belt now, and is a better TKD athlete than me, he will whoop my *** even if I train to 5th degree.

That is not likely to be true of any yellow, green, and probably not blue belt (starts to get sweaty though)


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Some understand it differently. How does General Choi classify First Dan?



Choi defines it much like Judo does; knowing the basics. Basics are however the most important aspect so knowing that is advanced in and of itself

But this isn't an easily definable matter. There are so many variables that go into martial arts prowess and very few have top marks in everything. Actually, I can't think of anyone who does.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If we can get back on track for just a second. One of the things I object to about Sine Wave is that it emphasizes something we naturally do anyway, that is rise and sink into motions. In order to distinguish Chois concept then, it has to be more pronounced and that's why it's self-defeating and unnatural.
> 
> Just my 50 cents..


Sir, Do you feel the same about slow motion techniques? How about the ones where you balance on one  leg.?  Etc.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Choi defines it much like Judo does; knowing the basics. B.


Sir, Chang Hon / General Choi defines first dan as "Novice".


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> I'm in the advanced realm according to the original standard which very few TKD and Karate instructors uphold.))


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> I'm in the advanced realm according to the original standard which very few TKD and Karate instructors uphold.
> 
> For instance, if someone trains to red belt now, and is a better TKD athlete than me, he will whoop my *** even if I train to 5th degree.
> 
> That is not likely to be true of any yellow, green, and probably not blue belt (starts to get sweaty though)



Thank you for the laugh.


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


>



Yes I'm looking at you


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Do you feel the same about slow motion techniques? How about the ones where you balance on one  leg.?  Etc.



Slow motions do not exaggerate techniques


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Chang Hon / General Choi defines first dan as "Novice".



I'll be you now and blame it on a translation error.


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> Yes I'm looking at you




It is the way.


----------



## Acronym

I hate to bark up the wrong tree but Choi's black belt in Shotokan was never certified, was it Earl?


----------



## dvcochran

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> That was the point I made that you disagreed with. That belts, including black belts, mean nothing, so competing with them is not a sign of you being advanced.


Sadly, there will always be outliers that make your statement true. But looking at the bigger picture belts are still very useful tools to help people navigate their training with an easy marker and/or target. In no way does that preclude a certain level of training. Quite the opposite. 
It is a treacherous position when any swing dxxk can go out a purchase a black belt. Just like the same person can give themselves the title of President, CEO, GM, etc... The proof is in the pudding not the outward appearance. 

I hope the perception of belting hasn't degraded to the point that they are a 'joke' to most people. 

We are such strange creatures; how we seem to get more enjoyment out of watching people failures more than their successes.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Sadly, there will always be outliers that make your statement true. But looking at the bigger picture belts are still very useful tools to help people navigate their training with an easy marker and/or target. In no way does that preclude a certain level of training. Quite the opposite.
> It is a treacherous position when any swing dxxk can go out a purchase a black belt. Just like the same person can give themselves the title of President, CEO, GM, etc... The proof is in the pudding not the outward appearance.
> 
> I hope the perception of belting hasn't degraded to the point that they are a 'joke' to most people.
> 
> We are such strange creatures; how we seem to get more enjoyment out of watching people failures more than their successes.



All those in-between colored belts and stripes is western capitalism. In asia you had two or three belts until 1st dan.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> All those in-between colored belts and stripes is western capitalism. In asia you had two or three belts until 1st dan.


Yea, there are several threads on here about stripes, stars, buttons and such used on belts to stretch out the curriculum.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

dvcochran said:


> Sadly, there will always be outliers that make your statement true. But looking at the bigger picture belts are still very useful tools to help people navigate their training with an easy marker and/or target. In no way does that preclude a certain level of training. Quite the opposite.
> It is a treacherous position when any swing dxxk can go out a purchase a black belt. Just like the same person can give themselves the title of President, CEO, GM, etc... The proof is in the pudding not the outward appearance.
> 
> I hope the perception of belting hasn't degraded to the point that they are a 'joke' to most people.
> 
> We are such strange creatures; how we seem to get more enjoyment out of watching people failures more than their successes.


I meant they mean nothing in the context of this forum. With people from multiple different arts, there's no standards, so while jaimseau may give black belts after a year (i mention him because I believe he said that's what his org does in korea..they truly view it as a starting point, you may give them (on average) in five years, bjj gives them in 10, and I earned mine in 15. So in context of discussing how advanced each practitioner is, it doesn't play a huge role.

In fact, i can think of someone on this forum who started martial arts way after I joined this forum and recently got her 2nd degree in TKD, meaning she's a higher rank than me (in a different system), but that doesn't mean she's more advanced. Or at a level I'd consider advanced in general.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Slow motions do not exaggerate techniques


Sir, If you think not then I suggest you are not familiar with the Chang Hon  Pattern Standard for Palm Pressing Blocks, Scooping Blocks, and others.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I'll be you now and blame it on a translation error.


Sir, If you think you want to be me you have a world of disappointment ahead of you.   As far as "Translation error"   that would involve a lot of error in the explanation he provides   which taken together cover a full page of text.   Or perhaps I misunderstand and you are referring to your erroneous translation.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I hate to bark up the wrong tree but Choi's black belt in Shotokan was never certified, was it Earl?


Sir, I really have no idea what this question has to do with anything. I know there are some who make the claim. I will readily admit I was not there and this I something I cannot attest to.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, If you think not then I suggest you are not familiar with the Chang Hon  Pattern Standard for Palm Pressing Blocks, Scooping Blocks, and others.



I thought we were talking about striking.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, If you think you want to be me you have a world of disappointment ahead of you.   As far as "Translation error"   that would involve a lot of error in the explanation he provides   which taken together cover a full page of text.   Or perhaps I misunderstand and you are referring to your erroneous translation.



Novice
_noun_

1.
a person new to and inexperienced in a job or situation.
Sounds like a white belt to me and not a black belt going by proper language.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I thought we were talking about striking.


Sir, Since SW can also apply to blocking why would we only be talking about striking?   We were addressing exaggerated motions not being practical, and my point is if you want to critique practicality, then there is a whole lot besides SW to critique as far as patterns are concerned.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Novice
> _noun_
> 
> 1.
> a person new to and inexperienced in a job or situation.
> Sounds like a white belt to me and not a black belt going by proper language.



Sir, exactly the point. What it sounds like to you nd your opinion is not how many others choose to view it.   Now, we have to agree (I hope) there are not hard and fast rules across martial arts delineating what a First Dan Knows or needs to be able to do.   General Choi made some delineations and considers it Novice - New and inexperienced.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, exactly the point. What it sounds like to you nd your opinion is not how many others choose to view it.   Now, we have to agree (I hope) there are not hard and fast rules across martial arts delineating what a First Dan Knows or needs to be able to do.   General Choi made some delineations and considers it Novice - New and inexperienced.



New and inexperienced to what?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Since SW can also apply to blocking why would we only be talking about striking?  .



Because hip twist for striking, more specifically punching, is in doubt. We had a shotokan player transitioning who still used hip twist in a grading session. Aforementioned Yeo Chin Huat, the examiner, made the point that it's how they used to do back in the day but not now. Again, deemphasizing hip twist, contrary to your claim that it is supposed to be left in tact.


----------



## Acronym

I would really encourage you to email Mr Yeo Chin Huat and tell him he's doing it wrong.

I'm happy to concede If I got it all twisted (no pun intended). Let's just say that I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> I hate to bark up the wrong tree but Choi's black belt in Shotokan was never certified, was it Earl?


Which is relevant to which part of this discussion??


----------



## Gerry Seymour

dvcochran said:


> Sadly, there will always be outliers that make your statement true. But looking at the bigger picture belts are still very useful tools to help people navigate their training with an easy marker and/or target. In no way does that preclude a certain level of training. Quite the opposite.
> It is a treacherous position when any swing dxxk can go out a purchase a black belt. Just like the same person can give themselves the title of President, CEO, GM, etc... The proof is in the pudding not the outward appearance.
> 
> I hope the perception of belting hasn't degraded to the point that they are a 'joke' to most people.
> 
> We are such strange creatures; how we seem to get more enjoyment out of watching people failures more than their successes.


This is where we get into perceived meaning again. "President" doesn't mean anything powerful. Technically, I'm the President of my company. Mind you, the Hobbit and I are the only members in the LLC, and I currently have no employees (had 3 at most). But "President" is still an appropriate title...because it does't mean much on its own. The meaning comes from what the person is president of. Just the a black belt, in and of itself, has little intrinsic meaning.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> All those in-between colored belts and stripes is western capitalism. In asia you had two or three belts until 1st dan.


I've heard that argument before, but have yet to have anyone give an explanation how more colors increases income. Sure, some folks charge exorbitantly for testing, but that only makes the claim true of those folks. The vast majority of the belt-rank schools I have operational knowledge of either don't charge for testing (and only approximately charge cost for the actual belt), or charge a small testing fee (on the order of $10-20). So where's the "western capitalism" in that?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Novice
> _noun_
> 
> 1.
> a person new to and inexperienced in a job or situation.
> Sounds like a white belt to me and not a black belt going by proper language.


"new" and "inexperienced" are both relative terms. Where black belts are awarded after a year or two, many of us would consider those folks mostly (likely with exceptions) to be novices.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Because hip twist for striking, more specifically punching, is in doubt. We had a shotokan player transitioning who still used hip twist in a grading session. Aforementioned Yeo Chin Huat, the examiner, made the point that it's how they used to do back in the day but not now. Again, deemphasizing hip twist, contrary to your claim that it is supposed to be left in tact.


I don't know if it is in TKD or not, but hip twist can be applied to blocks, as well.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> I don't know if it is in TKD or not, but hip twist can be applied to blocks, as well.



And I don't deny that it's in blocks


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> I've heard that argument before, but have yet to have anyone give an explanation how more colors increases income. Sure, some folks charge exorbitantly for testing, but that only makes the claim true of those folks. The vast majority of the belt-rank schools I have operational knowledge of either don't charge for testing (and only approximately charge cost for the actual belt), or charge a small testing fee (on the order of $10-20). So where's the "western capitalism" in that?



I don't remember the fee but it's at least 30 dollars, and that adds up if you have a lot of kid students.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Which is relevant to which part of this discussion??



We were talking about how Choi defines first Dan black belt. I thought it would be appropriate if he ever had one himself. 

From what I gather he learned Karate from a korean and then switch to the japanese.

I did not buy that the japanese award him a black belt in 2 years, but it just so happens that they didn't, it was a Korean instructor. Then Choi supposedly got a second Dan from the Japanese.


----------



## Acronym

Then again, the Taekkyon claim is fairytales so who knows...

General Choi Hong Hi – Michal Košátko

"When he became older he went to Japan to study calligraphy. Choi had been studying calligraphy and Taek Kyon in Korea under Han Il Dong and upon arrival in Japan he started to study Shotokan Karate as a student of a Korean named Kim Hyun-soo, and after two years of intensive training he was presented with a first Dan Black Belt in Shotokan. He then went into Tokyo University where he studied under Master Gichin Funakoshi, founder of Shotokan, and gained his second Dan."


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> I don't remember the fee but it's at least 30 dollars, and that adds up if you have a lot of kid students.


Depending how testing is done, that may not be unreasonable. If it's extra time for the instructor (or other instructors, to cover class during testing), and there are other fees (cost of belt, registering with an association), it might be mostly a wash. If it takes regular class time (everyone in class is testing) and doesn't cover anything else, that's extra money.

I do know some schools use testing fees rather than higher monthly fees, in which case, the number of tests doesn't really make much difference. It actually works out well for students who are slower to test, since they get lower monthly fees in the deal.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> We were talking about how Choi defines first Dan black belt. I thought it would be appropriate if he ever had one himself.
> 
> From what I gather he learned Karate from a korean and then switch to the japanese.
> 
> I did not buy that the japanese award him a black belt in 2 years, but it just so happens that they didn't, it was a Korean instructor. Then Choi supposedly got a second Dan from the Japanese.


But it's not, really. If someone came from a non-belt art (let's say boxing) and decided to use belts to make managing class easier, it wouldn't really matter to me that they'd never been awarded a BB rank - they're defining what that belt (and the others) signifies within their new system.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Then Choi supposedly got a second Dan from the Japanese.


I forgot to reply to this. This, apparently, wasn't an odd practice. I know of one instructor who was promoted 2nd-5th dan by letter, by an instructor he hadn't physically seen in years. 3rd-5th were (and still are in the system) considered more honorary ranks. Second was (and still is) seen as the last technical (skill-based) rank.

From what I understand, when folks were distant from any possible instructor who could rank them up, if they were active and producing students for long enough, someone back in Japan would rank them up in recognition of the time and effort they continued to put into the art.

I don't know how common it was (nor if it still happens, now that video is so easy to exchange), but there are examples enough that I doubt it was surprising.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Depending how testing is done, that may not be unreasonable. If it's extra time for the instructor (or other instructors, to cover class during testing), and there are other fees (cost of belt, registering with an association), it might be mostly a wash. If it takes regular class time (everyone in class is testing) and doesn't cover anything else, that's extra money.
> 
> I do know some schools use testing fees rather than higher monthly fees, in which case, the number of tests doesn't really make much difference. It actually works out well for students who are slower to test, since they get lower monthly fees in the deal.



Monthly fee seems to be an American thing. In Sweden you pay for 6 months of training all up front. In America  that's apparently viewed as Mcdojo which I find odd.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Then again, the Taekkyon claim is fairytales so who knows...
> 
> General Choi Hong Hi – Michal Košátko
> 
> "When he became older he went to Japan to study calligraphy. Choi had been studying calligraphy and Taek Kyon in Korea under Han Il Dong and upon arrival in Japan he started to study Shotokan Karate as a student of a Korean named Kim Hyun-soo, and after two years of intensive training he was presented with a first Dan Black Belt in Shotokan. He then went into Tokyo University where he studied under Master Gichin Funakoshi, founder of Shotokan, and gained his second Dan."


I don't know which part of that is supposed to be fairy tales - I probably don't know enough to recognize it. The two years to shodan wouldn't be all that odd in Japan, from what I understand.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Monthly fee seems to be an American thing. In Sweden you pay for 6 months of training all up front. In America  that's apparently viewed as Mcdojo which I find odd.


The issue is that many folks join and only last a month. Schools that force contracts here mostly seem to do it to get much more money from folks. I used to offer term payments (up to a full year) that were lower, but nobody ever took them. Most folks paid monthy, and some paid per-class (if they weren't going to make enough classes for the monthly fee to make sense).


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> New and inexperienced to what?


Sir, rather than re type a page of text I refer you to the Encyclopedia Volume I First Edition page 94 "Significance of First Degree"   If your edition is different go to Index of Volume I/  1   Find the Page for "Rank" and then on about the third page after where that is listed you will find it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> . Again, deemphasizing hip twist, contrary to your claim that it is supposed to be left in tact.


Sir, so are you reframing your point to "Deemphasizing"   from "Eliminating" ?     Huge difference. Mainly because what many learned if roots went back to some pre -TKD Kwans   was over exaggerated.   Changing this habit was not a change in TK-D, only a change for what some did.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> But it's not, really. If someone came from a non-belt art (let's say boxing) and decided to use belts to make managing class easier, it wouldn't really matter to me that they'd never been awarded a BB rank - they're defining what that belt (and the others) signifies within their new system.



His definitions and principles were copy and pasted from Shotokan Karate, including "one punch, one kill" which he changed to "one punch, one victory". The first encyclopedia has him punching a makiwara, etc.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, so are you reframing your point to "Deemphasizing"   from "Eliminating" ?     Huge difference. Mainly because what many learned if roots went back to some pre -TKD Kwans   was over exaggerated.   Changing this habit was not a change in TK-D, only a change for what some did.



I am not reframing it. I stand by that Choi did not want hip twist for punches. However, even if you take the view that Master Yeo wanted hip twist, he certainly didn't want it as much as before, which you claim is SW proper.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> We were talking about how Choi defines first Dan black belt. I thought it would be appropriate if he ever had one himself.
> 
> I did not buy that the japanese award him a black belt in 2 years, but it just so happens that they didn't, it was a Korean instructor. Then Choi supposedly got a second Dan from the Japanese.


Sir, Which is your claim? In the first sentence you seem to indicate he did not have a black belt, and in the second you claim he had one from a Korean Instructor?   Of course none of this really matters to the discussion since you seem  to feel your knowledge and ability better qualifies you to define First Degree than General Choi who created the criteria for his system.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, so are you reframing your point to "Deemphasizing"   from "Eliminating" ?     Huge difference. Mainly because what many learned if roots went back to some pre -TKD Kwans   was over exaggerated.   Changing this habit was not a change in TK-D, only a change for what some did.



The original principles in his first english encyclopedia doesn't have hip twist in the parameters either. Very alarming if Choi never wanted it in the first place even though everybody did it.

Doing Karate punches without hip twist lacks momentum and are weak arm punches.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Which is your claim? In the first sentence you seem to indicate he did not have a black belt, and in the second you claim he had one from a Korean Instructor?   Of course none of this really matters to the discussion since you seem  to feel your knowledge and ability better qualifies you to define First Degree than General Choi who created the criteria for his system.



From what I've read it's all reworded Shotokan criterias and principles. Can you point to one that is uniquely his?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I am not reframing it. I stand by that Choi did not want hip twist for punches. However, even if you take the view that Master Yeo wanted hip twist, he certainly didn't want it as much as before, which you claim is SW proper.


Sir, they were your words - not mine. You change the argument from "Eliminated" to Deemphasizing"   which had have put you on the right path - for the wrong reason - but the right path.   As I have stated before lots of people (including me) did lots of stuff   due to their lineage and when they learned the Chang Hon standard felt it was a change, when in fact it was a correction.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> The original principles in his first english encyclopedia doesn't have hip twist in the parameters either. Very alarming if Choi never wanted it in the first place even though everybody did it.


Sir, Actually it does and I have quoted Volume and page but because you are fixated on the term "Twist" where he says "Turn" or "Jerk" the hip you feel you have made this distinction where there is no difference.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, they were your words - not mine. You change the argument from "Eliminated" to Deemphasizing"   which had have put you on the right path - for the wrong reason - but the right path.   As I have stated before lots of people (including me) did lots of stuff   due to their lineage and when they learned the Chang Hon standard felt it was a change, when in fact it was a correction.



I wrote deemphasized because Master Yeo does not fail you by doing some of it, even If he wants zero.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Actually it does and I have quoted Volume and page but because you are fixated on the term "Twist" where he says "Turn" or "Jerk" the hip you feel you have made this distinction where there is no difference.



Jerk is not in the punching principles. You are conflating "attack techniques" parameters with punching principles page.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> From what I've read it's all reworded Shotokan criterias and principles. Can you point to one that is uniquely his?


Sir, first and foremost this response has nothing to do with what you quote at post 371.   Next, I have no incentive to review each principle and criteria and compare it to Shotokan, and then codified systems that pre date that as well.   It's no Secret Chang Hon Has roots in Shotokan Shorin, Shorei etc.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Jerk is not in the punching principles. You are conflating "attack techniques" parameters with punching principles page.


Sir, last I checked "Punching" was part of Attack techniques.   How can you claim something specified for attacks would not be part of punching?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, first and foremost this response has nothing to do with what you quote at post 371.   Next, I have no incentive to review each principle and criteria and compare it to Shotokan, and then codified systems that pre date that as well.   It's no Secret Chang Hon Has roots in Shotokan Shorin, Shorei etc.



Then how do you know that he created them?

 I just gave an example of Choi rewording Shotokan principles from one punch, one "kill" to one strike, one "victory".


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, last I checked "Punching" was part of Attack techniques.   How can you claim something specified for attacks would not be part of punching?



Because the punching principles are clearly SW/pattern strict parameters whereas attack techniques sections are not. They can refer to hitting mitts, breaking, sparring, etc


----------



## dvcochran

gpseymour said:


> This is where we get into perceived meaning again. "President" doesn't mean anything powerful. Technically, I'm the President of my company. Mind you, the Hobbit and I are the only members in the LLC, and I currently have no employees (had 3 at most). But "President" is still an appropriate title...because it does't mean much on its own. The meaning comes from what the person is president of. Just the a black belt, in and of itself, has little intrinsic meaning.


Agree. 
But I hope it would be true to say you are proud of the business you have created. Something to be proud of and a cornerstone of our great country. I hope this is how attaining black belt is thought of for most. As an accomplishment. 

Discussing "proud of" could take some time.

If for nothing other than organizational purpose, I would assume in the course of some business conversations you refer to yourself as owner, or president or some kind of title. Or maybe you are "The Guy".


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I would really encourage you to email Mr Yeo Chin Huat and tell him he's doing it wrong.
> 
> .


Sir, Since I have no idea what he's doing other than what you state and it seems there are some definite perception and terminology issues I would never consider doing any such thing.   Further, if what you say is accurate it seems he has "Deemphasized" the hip twist / turn /jerk,  so I might  consider that he is correct , and you of  course were simply mistaken.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Then how do you know that he created them?
> 
> I just gave an example of Choi rewording Shotokan principles from one punch, one "kill" to one strike, one "victory".



Once again you misstate what I said.   I never claimed he "Created" something- only what he applies.   General Choi himself clearly states that for any person or country to claim they created Martial Art techniques would be like claiming to have invented the wheel or discovered fire.


----------



## Earl Weiss

thought perhaps Acronym would like this photo  pictured along with General Cho are 2 of the people he posted videos of.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> His definitions and principles were copy and pasted from Shotokan Karate, including "one punch, one kill" which he changed to "one punch, one victory". The first encyclopedia has him punching a makiwara, etc.


OK, that seems unsurprising. Was there a point to that post?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Jerk is not in the punching principles. You are conflating "attack techniques" parameters with punching principles page.


Wait, a punch isn't an attack?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Then how do you know that he created them?
> 
> I just gave an example of Choi rewording Shotokan principles from one punch, one "kill" to one strike, one "victory".


Very little needs to be created. Mostly, when a new style is codified, it's a reframing and change of emphasis among the principles.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, they were your words - not mine. You change the argument from "Eliminated" to Deemphasizing"   which had have put you on the right path - for the wrong reason - but the right path.   As I have stated before lots of people (including me) did lots of stuff   due to their lineage and when they learned the Chang Hon standard felt it was a change, when in fact it was a correction.



I have not changed my position. Yeo Chin Huat does not take the view that SW should incorporate hip twisting punches at all, but will accept a fraction of it nonetheless. 

I will simply refer back to him twisting his hip when replying how he punched before SW. Clearly indicating that he does not twist it anymore.

GM Yeo did not do many demonstrations in the years I trained under him, in case people are wondering why this hasn't been settled.

I  do know however that he never mentioned anything about hip twisting my punches when covering SW.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> Wait, a punch isn't an attack?



Punching principles had a separate page devoted to kata mechanics(SW) to the one entitled attack techniques.

Mr Weiss chooses to ignore this since it conflicts with his viewpoint.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> thought perhaps Acronym would like this photo  pictured along with General Cho are 2 of the people he posted videos of.



Sad thing is that Choi might have very well told you one day to hip twist your punches in SW, and another day reject it out loud, just like he did with retracting your hand after punching. Just like he would say that the KKW are imposters one day, and part of the family another day....


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Once again you misstate what I said.   I never claimed he "Created" something- only what he applies. .



You did use the word "create". I would use the term "implement" . At least until I can identify something not copy and pasted from another system, or at most reworded



Earl Weiss said:


> Of course none of this really matters to the discussion since you seem  to feel your knowledge and ability better qualifies you to define First Degree than General Choi who created the criteria for his system.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Punching principles had a separate page devoted to kata mechanics(SW) to the one entitled attack techniques.
> 
> Mr Weiss chooses to ignore this since it conflicts with his viewpoint.



Sir, Again, you misstate my position. I have ignored nothing .  You mistakenly claim  the general principles stated for attacks are not part of the principles for punching. It is not one or the other it is all the principles together.   Puzzling that you cannot accept this.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You did use the word "create". I would use the term "implement" . At least until I can identify something not copy and pasted from another system, or at most reworded


Sir, I see your confusion now. .  What I said and as you quoted "Once again you misstate what I said. I never claimed he "Created" something- only what he applies. ."  

He created the criteria for his system which is what would be a First degree in his system, and how he classified the First Degree. Somehow you feel you can ignore this and classify a first Degree in his system as something else.     That Criteria, which at the most basic level includes the patterns required for that rank, the fundamental techniques included therein are his alone, unique to his system  along with other aspects defined in what he called "The Cycle of TK-D".    

Again it's the criteria, not the techniques that he created and applied. When you create your system you will get to define how you classify first degree.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Again, you misstate my position. I have ignored nothing .  You mistakenly claim  the general principles stated for attacks are not part of the principles for punching. It is not one or the other it is all the principles together.   Puzzling that you cannot accept this.



You run a rather unique ITF-affiliated school if your students punch mitts the same way they punch in forms. Stance is different, hand position, and yes, rotation,.....


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You run a rather unique ITF-affiliated school if your students punch mitts the same way they punch in forms. Stance is different, hand position, and yes, rotation,.....


Sir, not unique at all . Mitt punching is a free sparring exercise.   ITF competitors do not punch in sparring as they do in patterns.   Or do you think they do?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, not unique at all . Mitt punching is a free sparring exercise.   ITF competitors do not punch in sparring as they do in patterns.   Or do you think they do?



That is my point. Attack techniques MAY apply to the punching principle section, and they may not. Punching principles clearly denotes patterns.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That is my point. Attack techniques MAY apply to the punching principle section, and they may not. Punching principles clearly denotes patterns.


Sir, everyone has a right to an opinion - even erroneous ones.


----------



## Tez3

gpseymour said:


> Wait, a punch isn't an attack?



Probably not when he punches........


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, everyone has a right to an opinion - even erroneous ones.




You agree with me that pattern mechanics are distinct from mitts practice. Punching principles is clearly pattern mechanics. This is your problem to solve, not mine.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Punching principles had a separate page devoted to kata mechanics(SW) to the one entitled attack techniques.
> 
> Mr Weiss chooses to ignore this since it conflicts with his viewpoint.


Many things are in categories that are covered differently. I spend entire classes on concepts and entire other classes on techniques that use those concepts. Them being on different days doesn't at all imply they aren't linked. You're looking for anything that might shore up your position, rather than examining the position to see if it's sound. Can't learn that way.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> You did use the word "create". I would use the term "implement" . At least until I can identify something not copy and pasted from another system, or at most reworded


He would, in fact, have been the one who determined the criteria. And if he was a smart guy, he'd mostly use the criteria he'd experienced in his own training, adjusting them only where he felt there was an advantage to doing so. You seem to see he willingness to do the smart thing as some sort of lacking.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> You agree with me that pattern mechanics are distinct from mitts practice. Punching principles is clearly pattern mechanics. This is your problem to solve, not mine.


I don't see a problem. Some different emphasis of principles is used in forms. That's actually pretty common in my experience - it's sort of the basis of the classical Japanese MA training approach, IMO. That doesn't eliminate the two really odd issues with your claims here:

Just because a punch is identified separately (with additional principles) doesn't make it suddenly not within the category of attacks.
Just because something is done differently in forms, that doesn't mean the same principles don't apply (they often are applied with different emphasis).
Keep training and learning.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You agree with me that pattern mechanics are distinct from mitts practice. Punching principles is clearly pattern mechanics. This is your problem to solve, not mine.


Sir, 1. Perhaps "Distinct" is the wrong word. I would say they have common principles.  2. Not a problem at all, since I never viewed everything in TK-D or many traditional martial arts to be solely geared toward sparring or Self defense.   If all you want to do is train for sparring or Self defense, your problem is you chose the wrong discipline and . you want to change the discipline to suit your goals.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, 1. Perhaps "Distinct" is the wrong word. I would say they have common principles. .



Kicks certainly share common principles between forms and mitts practise, but punches do so only by coincidence. 

General Choi had nothing to do with our modern day boxing-ish pad work. This was born out of the sport side of TaeKwonDo.

Not sure how your other point pertains to the conversation.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> I don't see a problem. Some different emphasis of principles is used in forms. That's actually pretty common in my experience - it's sort of the basis of the classical Japanese MA training approach, IMO. That doesn't eliminate the two really odd issues with your claims here:
> 
> Just because a punch is identified separately (with additional principles) doesn't make it suddenly not within the category of attacks.
> Just because something is done differently in forms, that doesn't mean the same principles don't apply (they often are applied with different emphasis).
> Keep training and learning.



You sure have a lot of arrogance once again butting into something you have no clue about and telling me to keep learning.


----------



## Acronym

It is irrelevant if "jerking the hip" refers to punches, since punches are not thrown the same in pad work and sparring. The  mechanics of punching there is a product of Sport Karate/TKD which General Choi had no involvement in, besides agreeing to a common rule-set for the ITF side.


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> You sure have a lot of arrogance once again butting into something you have no clue about and telling me to keep learning.




Oooo get you sunshine!

Does empty your cup mean anything to you at all?


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


> Oooo get you sunshine!
> 
> Does empty your cup mean anything to you at all?



I have 6 years of training and reading. He has zero. He just foolishly assumes Mr Weiss is correct, even though General Choi had more mood swings and shifting opinions than a woman on her period.


----------



## Acronym

General Choi at one point reportedly did a 180 and claimed that Karate is a Taekkyon derivative.

I'm just firing these off  in advance because I know you think I'm exaggerating.

It doesn't get more crazy than that.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> I have 6 years of training and reading. He has zero. He just foolishly assumes Mr Weiss is correct, even though General Choi had more mood swings and shifting opinions than a woman on her period.


You mistake yourself.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> General Choi at one point reportedly did a 180 and claimed that Karate is a Taekkyon derivative.
> 
> I'm just firing these off  in advance because I know you think I'm exaggerating.
> 
> It doesn't get more crazy than that.


Show us proof of your claim.
Let me guess; you were there in person, right?


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I have 6 years of training and reading. He has zero. He just foolishly assumes Mr Weiss is correct, even though General Choi had more mood swings and shifting opinions than a woman on her period.


I put my money on 6 months 'training' and 5 1/2 years of reading. And then reading into it what you want it to say.
Regardless, you have been consistently wrong.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Not sure how your other point pertains to the conversation.


Sir, really?  You said it was my problem to solve vis a vis differences in Hand techniques between patterns and sparring drills. I  don't see a problem let alone having to solve one.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You sure have a lot of arrogance once again butting into something you have no clue about and telling me to keep learning.


Sir, To the contrary. If he is not a Chang Hon person (he may be)  and he sees that punches are attacks and you do not see the connection, the problem is not with him.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> even though General Choi had more mood swings and shifting opinions than a woman on her period.


  Sir, you know this how?    How many classroom hours did you spend with General Choi? Did you take notes on what he said?   Did you highlight discrepancies?


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> I have 6 years of training and reading. He has zero. He just foolishly assumes Mr Weiss is correct, even though General Choi had more mood swings and shifting opinions than a woman on her period.



Well aren't you the right little sexist. You are also incorrect as usual about women, but then that's your forte isn't it, being wrong, rude and arrogant. There is no place here for your misogyny.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> General Choi at one point reportedly did a 180 and claimed that Karate is a Taekkyon derivative.
> 
> .


Sir, link to source for this claim please.


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


> Well aren't you the right little sexist. You are also incorrect as usual about women, but then that's your forte isn't it, being wrong, rude and arrogant. There is no place here for your misogyny.



Yes such a misoginist stating biological facts. I'm sorry you took offense to being a woman


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, link to source for this claim please.



From the book "A killing art".


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, really?  You said it was my problem to solve vis a vis differences in Hand techniques between patterns and sparring drills. I  don't see a problem let alone having to solve one.



It is your problem as it relates to our discussion about to hip twist or not hip twist   (as Shakespear would put it). 

Attack techniques need to refer to patterns, let alone punching in patterns.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, you know this how?    How many classroom hours did you spend with General Choi? Did you take notes on what he said?   Did you highlight discrepancies?



I have clips on Youtube of General Choi puking over the KKW.  And others embracing them.


----------



## Acronym

Here is the KKW/Karate impersonators rant

I hope you listen very carefully to how he completely disrepects the KKW and thus violates his own principles of respect.


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> Yes such a misoginist stating biological facts. I'm sorry you took offense to being a woman



Actually no you were wrong. It's called Pre Menstrual Tension, the clue being the 'pre' bit indicating mood swings etc which happen before the period starts not during it.

I wasn't offended I was appalled by your arrogance and the assumption you could use this place like a school locker room.


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


> Actually no you were wrong. It's called Pre Menstrual Tension, the clue being the 'pre' bit indicating mood swings etc which happen before the period starts not during it.
> 
> .



That's true but I include it as within the period since it's tied to it


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> From the book "A killing art".


Approximate page please.     I have the book, I will check it out - Plus, I wrote Mr. Gillis and pointed out several things he got wrong.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> It is your problem as it relates to our discussion about to hip twist or not hip twist   (as Shakespear would put it).
> 
> Attack techniques need to refer to patterns, let alone punching in patterns.



A. Not a problem, since this is what he taught consistently. 
B. Hard to imagine how you can misinterpret and claim  "Attack techniques need to refer to patterns, let alone punching in patterns"    The Attack technique section is in Volume III   and the entire Volume III is Hand Techniques, and covers all hand techniques, including those done in pattern. There is no separate section differentiating pattern hand techniques.  You have the hubris to feel it's not clear enough.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I have clips on Youtube of General Choi puking over the KKW.  And others embracing them.


  This has exactly what to do on your claim that he changed what he said when he taught the hip twist / turn / jerk  for punches.   Anytime you want to detail your experience with General Choi, please go ahead.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> From the book "A killing art".


Actually in the book at page 42 (1st Edition) Gillis references Pres. Rhee after seeing the  demo and being told "it is Tang Soo Do" Pres. Rhee said "No, it'sT'aekkyon"   Gillis further goes on to state that this was problematic because TSD  was Karate and T'aekkyon  was a traditional Korean game.   So, I hope you can provide another page to purportedly support your claim since this actually refutes it.

For the record, as a whole like the book, He cites one of my articles in the notes.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> A There is no separate section differentiating pattern hand techniques.  You have the hubris to feel it's not clear enough.



I obviously meant need NOT refer to patterns. I missed writing out the "not" . 

There is too a separate section, it's called "punching: common principles"


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Actually in the book at page 42 (1st Edition) Gillis references Pres. Rhee after seeing the  demo and being told "it is Tang Soo Do" Pres. Rhee said "No, it'sT'aekkyon"   Gillis further goes on to state that this was problematic because TSD  was Karate and T'aekkyon  was a traditional Korean game.   So, I hope you can provide another page to purportedly support your claim since this actually refutes it.



That refutes what exactly?



Earl Weiss said:


> For the record, as a whole like the book, He cites one of my articles in the notes.



LOL! That sounds exactly like something Trump would say. "he likes me, so therefore I like him"


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> That's true but I include it as within the period since it's tied to it




No, you included it to be demeaning to the poster you were replying to. In doing so you demeaned women as well. 
And now you are bringing politics into it.

You don't know when to just shut up.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> This has exactly what to do on your claim that he changed what he said when he taught the hip twist / turn / jerk  for punches.   Anytime you want to detail your experience with General Choi, please go ahead.



His opinions are all over the place. Some days, they are poor impersonators of Karate, others they are doing TaeKwonDo techniques and he is proud to see his art in the Olympics


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I have clips on Youtube of General Choi puking over the KKW.  And others embracing them.


Show us.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Here is the KKW/Karate impersonators rant
> 
> I hope you listen very carefully to how he completely disrepects the KKW and thus violates his own principles of respect.


 listened through this interview twice. I heard nothing at all negative, especially against KKW (which is Korea). Rightfully, he expressed his passion to separate from the Japanese occupation But he was never disrespectful. 

I think it is You who lost some of what is said in translating.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> listened through this interview twice. I heard nothing at all negative, especially against KKW (which is Korea). Rightfully, he expressed his passion to separate from the Japanese occupation But he was never disrespectful.
> 
> I think it is You who lost some of what is said in translating.


*
The General

"It is unique that the founder of an Olympic discipline survives to see such global recognition of his work. It is unfortunate however, that due to the efforts of Korea to distance themselves politically from me, that the Olympics do not represent true TAEKWON-DO, but that of an inferior and removed style. "*


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> listened through this interview twice. I heard nothing at all negative, especially against KKW (which is Korea). Rightfully, he expressed his passion to separate from the Japanese occupation But he was never disrespectful.
> 
> I think it is You who lost some of what is said in translating.



I think you should put on your listening ears. He said that they were Poor imitation of Karate. And added that Karate is  "much"  better". That  is negative and disrespectful. .


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Here is the KKW/Karate impersonators rant
> 
> I hope you listen very carefully to how he completely disrepects the KKW and thus violates his own principles of respect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUOTE
> 
> .



Please point me to where he specifies his own principle of "respect" or are you confusing it with "Courtesy"


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That refutes what exactly?
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! That sounds exactly like something Trump would say. "he likes me, so therefore I like him"


Except that is not even close to what I said.   Classic example of "False equivalency".


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That refutes what exactly?
> 
> 
> "


Refutes your claim of General Choi saying Taekyon came from Karate and citing  "A Killing Art" being a source  to support your claim in that it say Pres. Rhee made the statement of watching the TSD Demo and saying that is Taekyon and General Choi and GM Nam considering the statement problematic.   I gave you the page number. If you have another portion that supposedly supports your claim I will be happy to review it just as I will your personal experience,  where you find General Choi changed what he taught,  Still waiting since I requested it at post 414.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Refutes your claim of General Choi saying Taekyon came from Karate and citing  "A Killing Art" being a source  to support your claim in that it say Pres. Rhee made the statement of watching the TSD Demo and saying that is Taekyon and General Choi and GM Nam considering the statement problematic.   I gave you the page number. If you have another portion that supposedly supports your claim I will be happy to review it just as I will your personal experience,  where you find General Choi changed what he taught,  Still waiting since I requested it at post 414.



I wrote that General Choi did a 180. Do you know what that means? And Yes I can give you the page but you will have to bare with me because I don't know which chapter.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I think you should put on your listening ears. He said that they were Poor imitation of Karate. And added that Karate is  "much"  better". That  is negative and disrespectful. .


Okay. What does any of that have to do with KKW?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I obviously meant need NOT refer to patterns. I missed writing out the "not" .
> 
> There is too a separate section, it's called "punching: common principles"


Clearly - Again, you misunderstand.   Try again.    Volume 3 contains Hand techniques.  Attack principles are the first General section followed by other sections such as Punching, striking etc. There is no separate section in any volume specifying different methodology for attack techniques or Lunching techniques in patterns.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Okay. What does any of that have to do with KKW?



The head of the KKW used to be the head of the WTF. He is talking about them.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I wrote that General Choi did a 180. Do you know what that means? And Yes I can give you the page but you will have to bare with me because I don't know which chapter.



What you said at post 408 was: 
"General Choi at one point reportedly did a 180 and claimed that Karate is a Taekkyon derivative."          I asked for your source and you state "A Killing Art"   My review indicates the book not only did not support your statement of what General Choi allegedly claimed, but indicates why he would not say that at the referenced page.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> What you said at post 408 was:
> "General Choi at one point reportedly did a 180 and claimed that Karate is a Taekkyon derivative."          I asked for your source and you state "A Killing Art"   My review indicates the book not only did not support your statement of what General Choi allegedly claimed, but indicates why he would not say that at the referenced page.



There is a chapter describing how Chois claims got more and more outrageous, and that is where that can be found. I don't have the urge to read through the hole book again but It's somewhere chapter 1-5


----------



## Acronym

Acronym said:


> The head of the KKW used to be the head of the WTF. He is talking about them.



Why are you disagreeing @dvcochran? What do you think he is referring to???


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Please point me to where he specifies his own principle of "respect" or are you confusing it with "Courtesy"



Respect is a budo philosophy tied tot he traditional martial arts. Every single person I've ever encountered espousing it fell short of it. General Choi's statements in that press conference about the KKW/WTF is cringeworthy.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Why are you disagreeing @dvcochran? What do you think he is referring to???


President KKW: Choi Young Ryul
President WT: Chungwon Choue

To my knowledge it has never been the same person.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Respect is a budo philosophy tied tot he traditional martial arts. Every single person I've ever encountered espousing it fell short of it. General Choi's statements in that press conference about the KKW/WTF is cringeworthy.


Sir, 'respect' is a base principle in every vein of philosophy I have ever read. It is not exclusive.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Respect is a budo philosophy tied tot he traditional martial arts. Every single person I've ever encountered espousing it fell short of it. General Choi's statements in that press conference about the KKW/WTF is cringeworthy.


Again? Let it go.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> To my knowledge it has never been the same person.




I believe it has but anyway, you know WTF is a term used to describe the KKW, since that is their sport.


----------



## Steve

Acronym said:


> All those in-between colored belts and stripes is western capitalism. In asia you had two or three belts until 1st dan.


Belts are useful for competition.  Helps pair folks up with others at roughly the same level of skill and training.  Not just about making a buck.


----------



## Steve

Acronym said:


> Novice
> _noun_
> 
> 1.
> a person new to and inexperienced in a job or situation.
> Sounds like a white belt to me and not a black belt going by proper language.


"Novice" is one of those words that can be used as an absolute term or a relative term.  Someone may actually be brand new to a position, and so clearly a novice.  Someone may also be new or inexperienced relative to someone else, and be considered a novice. So a white belt is a novice in the absolute sense of the word.  But a black belt may also be novice relative to a much more experienced practitioner.


----------



## Steve

Acronym said:


> Monthly fee seems to be an American thing. In Sweden you pay for 6 months of training all up front. In America  that's apparently viewed as Mcdojo which I find odd.


I heard in Sweden, the city government pays your dues out of general revenue tax dollars.

...

Just kidding, but the idea of paying 6 months at a time is only an indication of a McDojo if the idea is to lock you into a 6 month contract while simultaneously counting on you quitting after a month or two.

As an aside... are you in Sweden? Neat.


----------



## Steve

gpseymour said:


> Wait, a punch isn't an attack?


Somewhere along the way, someone said a punch can also be a block and vice versa (a block can also be a punch).  That might have been in the WC sub forum, though.


----------



## Steve

Acronym said:


> That's true but I include it as within the period since it's tied to it


Hey man.  This is not okay.


----------



## Steve

Okay.  So, I've read the entire thread, and I will admit I can't tell if @Acronym dislikes Gen. Choi, likes Gen. Choi, is trying to discredit Gen. Choi, or is actually trying to discredit TKD.  Outside of some really inappropriate and sexist comments, though, it was a wild ride.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> I believe it has but anyway, you know WTF is a term used to describe the KKW, since that is their sport.


WTF has not existed for some time now.


----------



## dvcochran

Steve said:


> Somewhere along the way, someone said a punch can also be a block and vice versa (a block can also be a punch).  That might have been in the WC sub forum, though.


100% true.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Steve said:


> Belts are useful for competition.  Helps pair folks up with others at roughly the same level of skill and training.  Not just about making a buck.


And can serve that same purpose in classes, especially where rank indicates what portion of the curriculum has been learned.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> There is a chapter describing how Chois claims got more and more outrageous, and that is where that can be found. I don't have the urge to read through the hole book again but It's somewhere chapter 1-5



Sir, so, support for your claim your claim is  your belief  that somewhere in some book someone said that someone said something.   Got it.

Further the discussion has to do with him allegedly changing  his mind or doing a "180" had nothing to do with his thoughts on KKW but was a discussion of how he wants technique performed.   Are you deliberately trying to change the discussion?


----------



## Earl Weiss

From your post 421 "I hope you listen very carefully to how he completely disrepects the KKW and thus violates his own principles of respect."


Acronym said:


> Respect is a budo philosophy tied tot he traditional martial arts. Every single person I've ever encountered espousing it fell short of it. General Choi's statements in that press conference about the KKW/WTF is cringeworthy.



So, now are you  claiming it was not "His" own principle? 

Are  you arguing that courtesy nd respect are the same?


----------



## Buka

I once asked a hippopotamus what it was like to fly.


----------



## Flying Crane

Buka said:


> I once asked a hippopotamus what it was like to fly.


Did you get an earful?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Are  you arguing that courtesy nd respect are the same?



One cannot exist without the other.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, so, support for your claim your claim is  your belief  that somewhere in some book someone said that someone said something.   Got it.
> 
> Further the discussion has to do with him allegedly changing  his mind or doing a "180" had nothing to do with his thoughts on KKW but was a discussion of how he wants technique performed.   Are you deliberately trying to change the discussion?



His changing views of the KKW is evidence of inconsistent belief as to what constitutes TaeKwonDo as opposed to Karate impersonation.

It is exactly the type of unreliability I was referring to when he tells you that SW has punching hip twist and to Yeo chin huat that SW parted with hip twist....  Some days the KKW is a poor mans Karate, other days they are part of the TKD family.... Some days  SW has hip twist punches, other days it does not.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> His changing views of the KKW is evidence of inconsistent belief as to what constitutes TaeKwonDo as opposed to Karate impersonation.
> 
> It is exactly the type of unreliability I was referring to when he tells you that SW has punching hip twist and to Yeo chin huat that SW parted with hip twist....  Some days the KKW is a poor mans Karate, other days they are part of the TKD family.... Some days  SW has hip twist punches, other days it does not.



So, you are comparing what General Choi consistently taught with what someone else says he thinks General Choi taught - got it. 

You base your opinion on snippets of videos and excerpts from texts and somehow extrapolate various excerpted opinions on KKW to what he taught.   My opinion is based upon over 150 classroom hours with him, a dozen pages or so of typed notes from that along with comparison to what he had in his texts, and found him 98% consistent and my conclusion that the other 2% or so can be mainly attributed to my misunderstanding what he said, his misunderstanding a question  or my inaccuracy in note taking.   I will leave it to others as to whose opinion is based on better data


----------



## Earl Weiss

EARL WEISS SAID: ↑
Are you arguing that courtesy nd respect are the same?


Acronym said:


> One cannot exist without the other.



Well therein we have a disagreement on how terms are defined / applied and without such agreement an intelligent discussion cannot be had. 

At a certain basic level most humans are entitled  to a certain level of respect simply for being part of humanity.   This is not what is typically referred to when someone says you need to respect someone,   Admittedly "Showing Respect"   and displaying "Courtesy" can be considered similar.   However, in most common usage someone is respected because of what they have accomplished and a feeling of admiration for their qualities or accomplishments.  .   Age, Rank, knowledge, experience.  etc.    Aside from age these qualities are unknow in a stranger so you would not "Respect" them.  Courtesy is often defined as politeness or good manners.   You can display courtesy to a stranger, or even to someone you do not respect.    

So, you can most definitely have courtesy without respect.   Having respect without courtesy - while possible would not say much about someone's education.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Acronym said:


> One cannot exist without the other.



Bollocks. Any decent human being is capable of being courteous to someone even if they have zero respect for them.


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> His changing views of the KKW is evidence of inconsistent belief as to what constitutes TaeKwonDo as opposed to Karate impersonation.
> 
> It is exactly the type of unreliability I was referring to when he tells you that SW has punching hip twist and to Yeo chin huat that SW parted with hip twist....  Some days the KKW is a poor mans Karate, other days they are part of the TKD family.... Some days  SW has hip twist punches, other days it does not.




Even my dog knows to give up on a bone when there's nothing more to be got out of it.


As we used to say in the RAF..................... NFI mate.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> One cannot exist without the other.


Either can exist without the other. I can be courteous to someone that I have no respect for. I can be incredibly rude to someone that I have a ton of respect for.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I can be courteous to someone that I have no respect for.



Yeah but why would you? The hole point behind courteous is that you respect him or her. So in practice, there is no difference.


----------



## Acronym

Dirty Dog said:


> Bollocks. Any decent human being is capable of being courteous to someone even if they have zero respect for them.



I can't say that I've experienced it from you. But I don't mind a little sting to conversations. Just sayin..


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I can be incredibly rude to someone that I have a ton of respect for.



You can mock someone who says smart things too. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean it actually makes any sense..


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> So, you are comparing what General Choi consistently taught with what someone else says he thinks General Choi taught - got it.
> 
> You base your opinion on snippets of videos and excerpts from texts and somehow extrapolate various excerpted opinions on KKW to what he taught.   My opinion is based upon over 150 classroom hours with him, a dozen pages or so of typed notes from that along with comparison to what he had in his texts, and found him 98% consistent and my conclusion that the other 2% or so can be mainly attributed to my misunderstanding what he said, his misunderstanding a question  or my inaccuracy in note taking.   I will leave it to others as to whose opinion is based on better data



No, I base it on my own training dating back to 2014 under Yeo Chin Huat

You challenged me to produce names having a different experience of what sine wave does and does not contain.. Then when I did so and encouraged you to email said person, you decided against it.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Yeah but why would you? The hole point behind courteous is that you respect him or her. So in practice, there is no difference.


No? The point of being courteous is to be polite to people, and just generally not be an ***. I don't respect most people I don't know, I don't disrespect them either. But that doesn't mean I won't be courteous to them, most of the time.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> You can mock someone who says smart things too. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean it actually makes any sense..


It happens all the time. People that respect others can be rude to those people, normally they end up feeling guilty about it later. But someone that you respect is generally someone you engage with, and emotions can get tense and cause rudeness. It happens. I'm sure just about every one of us has been rude to our parents multiple times within our lives, and yet most of us respect our parents as well.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> It happens all the time. People that respect others can be rude to those people, normally they end up feeling guilty about it later. .



I don't "believe" in that. Disrespecting someone is fundamental. It's not just some snarky remark.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> No? The point of being courteous is to be polite to people,.



You have a basic level of respect for people that you are courteous to. Anonymous forums are a perfect example of how true that is. When nobody needs to face the consequences, they disrespect the sh*it out of each other.

Then in real life people keep their mouths shut simply because it's easier that way. But I wouldn't say that they are polite.. just neutral.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> I don't "believe" in that. Disrespecting someone is fundamental. It's not just some snarky remark.


I'm not referring to disrespecting someone. I'm referring to being discourteous to someone that you respect.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> You have a basic level of respect for people that you are courteous to. Anonymous forums are a perfect example of how true that is. When nobody needs to face the consequences, they disrespect the sh*it out of each other.
> 
> Then in real life people keep their mouths shut simply because it's easier that way. But I wouldn't say that they are polite.. just neutral.


Nope. I don't have a base level of respect for strangers. It starts off neutral. I'm still courteous to them. I gather that this might not be the case for you...but that's you. Not everyone.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Nope. I don't have a base level of respect for strangers. It starts off neutral. I'm still courteous to them. I gather that this might not be the case for you...but that's you. Not everyone.



You just said yourself that's it's neutral. Courteous is going out of your way to be nice. Chance encounters are irrelevant anyway. You just do things on autopilot.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> You just said yourself that's it's neutral. Courteous is going out of your way to be nice. Chance encounters are irrelevant anyway. You just do things on autopilot.


My level of respect for strangers is neutral. Being courteous is not.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> I don't "believe" in that. Disrespecting someone is fundamental. It's not just some snarky remark.


As this thread has shown, what you do and don’t believe doesn’t much affect reality.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Earl Weiss: "So, you are comparing what General Choi consistently taught with what someone else says he thinks General Choi taught - got it."




Acronym said:


> No, I base it on my own training dating back to 2014 under Yeo Chin Huat



Sir, Thank you for confirming what I said.     Your opinion is based on your understanding of  what someone else purportedly said their understanding of what General Choi   allegedly said or taught.  (This provides 2 levels of potential misinterpretation)

 My opinion is firsthand experience.  Training directly with General Choi - over 150 classroom hours   from 1990 to 2002.  Pages of notes from these classes   means any inconsistencies  or misunderstanding would have  been revealed. 

 I tried to find your instructor's resume on line so I could better understand the depth and breadth of his direct experience.   The on line resume is spare. Says he was born in 1953 and started Judo in 1966, and some unspecified time later started TKD continuing on to reach 9th Dan and leading Sweden . If you have more details I would love to see it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Yeah but why would you? The hole point behind courteous is that you respect him or her. So in practice, there is no difference.


Sir, Sorry, this is just wrong.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Earl Weiss: "So, you are comparing what General Choi consistently taught with what someone else says he thinks General Choi taught - got it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sir, Thank you for confirming what I said.     Your opinion is based on your understanding of  what someone else purportedly said their understanding of what General Choi   allegedly said or taught.  (This provides 2 levels of potential misinterpretation)
> 
> My opinion is firsthand experience.  Training directly with General Choi - over 150 classroom hours   from 1990 to 2002.  Pages of notes from these classes   means any inconsistencies  or misunderstanding would have  been revealed.
> 
> I tried to find your instructor's resume on line so I could better understand the depth and breadth of his direct experience.   The on line resume is spare. Says he was born in 1953 and started Judo in 1966, and some unspecified time later started TKD continuing on to reach 9th Dan and leading Sweden . If you have more details I would love to see it.



Here is the clubs website:

Malmö TaeKwon-Do-Cobra


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> My level of respect for strangers is neutral. Being courteous is not.



Being courteous to complete strangers is autopilot ingrained by your parents. It means nothing.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Being courteous to complete strangers is autopilot ingrained by your parents. It means nothing.


So then you agree that you don't need to respect someone to be courteous to them?


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> So then you agree that you don't need to respect someone to be courteous to them?



Not if it's someone with an agenda counter to yours such as the KKW. We saw how Choi dismissed them as pretenders. His statements were an absolutely disgrace. The only courtesy he would show them face to face would be out of fear to get his *** kicked.

I am not a representative for TKD so I can say what I want. He should be held to a higher standard.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Not if it's someone with an agenda counter to yours such as the KKW. We saw how Choi dismissed them as pretenders. His statements were an absolutely disgrace. The only courtesy he would show them face to face would be out of fear to get his *** kicked.
> 
> I am not a representative for TKD so I can say what I want. He should be held to a higher standard.


That's irrelevant to my point. It's a specific instance where you feel someone was both did not respect the others, and was discourteous towards them. It does not mean that you cannot be courteous towards someone you do not respect, as you initially implied.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Not if it's someone with an agenda counter to yours such as the KKW. We saw how Choi dismissed them as pretenders. His statements were an absolutely disgrace. The only courtesy he would show them face to face would be out of fear to get his *** kicked.
> 
> I am not a representative for TKD so I can say what I want. He should be held to a higher standard.


Sir, I see, now you are criticizing someone else for critical statements you deem to be a disgrace. 

Have you heard the expression "The pot calling the Kettle Black" ?


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> Being courteous to complete strangers is autopilot ingrained by your parents. It means nothing.



It means you don't get punched out by said stranger because you aren't rude to them.

Politeness and good manners are the oil that enables people to exist reasonably amicably. I don't think you got the note about that.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Here is the clubs website:
> 
> Malmö TaeKwon-Do-Cobra


Found this:   
GM Yeo Chin-Huat, born 1953 began his martial arts journey by practicing judo. In 1966 he began training taekwondo in Singapore when he was still a teenager. Taekwon-do was introduced to Singapore sometime in the early 60´s when Gen. Choi was an ambassador to Korea in Malaysia.
>>>Yeo was training under a Singapore pioneer instructor in YMCA and for a short period he was also training with some guest instructors, like GM Han Cha Kyo and GM Kim Bok Man, the Korean original Taekwon-do pioneer.<<<
In 1973 he joined the Singapore armed Forces, as taekwondo instructor he was teaching the senior officers and the Advanced Physical Training Instructors in the (School of Physical Training). He was among the first official taekwondo instructors to be appointed in the Singapore Army. He was also active in promoting taekwondo by instructing taekwondo at the YMCA. He participated in a number of taekwondo tournaments at both national and international levels.
He arrived in Sweden in 1977 as a guest instructor to GM Leong W.M. and later he took over his two clubs and continued to develop Taekwon-do in Sweden. He has been very active and TaeKwon-Do has been the main force in his life, since then he Participated almost in every ITF world Championships and European Championships as an Umpire/Jury. He also organized a few important seminars, for Gen. Choi in Sweden 1994 October with over more then hundreds of participants, For the Grand Master Rhee Ki Ha in Sweden as well.
Grand Master Yeo emphasizes not only a strict self-imposed discipline along with the spirit of cooperation and mutual respect. The study of TaeKwon-Do proceeded in two parts; spiritual discipline and technical perfection.

I noted the part >>><<<< Because according to Han Ch Kyo's info GM Han was Chief instructor in Singapore in 1971 before he left for Chicago.  Since my instructor was under Han Cha Kyo when he started one could say we have the same roots vis a vis adopting GM Han's habits in the early days which were of course CDK Habits.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Being courteous to complete strangers is autopilot ingrained by your parents. It means nothing.


That is correct. And is contradictory to your statement that respect and courtesy are always co-present.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> That is correct. And is contradictory to your statement that respect and courtesy are always co-present.



Nope. Not being disrespectful is not equivalent to being respectful. There is a middle ground called neutral.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I noted the part >>><<<< Because according to Han Ch Kyo's info GM Han was Chief instructor in Singapore in 1971 before he left for Chicago.  Since my instructor was under Han Cha Kyo when he started one could say we have the same roots vis a vis adopting GM Han's habits in the early days which were of course CDK Habits.



Nobody is disputing that you did things differently the early days. That's not the issue. The issue is how to do it *now*


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Nobody is disputing that you did things differently the early days. That's not the issue. The issue is how to do it *now*


No sir, the issue is how someone thought General Choi wanted things done in the early days  because they assumed what some pioneer did reflected that (which included me) and then when learning what General Choi actually wanted viewed it as a change rather than a refinement / correction.  .


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No sir, the issue is how someone thought General Choi wanted things done in the early days  because they assumed what some pioneer did reflected that (which included me) and then when learning what General Choi actually wanted viewed it as a change rather than a refinement / correction.  .



GM Yeo has a photo General Choi sitting in his sofa in the 90s. You can find it in the clubs website. Does that indicate to you someone who is not in touch with Choi since the 70s?


----------



## Acronym

One would think that in 4 years training, 3 days a week, I would be told to twist my hip in SW when punching, if that was what GM Yeo wanted.

Very curious also that he, like Choi, corrected people who did twist their hips in clips we can all see, as opposed to unverified anecdotes....

The evidence against United States Grandmaster is damning.... Pretty sure I would win this case easily in a court... Regardless of the truth.


----------



## Acronym

While we are on the subject of argument from authority. Is US GM Weiss of the opinion that he is a higher authority than international GM Yeo? 

Just curious....


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Nope. Not being disrespectful is not equivalent to being respectful. There is a middle ground called neutral.


Yes. Which you denied by saying respect and courtesy automatically go together. Did you forget what your statement was?


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Yes. Which you denied by saying respect and courtesy automatically go together. Did you forget what your statement was?



Courtesy and neutrality are not the same thing.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Courtesy and neutrality are not the same thing.


I think I see the issue. You can't imagine showing general courtesy to the general public. As such, you lose that courtesy yourself by your behavior. So your experience suggests that people are not typically courteous, and are instead neutral.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I think I see the issue. You can't imagine showing general courtesy to the general public. As such, you lose that courtesy yourself by your behavior. So your experience suggests that people are not typically courteous, and are instead neutral.



Ad hominem when all else fail... I think we can all agree that regardless, General Choi failed both.. Read the book a killing art. It tells a very telling story of how he tells one student "you should get your money back from your instructor" after they didn't demonstrate a technique to his satisfaction during a seminar.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> Ad hominem when all else fail... I think we can all agree that regardless, General Choi failed both.. Read the book a killing art. It tells a very telling story of how he tells one student "you should get your money back from your instructor" after they didn't demonstrate a technique to his satisfaction during a seminar.


Not an ad hominem. The difference in experiences just clicked with me, so I understand the dispute. And I doubt I can change your mind when your experiences support it.


----------



## Acronym

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Not an ad hominem. The difference in experiences just clicked with me, so I understand the dispute. And I doubt I can change your mind when your experiences support it.



This is Googles definition of courtesy:

"The showing of politeness in one's attitude and behaviour towards others."

Publicly labeling the KKW/WTF Karate imposters is incompatible with that tenet.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Acronym said:


> This is Googles definition of courtesy:
> 
> "The showing of politeness in one's attitude and behaviour towards others."
> 
> Publicly labeling the KKW/WTF Karate imposters is incompatible with that tenet.


Unrelated to the point I was making. Which is irrelevant to the larger point at this point since I was not addressing general choi, and have no idea the attitude he had towards others.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Nope. Not being disrespectful is not equivalent to being respectful. There is a middle ground called neutral.


That seems like you’re shifting around to try to avoid the contradiction of your prior statements.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> One would think that in 4 years training, 3 days a week, I would be told to twist my hip in SW when punching, if that was what GM Yeo wanted.
> 
> Very curious also that he, like Choi, corrected people who did twist their hips in clips we can all see, as opposed to unverified anecdotes....
> 
> The evidence against United States Grandmaster is damning.... Pretty sure I would win this case easily in a court... Regardless of the truth.


So you admit the truth isn’t really important to your claim?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> While we are on the subject of argument from authority. Is US GM Weiss of the opinion that he is a higher authority than international GM Yeo?
> 
> Just curious....


That is a blatant attempt to use argument from authority. And it has no real weight in the question at hand. 

You are bad at this.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> That is a blatant attempt to use argument from authority. And it has no real weight in the question at hand.
> 
> You are bad at this.



No no, Mr Weiss used it first (which is fine, argument from authority is not always a fallacy)


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> So you admit the truth isn’t really important to your claim?



As I explained in this thread repeatedly, General Choi displayed a lot of conflictedness towards Karate and TaeKwonDo, and I am being honest when I say that I do not trust his own words from day to day. His opinions were not consistent through time with regards to pretty much anything. 

This is why I take the view that I believe he has advocated both things at different times. I am being charitable to Mr Weiss, he could also have misunderstood him.


----------



## Acronym

It is worth noting that Mr Weiss is the only one I know of who claim that hip twist was intact for sine wave punching.

Everybody else have a different interpretation. 

Make of that what you will..


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Nope. Not being disrespectful is not equivalent to being respectful. There is a middle ground called neutral.


You will have to elaborate on that one. To me the two terms are binary; you either Are being disrespectful or not.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> GM Yeo has a photo General Choi sitting in his sofa in the 90s. You can find it in the clubs website. Does that indicate to you someone who is not in touch with Choi since the 70s?


No sir, yet sitting on a sofa is not the same as being in a classroom.   What has been indicated to me is you have language processing issues vis a vis conventional  meanings.     II have been on the floor instructed by several who trained with General Choi at various times.   Yet, my first hand experience revealed   revealed numerous items that needed refinement based on first hand experience.   If you expect me to criticize GM Yeo, that won't happen the best you would get, if I were to ever have first hand classroom experience with him is that we have a difference of opinion.   This is not unusual. The Triumvirate that took over teaching IICs after General Choi's death during dinner related how between them they had been to 100 IICs with general Choi andid not always agree on what the standard should be.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> One would think that in 4 years training, 3 days a week, I would be told to twist my hip in SW when punching, if that was what GM Yeo wanted.
> 
> Very curious also that he, like Choi, corrected people who did twist their hips in clips we can all see, as opposed to unverified anecdotes....
> 
> The evidence against United States Grandmaster is damning.... Pretty sure I would win this case easily in a court... Regardless of the truth.


I cannot speak to what GM Yeo may or may not have said he told you.  If you refer to the clip where General Choi says "Don't twist your body" as opposed to "Don't twist your Hips" don't let the courthouse door hit you in the butt on the way out after your loss. If you have another clip I will be happy to review it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> While we are on the subject of argument from authority. Is US GM Weiss of the opinion that he is a higher authority than international GM Yeo?
> 
> Just curious....


Sir, since I have no information concerning the extent of GM Yeo's classroom experience with General Choi I have no opinion on this. Eve if I did,  As far as  me commenting on who is a "Higher Authority" if it is based solely upon whether your instructor or mine is of senior rank  - you lose.  Other than that  - Courtesy will not let me comment on the accuracy of your claims, as to the accuracy of GM Yeo's perspective.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No sir, yet sitting on a sofa is not the same as being in a classroom.   What has been indicated to me is you have language processing issues vis a vis conventional  meanings.     II have been on the floor instructed by several who trained with General Choi at various times.   Yet, my first hand experience revealed   revealed numerous items that needed refinement based on first hand experience.   If you expect me to criticize GM Yeo, that won't happen the best you would get, if I were to ever have first hand classroom experience with him is that we have a difference of opinion.   This is not unusual. The Triumvirate that took over teaching IICs after General Choi's death during dinner related how between them they had been to 100 IICs with general Choi andid not always agree on what the standard should be.



Hearsay is dismissable in court.


----------



## Steve

Couple of quick points about some of the tangential discussions going on.  

An appeal to authority is not always a fallacy, if the credibility of the authority is generally agreed upon by everyone involved, and the area of expertise is directly relevant to the topic at hand.  The issue around here is people arguing that because they know one thing (e.g., "self defense" ninja training), that they are experts in another thing (e.g., fighting).  The easiest way to combat this is to cite your sources, and to pay attention to those who do not.  

Respect can exist without courtesy, and vice versa.  Though, I can understand how not being disrespectful is different from being respectful.  FWIW, I also see a clear distinction between respecting someone and being respectful.  The latter is a behavior, while the former is a belief or opinion.

Okay, carry on.


----------



## Acronym

Steve said:


> Couple of quick points about some of the tangential discussions going on.
> 
> An appeal to authority is not always a fallacy, if the credibility of the authority is generally agreed upon by everyone involved, and the area of expertise is directly relevant to the topic at hand.  The issue around here is people arguing that because they know one thing (e.g., "self defense" ninja training), that they are experts in another thing (e.g., fighting).  The easiest way to combat this is to cite your sources, and to pay attention to those who do not.
> 
> Respect can exist without courtesy, and vice versa.  Though, I can understand how not being disrespectful is different from being respectful.  FWIW, I also see a clear distinction between respecting someone and being respectful.  The latter is a behavior, while the former is a belief or opinion.
> 
> Okay, carry on.



I agree. And GM Yeo has more credentials than Weiss as far as I know. 

Isn't YMCA a pretty prestigious merit?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, since I have no information concerning the extent of GM Yeo's classroom experience with General Choi I have no opinion on this. Eve if I did,  As far as  me commenting on who is a "Higher Authority" if it is based solely upon whether your instructor or mine is of senior rank  - you lose.  Other than that  - Courtesy will not let me comment on the accuracy of your claims, as to the accuracy of GM Yeo's perspective.



You said that you couldn't find any info on him, then you did.. So do you take that back?


----------



## Steve

Acronym said:


> I agree. And GM Yeo has more credentials than Weiss as far as I know.
> 
> Isn't YMCA a pretty prestigious merit?


Don't misunderstand me.  It's a fallacy unless everyone agrees on the relative credibility of the authority in question.  Generally, if someone disputes the credibility of people involved, it's a good idea to present objective information from other credible sources.


----------



## Acronym

Steve said:


> Don't misunderstand me.  It's a fallacy unless everyone agrees on the relative credibility of the authority in question.  Generally, if someone disputes the credibility of people involved, it's a good idea to present objective information from other credible sources.



Which has been done


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No sir, yet sitting on a sofa is not the same as being in a classroom.   What has been indicated to me is you have language processing issues vis a vis conventional  meanings.     II have been on the floor instructed by several who trained with General Choi at various times.   Yet, my first hand experience revealed   revealed numerous items that needed refinement based on first hand experience.   If you expect me to criticize GM Yeo, that won't happen the best you would get, if I were to ever have first hand classroom experience with him is that we have a difference of opinion.   This is not unusual. The Triumvirate that took over teaching IICs after General Choi's death during dinner related how between them they had been to 100 IICs with general Choi andid not always agree on what the standard should be.



And you never self reflected that the vast majority talk about sine wave as juxtaposed to hip twist? Everybody else is wrong, you are the only one who formed the impression that it was intact...

Why NLTKD does not teach Sine Wave - North London Taekwondo

*Ask anyone to punch as hard as possible and he or she will naturally twist their hips and shoulders. It is a natural movement hard coded into our DNA. The “hip twist” technique has been used for centuries in most fighting and martial arts styles. The NLTKD practices it too.

In competition sparring, example Taekwondo, kick boxing, regular boxing or MMA, everyone uses “hip twist” to generate power and speed. Sine Wave is non-existent anywhere in the real world.

Now bear in mind, no one ever joins a martial arts club to learn patterns, so adding a bobbing up and down movement called “Sine Wave” to patterns lessons seems pointless. People join a martial arts club for fitness, self defence, sparring and/or confidence. The sine wave style does nothing to help achieve these goals.

So that is why the NLTKD does not teach Sine Wave style. We teach the original Traditional style Taekwondo as in the video below and still practiced in many taekwondo schools worldwide.*


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You said that you couldn't find any info on him, then you did.. So do you take that back?


My initial search revealed little. Then by happenstance I ran across something - I think it was on FB, I found what I posted - a very brief history of his TKD experience. - Born in 1953, started TKD in 1966, with some experience under Han Cha Kyo who coincidentally my instructor was under when I started in 1972 or so.   Other than that not much in the way of his experience vis a vis courses or sessions with General Choi,  such as IICs, or promotion history so the comment stands.   Too little information found to form any sort of opinion..


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> No no, Mr Weiss used it first (which is fine, argument from authority is not always a fallacy)


Sir, my argument  from authority   cited THE AUTHORITY, far different than opinions . It would be likemaking a claim about Mozart's music and citing something Mozart said to support it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I agree. And GM Yeo has more credentials than Weiss as far as I know.
> 
> Isn't YMCA a pretty prestigious merit?




Here is a link to excerpts from my credentials..  Microsoft Word - Resume TKD.doc (googlegroups.com) 
Important updates would be an ITF IC in Denver in 2010, and promotion to 9th Dan (USTF) 2016. 
If you have something similar for GM yeo I would be happy to compare.   However it is of little import since I know of some whose credentials exceed mine when it comes to   TK-D and we have differences of opinion. As I related in a prior post even the most seniors who took ove after general Choi died admitted to having differences of opinion on some technical issues. 

As for your   >>>Isn't YMCA a pretty prestigious merit?<<<   question, I do not know what you refer to.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, my argument  from authority   cited THE AUTHORITY, far different than opinions . It would be likemaking a claim about Mozart's music and citing something Mozart said to support it.



You have not cited anything said in any one of Chois classes with regards to hip twist and sine wave. The encyclopedia quotes were taken out of context and are also old statements that are left in from the very first editions.


----------



## Acronym

I will ask again: *Why is there a perceived juxtaposition between Sine Wave and hip twist in the public eye if no such conflict exist?*

General Choi must have been a very poor communicator of his own revised system.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> And you never self reflected that the vast majority talk about sine wave as juxtaposed to hip twist? Everybody else is wrong, you are the only one who formed the impression that it was intact...
> 
> Why NLTKD does not teach Sine Wave - North London Taekwondo
> 
> /QUOTE]
> >>.And you never self reflected that the vast majority talk about sine wave as juxtaposed to hip twist?<<
> 
> .


Not certain what you mean by "Juxtaposed" .    If you use   a dictionary definition "To place side by side, especially for comparison or contrast."   then the premise is faulty. since it is not one compared to the other , it is both used together- that is what General Choi taught.   So the article linked to which seems based upon an either or premise  is based on a faulty premise.  Everyone else is not wrong. It seems the articles written to the contrary seem to be from those who did not train with General Choi and  and make faulty assumptions   based upon internet snippets


----------



## Acronym

Chang Hon TKD instructor Mitch quote from MartialArtsPlanet:
*
"Gen Choi changed the way many techniques were delivered, initially through how hip movement was used to develop power in some techniques and later through the more controversial "sine wave."*


Again, everybody but Weiss and his circle of friends have a different impression. Very curious


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You have not cited anything said in any one of Chois classes with regards to hip twist and sine wave. The encyclopedia quotes were taken out of context and are also old statements that are left in from the very first editions.



Encyclopedia quotes were in context. Sorry, if you did not like them . 

Here you go from my notes:    HOWEVER, I did not necessarily record things if they were a repeat from other courses / classes.   So, the absence of the notes from other sessions does not mean it did not happen:

Regular numbers are June 1990 instructor course Grand Lake Colorado: Taught By General Choi

Numbers P1., P2., etc. are from the December 6, 1997 seminar with General Choi Hong Hi in Phoenix Arizona.

Numbers J1., J2., etc. are from the November 1998 Instructor course with General Choi in Jamaica.

27. Move bigger muscles (hips) slightly before and ahead of smaller muscles, (finish at same time) to utilize body mass.

P4. Must move hip and abdomen to bring entire muscle system into play and start moving the larger and slower muscles before the smaller faster muscles which will catch up. 

J6. Movement of Hip and abdomen See P4.

J7. Only TKD has 2 ways to generate power with hip, up and down and sideways


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Chang Hon TKD instructor Mitch quote from MartialArtsPlanet:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, everybody but Weiss and his circle of friends have a different impression. Very curious



Sir, which of my friends have you heard from . Of course by my friends if you are referring to people with first hand experience with General Choi   as opposed to those relying on internet snippets, I am flattered.   By the way not as curious as your above quote from "Chang Hon TKD Instructor Mich. "  Sorry, but I ma not familiar with his qualifications. Can you provide them?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Encyclopedia quotes were in context. Sorry, if you did not like them .
> 
> Here you go from my notes:    HOWEVER, I did not necessarily record things if they were a repeat from other courses / classes.   So, the absence of the notes from other sessions does not mean it did not happen:
> 
> Regular numbers are June 1990 instructor course Grand Lake Colorado: Taught By General Choi
> 
> Numbers P1., P2., etc. are from the December 6, 1997 seminar with General Choi Hong Hi in Phoenix Arizona.
> 
> Numbers J1., J2., etc. are from the November 1998 Instructor course with General Choi in Jamaica.
> 
> 27. Move bigger muscles (hips) slightly before and ahead of smaller muscles, (finish at same time) to utilize body mass.
> 
> P4. Must move hip and abdomen to bring entire muscle system into play and start moving the larger and slower muscles before the smaller faster muscles which will catch up.
> 
> J6. Movement of Hip and abdomen See P4.
> 
> J7. Only TKD has 2 ways to generate power with hip, up and down and sideways



Thank you for that. Those parameters are open to interpretation. No explicit mention of hip twist, just as I suspected. TKD obviously generates power through the hip in various techniques outside of SW punching so that is not a vindication of your contention.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I will ask again: *Why is there a perceived juxtaposition between Sine Wave and hip twist in the public eye if no such conflict exist?*
> 
> General Choi must have been a very poor communicator of his own revised system.


Sir, Because to many people   make rash generalizations based on limited observations. .


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Thank you for that. Those parameters are open to interpretation. No explicit mention of hip twist, just as I suspected. TKD obviously generates power through the hip in various techniques outside of SW punching so that is not a vindication of your contention.



They are open to interpretation / misinterpretation if someone has only the limited resource of the written word.   (Heck I misinterpreted stuff in the texts like "Pick Shape Kick" and "Hooking kick" even with some photos.   proper understanding was easy when the written word  was coupled with demonstration.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Hearsay is dismissable in court.


Sir, not sure what the heck you are referring to since my experience is firsthand.   As such my experience is not hearsay. On the other hand you are relating what someone else told you happened.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> They are open to interpretation / misinterpretation if someone has only the limited resource of the written word.   (Heck I misinterpreted stuff in the texts like "Pick Shape Kick" and "Hooking kick" even with some photos.   proper understanding was easy when the written word  was coupled with demonstration.



It states specifically "2 ways to generate power". if hip twist and SW went hand in hand, it would make more sense to label it as 1 unified way. Whether this was intentional or not, it is ambiguous.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I agree. And GM Yeo has more credentials than Weiss as far as I know.
> 
> Isn't YMCA a pretty prestigious merit?


I see now - you seem to refer to the info I posted about GM Yeo teaching at a YMCA.   The answer to your question >>>Isn't YMCA a pretty prestigious merit?<<<   would be "No".


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> It states specifically "2 ways to generate power". if hip twist and SW went hand in hand, it would make more sense to label it as 1 unified way. Whether this was intentional or not, it is ambiguous.


Sir, when you write a text or  two, (how about publish an article or two) and have it read by tens of thousands of people let me know if any readers or even you yourself might not think there might have been a better way of writing something.   Perhaps that is why instructors consider texts to be a good reference but not a substitute for the instructor..


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, when you write a text or  two, (how about publish an article or two) and have it read by tens of thousands of people let me know if any readers or even you yourself might not think there might have been a better way of writing something.   Perhaps that is why instructors consider texts to be a good reference but not a substitute for the instructor..



That's why I asked for actual quotes of Choi from the classes of which you speak. You can at worst paraphrase, since you apparently remember them...


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That's why I asked for actual quotes of Choi from the classes of which you speak. You can at best paraphrase, since you apparently remember them...


Not exactly.   I took notes at each course.   I kept a small notepad and pen in the folds of my uniform. Later I was able to   compile all notes by topic on the computer.    So, it was not from my memory now but from my notes at the time.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Not exactly.   I took notes at each course.   I kept a small notepad and pen in the folds of my uniform. Later I was able to   compile all notes by topic on the computer.    So, it was not from my memory now but from my notes at the time.



Why didn't he devote any chapters to SW? He outlined 5 very short principles. He never defended his revision, all he did was say that the old way "makes no sense" in various seminars on Youtube.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Why didn't he devote any chapters to SW? He outlined 5 very short principles. He never defended his revision, all he did was say that the old way "makes no sense" in various seminars on Youtube.



Sir, Why do you think you get to set the parameters as to what should be done.   There is no question he never meant a book to be a substitute for a good instructor.    

You seem to think I am in some small minority of those who disagree with you or what you claim your instructor says.  Find me some people who went through 6 or more IICs with General Choi and then perhaps we  can address who agrees and who disagrees with me.   If you can't find someone who has been to 6 who disagrees with me, how about 4?   Maybe 2?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Why do you think you get to set the parameters as to what should be done.   There is no question he never meant a book to be a substitute for a good instructor.
> 
> You seem to think I am in some small minority of those who disagree with you or what you claim your instructor says.  Find me some people who went through 6 or more IICs with General Choi and then perhaps we  can address who agrees and who disagrees with me.   If you can't find someone who has been to 6 who disagrees with me, how about 4?   Maybe 2?



You wrote yourself that the incorrect notion people have is due to limited observations. This raises the question why there is an incorrect notion in the first place. If there wasn't a removal of hip twist taking place, why did they act as if there was? Clearly because their instructor had this interpretation...


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That's why I asked for actual quotes of Choi from the classes of which you speak. You can at worst paraphrase, since you apparently remember them...


This was from my notes - not from memory.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You wrote yourself that the incorrect notion people have is due to limited observations. This raises the question why there is an incorrect notion in the first place. If there wasn't a removal of hip twist taking place, why did they act as if there was? Clearly because their instructor had this interpretation...


  Almost correct - their instructor had a misinterpretation.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Almost correct - their instructor had a misinterpretation.



Don't you see how arrogant that is? The notes you provided are ambigious, and a hip twist interpretation is strenuous. The notes prescribe to engage your entire body. Big surprise. And it describes two system of power generation...


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Don't you see how arrogant that is? The notes you provided are ambigious, and a hip twist interpretation is strenuous. The notes prescribe to engage your entire body. Big surprise. And it describes two system of power generation...



Not arrogant at all.   Why? Because  from first hand experience I could see how stuff was misinterpreted  (just as I and my instructors had) .  Also, sometimes when he taught I did not initially understand his meaning.  I would then ask others if they understood what he was trying to convey- sometimes they did and sometimes they didn't. If they did I asked them to help me understand.  Later, after more explanations /  demonstrations the point became clear.     Also, sometimes at courses due to my prior experience when he would say something I would see a puzzled look on someone's face  and ask if they understood what he meant - if they said no, I would then help them understand.   There was a technique I developed in grade school and used thru post grad work. As a child if the teacher said something you did not understand and you asked a question others might call you stupid for not understanding.   To counter this before i would ask  question I might ask  at least 2 people around me if they understood. If they did I would ask them to explain it to me. If they didn't I would ask the question taking comfort in knowing there were at least 2 other people as stupid as I was.    

You consider my notes ambiguous and the interpretation strenuous  (strained)  only because you seem to have a language processing issue, weren't there, nor was anyone who feels as you do,  and you want to  take this position.    Tell me someone who feels as you do but shares firsthand experience similar to mine?   

As far as arrogance goes , if you consider my position  that I am  neither smarter nor dumber than average - then I guess I am.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Not arrogant at all.   Why? Because  from first hand experience I could see how stuff was misinterpreted  (just as I and my instructors had) .  Also, sometimes when he taught I did not initially understand his meaning.  I would then ask others if they understood what he was trying to convey- sometimes they did and sometimes they didn't. If they did I asked them to help me understand.  Later, after more explanations /  demonstrations the point became clear.     Also, sometimes at courses due to my prior experience when he would say something I would see a puzzled look on someone's face  and ask if they understood what he meant - if they said no, I would then help them understand.   There was a technique I developed in grade school and used thru post grad work. As a child if the teacher said something you did not understand and you asked a question others might call you stupid for not understanding.   To counter this before i would ask  question I might ask  at least 2 people around me if they understood. If they did I would ask them to explain it to me. If they didn't I would ask the question taking comfort in knowing there were at least 2 other people as stupid as I was.
> 
> You consider my notes ambiguous and the interpretation strenuous  (strained)  only because you seem to have a language processing issue, weren't there, nor was anyone who feels as you do,  and you want to  take this position.    Tell me someone who feels as you do but shares firsthand experience similar to mine?
> 
> As far as arrogance goes , if you consider my position  that I am  neither smarter nor dumber than average - then I guess I am.



I am not having language issues. Nowhere does it state explicitly what you claim it does. Ambigious writing is not inevitable. All it needs to state is twist your hip (when punching) and the case is settled, with no instructor susceptible to incorrect interpretation.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Not arrogant at all.   Why? Because  from first hand experience I could see how stuff was misinterpreted  (just as I and my instructors had) .  Also, sometimes when he taught I did not initially understand his meaning.  I would then ask others if they understood what he was trying to convey- sometimes they did and sometimes they didn't. If they did I asked them to help me understand.  Later, after more explanations /  demonstrations the point became clear.     Also, sometimes at courses due to my prior experience when he would say something I would see a puzzled look on someone's face  and ask if they understood what he meant - if they said no, I would then help them understand.   There was a technique I developed in grade school and used thru post grad work. As a child if the teacher said something you did not understand and you asked a question others might call you stupid for not understanding.   To counter this before i would ask  question I might ask  at least 2 people around me if they understood. If they did I would ask them to explain it to me. If they didn't I would ask the question taking comfort in knowing there were at least 2 other people as stupid as I was.
> 
> You consider my notes ambiguous and the interpretation strenuous  (strained)  only because you seem to have a language processing issue, weren't there, nor was anyone who feels as you do,  and you want to  take this position.    Tell me someone who feels as you do but shares firsthand experience similar to mine?
> 
> .



I am not impressed with anecdotes. If you by your own admission have been repeatedly confused, then your own account of when you think you understood is in question. Especially with a lingustically and cognitively unreliable source, that is an elderly Korean with a second language and opinions all over the map.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I am not having language issues. Nowhere does it state explicitly what you claim it does. Ambigious writing is not inevitable. All it needs to state is twist your hip (when punching) and the case is settled, with no instructor susceptible to incorrect interpretation.



Your point seems to be "Hip Twist" Existed before "Sine Wave " was introduced and then was eliminated and only finding those exact words will satisfy you.   Please point out where those exact words appear in the 1965 or 1972 Text which were the Texts in English published before the term Sine wave was later introduced.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If you by your own admission have been repeatedly confused,


Again you either have a language processing issue or are of extreme intellect.  If you have understood 100% of everything every teacher you ever had told you the first time then I envy you, however your failure to grasp numerous issues with language as evidenced on this board would indicate this is not the case.  Here is yet another example. There is a difference between not understanding what someone says and being confused.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I am not impressed with anecdotes.


Apparently you are very impressed by anecdotes but only by those that agree with you.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Your point seems to be "Hip Twist" Existed before "Sine Wave " was introduced and then was eliminated and only finding those exact words will satisfy you.



Not me, instructors all over the world....


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> Don't you see how arrogant that is? The notes you provided are ambigious, and a hip twist interpretation is strenuous. The notes prescribe to engage your entire body. Big surprise. And it describes two system of power generation...


You really, really need to research who you are trying to pick an argument with. To say you are way off base would mean your base is on another planet.


----------



## Buka

When one has a wealth of knowledge,  experience and information at their fingertips, one would be better served to take advantage of it.


----------



## Earl Weiss

[QUOTE="Acronym, post: 2031750, member: 42552". Especially with a lingustically and cognitively unreliable source, that is an elderly Korean with a second language and opinions all over the map.[/QUOTE]
General Choi was neither linguistically nor cognitively unreliable. To the contrary he was remarkable teaching for hours without notes and reciting technical specification for pattern moves by number.   Of course if you actually communicated with anyone who attended his courses / classes you would know this.  
It would be interesting to hear from instructors on this board to see if they were ever misunderstood by their  students or ever   failed to fully grasp what a teacher said during the initial explanation.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> General Choi was neither linguistically nor cognitively unreliable. To the contrary he was remarkable teaching for hours without notes and reciting technical specification for pattern moves by number.   Of course if you actually communicated with anyone who attended his courses / classes you would know this.
> It would be interesting to hear from instructors on this board to see if they were ever misunderstood by their  students or ever   failed to fully grasp what a teacher said during the initial explanation.



Yet we have a state in the ITF in which a significant portion are under the impression that SW jettisoned hip twist....


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Yet we have a state in the ITF in which a significant portion are under the impression that SW jettisoned hip twist....


  Well, you may claim a significant portion  and I would ask how you come by your data. You have referenced various individuals and with the noteble exception of your instructor  they were not ITF and / or had little to no direct classroom experience with General Choi.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Earl Weiss said:


> It would be interesting to hear from instructors on this board to see if they were ever misunderstood by their students or ever failed to fully grasp what a teacher said during the initial explanation.


One of my favorite anecdotes to share with my students is of me saying “Mr. _____ said it should be done _____.” And my instructor replying, “Yes. I’ve been telling you that for 7 years. You just couldn’t hear me.”


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Well, you may claim a significant portion  and I would ask how you come by your data. You have referenced various individuals and with the noteble exception of your instructor  they were not ITF and / or had little to no direct classroom experience with General Choi.



They broke from the ITF  for exactly for that reason.


----------



## _Simon_

Well.. this thread has been a wild ride! Can't believe it's still goin!

That's all, go nuts


----------



## Acronym

_Simon_ said:


> Well.. this thread has been a wild ride! Can't believe it's still goin!
> 
> That's all, go nuts



 "Don't twist your body" /General Choi. "He meant shoulders" /Earl Weiss.

I


----------



## Acronym

The master communicator General Choi..


----------



## _Simon_

Acronym said:


> "Don't twist your body" /General Choi. "He meant shoulders" /Earl Weiss.
> 
> I


Meh.. to me when someone says twist it looks like this. Where one part (the bottom) is fixed or going in the opposite direction to the movement of the other, thus twisting around each other. Thus the shoulders twisting (which is essentially the upper body/waist). Don't twist the body would mean don't twist the upper body (twist movement from the shoulders down into obliques etc) and lower body.








And when someone says rotation it looks like this. Rotating around a specific fixed point, but that point can also be at the central axis. So either hip rotating like an open/close door, or with the pivot point in the middle. They're different.


----------



## dvcochran

_Simon_ said:


> Well.. this thread has been a wild ride! Can't believe it's still goin!
> 
> That's all, go nuts


Yes, clearly Acronym is more than willing to sound totally foolish to get his message count up. 
Much respect to Mr. Weiss for trying but I feel he is spinning his wheels.


----------



## Acronym

_Simon_ said:


> Meh.. to me when someone says twist it looks like this. Where one part (the bottom) is fixed or going in the opposite direction to the movement of the other, thus twisting around each other. Thus the shoulders twisting (which is essentially the upper body/waist). Don't twist the body would mean don't twist the upper body (twist movement from the shoulders down into obliques etc) and lower body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And when someone says rotation it looks like this. Rotating around a specific fixed point, but that point can also be at the central axis. So either hip rotating like an open/close door, or with the pivot point in the middle. They're different.



So if a cop asks you to don't move your body, you might still move your hips?


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> Yes, clearly Acronym is more than willing to sound totally foolish to get his message count up.
> Much respect to Mr. Weiss for trying but I feel he is spinning his wheels.



Do you have to kiss his *** every post?


----------



## _Simon_

Acronym said:


> So if a cop asks you to don't move your body, you might still move your hips?


a) you're changing the words used ('move' instead of twist)

b) you're changing the context to suit your argument (a cop asking you to move your body)


----------



## Acronym

_Simon_ said:


> a) you're changing the words used ('move' instead of twist)
> 
> b) you're changing the context to suit your argument (a cop asking you to move your body)



Same principle. If he meant shoulders, he would say shoulders. You are the ones changing things.


----------



## Acronym

If a cop asks you to don't twist your body, would you still twist your hip?

There. Exact. Word for word....

I wouldn't twist my hip....


----------



## Acronym

_Simon_ said:


> b) you're changing the context to suit your argument (a cop asking you to move your body)



No, I am highlight how absurd this is by showing how in ANY other context, you would not interpret it as excluding the hips.


----------



## _Simon_

Acronym said:


> Same principle. If he meant shoulders, he would say shoulders. You are the ones changing things.



Well..  no it's not at all man. Completely different! In the context of martial arts movements, like the example images above, that is how I would see it if I heard don't TWIST your body. Twisting occurs at the waist which starts at the shoulders (sort of). Or moreso requires the shoulders to turn anyway. I'm not actually changing anything at all, it's simple language/communication thing.



Acronym said:


> If a cop asks you to don't twist your body, would you still twist your hip?
> 
> There. Exact. Word for word....
> 
> I wouldn't twist my hip....



Whaaat.. I would just not use the cop example as it's totally removed from the discussion and confusing points. Twisting is specific, and anatomically it's easy to see what twisting means.

If I say "reach your arm overhead to grab that", I'm pretty sure they're not gonna say "ahhhh but you didn't tell me to raise my hand!" See what I mean?


----------



## _Simon_

Acronym said:


> No, I am highlight how absurd this is by showing how in ANY other context, you would not interpret it as excluding the hips.


Well the context chosen matters greatly, and that can completely alter the entire paradigm of what language/specific words mean.


----------



## Acronym

_Simon_ said:


> Well..  no it's not at all man. Completely different! In the context of martial arts movements, like the example images above, that is how I would see it if I heard don't TWIST your body. Twisting occurs at the waist which starts at the shoulders (sort of). Or moreso requires the shoulders to turn anyway. I'm not actually changing anything at all, it's simple language/communication thing.
> 
> 
> 
> Whaaat.. I would just not use the cop example as it's totally removed from the discussion and confusing points. Twisting is specific, and anatomically it's easy to see what twisting means.
> 
> If I say "reach your arm overhead to grab that", I'm pretty sure they're not gonna say "ahhhh but you didn't tell me to raise my hand!" See what I mean?



So you would still twist your hip (as you always did before) if a martial arts instructor demonstrating to you his own system, tells you to not twist your body? 

Funny how the gentleman in the actual clip didn't...


----------



## _Simon_

Acronym said:


> So you would still twist your hip (as you always did before) if a martial arts instructor demonstrating to you his own system, tells you to not twist your body?
> 
> Funny how the gentleman in the actual clip didn't...



As I said, to me twist the body and twist the hip are different. I wouldn't actually even say twist the hip as that doesn't make much sense..


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> They broke from the ITF  for exactly for that reason.


That reason would be?


----------



## Earl Weiss

dvcochran said:


> Yes, clearly Acronym is more than willing to sound totally foolish to get his message count up.
> Much respect to Mr. Weiss for trying but I feel he is spinning his wheels.


Sir, I may be spinning my wheels as far as Acronym goes, but by presenting through my notes, and experience that he has accepted a mistaken conclusion by others without the same experience I have accomplished my goal of skewering the spread of further misinformation.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> If a cop asks you to don't twist your body, would you still twist your hip?
> 
> There. Exact. Word for word....
> 
> I wouldn't twist my hip....



Sir, again, you take something out of context.   In the video clip the person he speaks to is rotating / twisting   (In my opinion over rotating / twisting) his shoulders.   General Choi comments "Don't twist your body"   The words with the visual make it clear what he refers to.

Your comment concerning choice of words is being as nitpicky as claiming he called something a "U"   shape block but it looks more like a "C"  so it should be called "C" shape block.  Clear what he meant when coupled with the visual.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> So if a cop asks you to don't move your body, you might still move your hips?


You really gonna swap "twist" with "move" to try to make a post say what you want?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Same principle. If he meant shoulders, he would say shoulders. You are the ones changing things.


Entirely different context. Now, if the cop was instructing on how to punch....


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> If a cop asks you to don't twist your body, would you still twist your hip?
> 
> There. Exact. Word for word....
> 
> I wouldn't twist my hip....


Not word for word. And not the same context. If someone says "twist those short wires together" would you spin the wires, or turn one pair of ends while the others don't turn? And would that necessarily be the same thing as twisting a body, or does context matter?


----------



## Earl Weiss




----------



## Earl Weiss

Above - #1   2 locations - 1999 Text    "Turn the hip"   "jerk the Hip"     but , oh wait - I guess it doesn't say "Twist"


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Earl Weiss said:


> Above - #1   2 locations - 1999 Text    "Turn the hip"   "jerk the Hip"     but , oh wait - I guess it doesn't say "Twist"


He’d probably argue “hand techniques” doesn’t really mean punches.


----------



## Earl Weiss

gpseymour said:


> He’d probably argue “hand techniques” doesn’t really mean punches.


Yep, of course ignoring the bottom portion which refers to sub part "A.   ATTACK TECNIQUES"


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Earl Weiss said:


> Yep, of course ignoring the bottom portion which refers to sub part "A.   ATTACK TECNIQUES"


Yep. He already dismissed that because somewhere else it specifically refers to punches....which, of course, are not “attack techniques”.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Above - #1   2 locations - 1999 Text    "Turn the hip"   "jerk the Hip"     but , oh wait - I guess it doesn't say "Twist"



Those are not pattern parameters.


----------



## Acronym

This just shows how poorly codified SW is. 

He looks nothing like the bunnies in forms competition


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Those are not pattern parameters.


Correct, they are not "Pattern parameters"   They are "Everything Parameters"       Unless of course you can point out to me somewhere where the text excludes these as pattern parameters.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> This just shows how poorly codified SW is.
> 
> He looks nothing like the bunnies in forms competition


I do not understand your point.   Are you saying because some competitors get it wrong it's not well codified? Perhaps those experience did not have adequate instruction likesome keyboard commandos who think they have learned properly / had correct information because they had a high ranking instructor or looked at stuff on the internet.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> This just shows how poorly codified SW is.


Of note in the video is the hip moving (Twisting) in the same direction  as the punch along with SW.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I do not understand you r point.   Are you saying because some competitors get it wrong it's not well codified? Perhaps those experience did not have adequate instruction likesome keyboard commandos who think they have learned properly / had correct information because they had a high ranking instructor or looked at stuff on the internet.



Some? There are entire teams consisting of a bunch of hopping bunnies. That gentleman was far more reasonable, although his side kicking control was poor (not saying it's easy).



Earl Weiss said:


> Correct, they are not "Pattern parameters"   They are "Everything Parameters"       Unless of course you can point out to me somewhere where the text excludes these as pattern parameters.



Are we just going to ignore the fact that they were written 20 years before SW and are not in the SW section?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Of note in the video is the hip moving (Twisting) in the same direction  as the punch along with SW.



Which speaks to my point. I don't know about you but I think his interpretation looked quite different from the norm.


----------



## Acronym

Clip needs no comment. Remember that nothing changed with hip twist after SW according to Earl


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Some? There are entire teams consisting of a bunch of hopping bunnies. That gentleman was far more reasonable, although his side kicking control was poor (not saying it's easy).
> 
> 
> 
> Are we just going to ignore the fact that they were written 20 years before SW and are not in the SW section?



No sir, we are going to ignore your theory that things specified in the text should somehow be repeated however many times you feel it necessary.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Which speaks to my point. I don't know about you but I think his interpretation looked quite different from the norm.


Sir, I don't know what you consider the "Norm"   I consider it to be illustrated well, but not necessarily perfectly in the videos produced under General Choi's supervision (By Com Do)  - the ones with the Black Background.  I would first look to those for guidance instead of some random performance pulled off the net.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> No sir, we are going to ignore your theory that things specified in the text should somehow be repeated however many times you feel it necessary.



Are we also going to ignore the gentleman in the Youtube clip above like an elephant in the room?


----------



## Acronym

I guess he didn't learn "sine wave unleashed" courtesy of a General Chois private classrooms....in which you twist your hips


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Are we also going to ignore the gentleman in the Youtube clip above like an elephant in the room?


You're diverting. Respond to the things said, or make your counters someplace they make sense. You respond to one post with something that ignores the next and doesn't address the content of the post being made. Because your arguments (thus far) lack cohesion and substance.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> You're diverting. Respond to the things said, or make your counters someplace they make sense. You respond to one post with something that ignores the next and doesn't address the content of the post being made. Because your arguments (thus far) lack cohesion and substance.



No Earl does. Listen to what he is saying: a book can never replace an instructor. Well,  the instructor needs to learn it from somewhere, and it’s clear he did not learn it properly from his instructor,  If what Earl is saying is true.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Are we also going to ignore the gentleman in the Youtube clip above like an elephant in the room?



Sir, Please explain your point exactly.  Also, are you referring to the Chon Ji video or the Moon Moo video.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I guess he didn't learn "sine wave unleashed" courtesy of a General Chois private classrooms....in which you twist your hips


Sir,  I really have no idea what your point is.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> No Earl does. Listen to what he is saying: a book can never replace an instructor. Well,  the instructor needs to learn it from somewhere, and it’s clear he did not learn it properly from his instructor,  If what Earl is saying is true.


100% correct. sir. - A book cannot replace an instructor.      We should all strive to be better than our instructors because hopefully we each in turn will have better instructors than they did.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir,  I really have no idea what your point is.



You would understand if you watch the clip.. Of that sabonim black belt


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Please explain your point exactly.  Also, are you referring to the Chon Ji video or the Moon Moo video.


.
The one here



Acronym said:


> Clip needs no comment. Remember that nothing changed with hip twist after SW according to Earl


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> 100% correct. sir. - A book cannot replace an instructor.      We should all strive to be better than our instructors because hopefully we each in turn will have better instructors than they did.



That seems to be bad idea given the diversity of Sine Wave deliveries. Better to encode it in a book.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> .
> The one here


This person kihaps at #17 so clearly an example of someone  not concerned with  following General Choi's parameters so the relevance excludes me.   I guess if you paid attention to the video you would understand that.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> That seems to be bad idea given the diversity of Sine Wave deliveries. Better to encode it in a book.


Easy to misunderstand a book - particularly when using a 2 dimensional medium to describe a 3 dimensional activity.    Heck, we did not understand the "Hooking Kick" in Ko Dang or the "Pick shape kick in Ju Che"   until we saw it perfumed.


----------



## dvcochran

Earl Weiss said:


> Easy to misunderstand a book - particularly when using a 2 dimensional medium to describe a 3 dimensional activity.    Heck, we did not understand the "Hooking Kick" in Ko Dang or the "Pick shape kick in Ju Che"   until we saw it perfumed.


Haha!!! I busted a gut when I read 'perfumed'!!! Hilarious


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Easy to misunderstand a book - particularly when using a 2 dimensional medium to describe a 3 dimensional activity.    Heck, we did not understand the "Hooking Kick" in Ko Dang or the "Pick shape kick in Ju Che"   until we saw it perfumed.



You wrote yourself that Jung Tae Park failed in his effort to convey Sine Wave proper mechanics to North Korea, and that this was acknowledged at the time. So clearly not a good idea either.


----------



## Acronym

Here it is from the man himself here. No hip twist. Lots of bouncing.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> You wrote yourself that Jung Tae Park failed in his effort to convey Sine Wave proper mechanics to North Korea, and that this was acknowledged at the time. So clearly not a good idea either.


I do not believe I ever said that.   I would like to see where I supposedly said that.      Perhaps I mistyped like above where I typed "Perfumed" instead of "performed" or "Exclude"  instead of "elude "


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Here it is from the man himself here. No hip twist. Lots of bouncing.


You do not see the hip move?  Perhaps since it is an hour and a half video you could provide the exact time stamp for the portion you refer to.  There is a part at the 39 plus minute mark where he says "Not  This" and shows excessive hip twist.  Perhaps that is why you are confused. Overly exaggerated hip twist being  improper.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> You do not see the hip move?  Perhaps since it is an hour and a half video you could provide the exact time stamp for the portion you refer to.  There is a part at the 39 plus minute mark where he says "Not  This" and shows excessive hip twist.  Perhaps that is why you are confused. Overly exaggerated hip twist being  improper.



He does not twist his hips demonstrating sitting stance punches.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I do not believe I ever said that.   I would like to see where I supposedly said that.      Perhaps I mistyped like above where I typed "Perfumed" instead of "performed" or "Exclude"  instead of "elude "



No you wrote that North Koreans did not get it right and the person responsible as demonstrator was Park Jung Tae. You did not blame it on him explicitly, but the point was that they got it wrong


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> You do not see the hip move?  Perhaps since it is an hour and a half video you could provide the exact time stamp for the portion you refer to.  There is a part at the 39 plus minute mark where he says "Not  This" and shows excessive hip twist.  Perhaps that is why you are confused. Overly exaggerated hip twist being  improper.




I am referring to his OWN demo, totally void of hip twist


----------



## dvcochran

@Acronym , playing off the video of General Choi and the horse stance punch; can you provide an example of what you feel correct technique is? I ask to have a comparison. 
This interest me particularly because I come from a non sine wave background in TKD. 
As an aside; in am an electrical engineer so I am intimately familiar with sine wave in this context. I do see it as a 2D construct of our theoretical understand of magnitude in a waveform to describe the physical changes of elemental properties we cannot see.  

You have batted this back and forth so much I have honestly lost the original message. I think you already know Mr.Wiess has exponentially more experience in this subject than most people still alive. His credentials are undeniable. Unless you can pony up something with substance to back your claims you are just swatting at the air. 
But I will give you both credit for keeping this thread alive.


----------



## Acronym

dvcochran said:


> @Acronym , playing off the video of General Choi and the horse stance punch; can you provide an example of what you feel correct technique is? I ask to have a comparison.
> This interest me particularly because I come from a non sine wave background in TKD.
> As an aside; in am an electrical engineer so I am intimately familiar with sine wave in this context. I do see it as a 2D construct of our theoretical understand of magnitude in a waveform to describe the physical changes of elemental properties we cannot see.
> 
> You have batted this back and forth so much I have honestly lost the original message. I think you already know Mr.Wiess has exponentially more experience in this subject than most people still alive. His credentials are undeniable. Unless you can pony up something with substance to back your claims you are just swatting at the air.
> But I will give you both credit for keeping this thread alive.



Mr Weiss's credentials don't help him here


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> No you wrote that North Koreans did not get it right and the person responsible as demonstrator was Park Jung Tae. You did not blame it on him explicitly, but the point was that they got it wrong


Sir, please refer me to the post where I wrote that "The North Koreans did not get it right." referring to Sine Wave .


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I am referring to his OWN demo, totally void of hip twist


If you can't see it or there is not enough for you no further discussion is warranted.


----------



## Earl Weiss

dvcochran said:


> @Acronym , playing off the video of General Choi and the horse stance punch; can you provide an example of what you feel correct technique is? I ask to have a comparison.
> .


Sir, here is an example from  the official videos produced under the supervision of General Choi.  Horse / sitting stance punches appear at the beginning of the video.   There are some examples where he punches from walking stance as well.   I will leave it for you to comment if the hip moves in the same direction as the punch. 

Yul-Gok Tul - YouTube


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> If you can't see it or there is not enough for you no further discussion is warranted.



Fine. I know who would win the court case with that footage


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, please refer me to the post where I wrote that "The North Koreans did not get it right." referring to Sine Wave .



I don't need to since you wrote it to me... Some work needed to be done. You did not provide any source for your claim.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I don't need to since you wrote it to me... Some work needed to be done. You did not provide any source for your claim.


Sir, Considering how inaccurate your posts have been and issues with taking things out of context, unless or until you can provide proof   of  your claim as to what  I allegedly said.  I categorically deny I said with reference to SW that the North Koreans did not get it right.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Fine. I know who would win the court case with that footage



Sir, I suggest you contact whomever gave you your legal education and ask for your money back since they taught you wrong.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I don't need to since you wrote it to me... Some work needed to be done. You did not provide any source for your claim.


I recall a time I said "Some work needed to be done"   In reference to some pattern performances in a Video produced by NK, however that comment was not in reference to SW, but some technical issues.       Additionally your comment wrongly assumes that every mistake a student would   make reflects poorly on the instructor.     I doubt very many instructors would want to be judged by the performance of  their best student on a bad day, or their worst student on their best day.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, Considering how inaccurate your posts have been and issues with taking things out of context, unless or until you can provide proof   of  your claim as to what  I allegedly said.  I categorically deny I said with reference to SW that the North Koreans did not get it right.



You have also said 4-5 years go that you have been mistaken for George Clooney, which was a funny joke. My verbal memory is pretty.... good.

So maybe know you know that I truly do remember things that most people forget?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I recall a time I said "Some work needed to be done"   In reference to some pattern performances in a Video produced by NK, however that comment was not in reference to SW, but some technical issues.       Additionally your comment wrongly assumes that every mistake a student would   make reflects poorly on the instructor.     I doubt very many instructors would want to be judged by the performance of  their best student on a bad day, or their worst student on their best day.



Taking a different example now, do you think snapping strikes can be taught visually? Some methodology is so internal that you have to verbalize it first, and then the student can break it down.

Simply displaying a snap will be a blur.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I recall a time I said "Some work needed to be done"   In reference to some pattern performances in a Video produced by NK, however that comment was not in reference to SW, but some technical issues.       Additionally your comment wrongly assumes that every mistake a student would   make reflects poorly on the instructor.     I doubt very many instructors would want to be judged by the performance of  their best student on a bad day, or their worst student on their best day.



You quoted me being underwhelmed by NKs sine wave delivery, and you did make a reference to Park Jung Tae... 

My reading of your comment originally was not a dig at Park Jung Tae, and I don't think my post implies that.....


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Additionally your comment wrongly assumes that every mistake a student would   make reflects poorly on the instructor.



I believe in personal responsibility not only in TKD but also politics, riots, and everyday life.. I do not blame institutions or leaders for the behavior of followers.

If we had a debate about the *quality* of SW then yes, every flaw of a student does NOT reflect back on the instructor.

But there is a difference between doing things poorly and simply being confused about what you are supposed to do. So in the latter regard, we have to blame the instructor. But again, my reading of it was that there was work to be done. Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## dvcochran

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, here is an example from  the official videos produced under the supervision of General Choi.  Horse / sitting stance punches appear at the beginning of the video.   There are some examples where he punches from walking stance as well.   I will leave it for you to comment if the hip moves in the same direction as the punch.
> 
> Yul-Gok Tul - YouTube


Thank you Sir. It clearly does.


----------



## dvcochran

Acronym said:


> You have also said 4-5 years go that you have been mistaken for George Clooney, which was a funny joke. My verbal memory is pretty.... good.
> 
> So maybe know you know that I truly do remember things that most people forget?


Hmm, you have not even been on the forum for a year, yet you are referencing something from 5 years ago? Dude.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> I don't need to since you wrote it to me... Some work needed to be done. You did not provide any source for your claim.


In this case, you are making a claim (that Earl said something). If true, it should be easy to prove....


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> In this case, you are making a claim (that Earl said something). If true, it should be easy to prove....



If it were not for the fact that it was 4-5 years ago


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> If it were not for the fact that it was 4-5 years ago


This thread isn’t that old. Nor is your membership here.

oh, and psychological studies have shown that memory is much more fragile than it seems - especially to those who claim exact recollection.


----------



## Acronym

gpseymour said:


> This thread isn’t that old. Nor is your membership here.
> 
> oh, and psychological studies have shown that memory is much more fragile than it seems - especially to those who claim exact recollection.



Do you think I was under the impression that my own thread was 4-5 years old? 

I am paraphrasing what he said in a different forum.  The exact quote isn't critical.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, here is an example from  the official videos produced under the supervision of General Choi.  Horse / sitting stance punches appear at the beginning of the video.   There are some examples where he punches from walking stance as well.   I will leave it for you to comment if the hip moves in the same direction as the punch.
> 
> Yul-Gok Tul - YouTube



Do you think that clip exemplifies the norm of how SW is delivered in world championships? It also looks nothing like how Choi demonstrated.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Do you think that clip exemplifies the norm of how SW is delivered in world championships? It also looks nothing like how Choi demonstrated.


Not sure exactly what you refer to. If you are comparing the black background video   to how patterns are performed in the last few years at World Championships, with more recent and more current performances having a more pronounced / exaggerated up and down motion, then we are in agreement.   This has been addressed by others in different forums and there have been some comparisons but that was a couple of years ago that I came across it.  If that is your point - we are in agreement. The motion has become more exaggerated.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Do you think I was under the impression that my own thread was 4-5 years old?
> 
> I am paraphrasing what he said in a different forum.  The exact quote isn't critical.



Sir, the exact wording may in fact be critical.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Not sure exactly what you refer to. If you are comparing the black background video   to how patterns are performed in the last few years at World Championships, with more recent and more current performances having a more pronounced / exaggerated up and down motion, then we are in agreement.   This has been addressed by others in different forums and there have been some comparisons but that was a couple of years ago that I came across it.  If that is your point - we are in agreement. The motion has become more exaggerated.



Aren't you a former ITF judge?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Acronym said:


> Do you think I was under the impression that my own thread was 4-5 years old?
> 
> I am paraphrasing what he said in a different forum.  The exact quote isn't critical.


Ah, but it may be. Context and wording matters.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Aren't you a former ITF judge?


I am credentialed as a "Class A" umpire and have judged world Championships in St. Petersburg Russia, -19967,   Rimini Italy  2001, and a world cup in Orlando - I think it was 2002.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> I am credentialed as a "Class A" umpire and have judged world Championships in St. Petersburg Russia, -19967,   Rimini Italy  2001, and a world cup in Orlando - I think it was 2002.



And North Korea is yet to lose team championships in forms or has this finally happened?


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> And North Korea is yet to lose team championships in forms or has this finally happened?




WOW! That's quite some insinuation.


----------



## Acronym

Tez3 said:


> WOW! That's quite some insinuation.



*President Clinton to Peter Jennings "Don't go there"*


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> And North Korea is yet to lose team championships in forms or has this finally happened?


I have no idea since I have been out of the loop since 2004 or so. Further, what if anything that might have to do with mistakes on a video eludes me.   Also, since   2002 NK has been in it's own ITF that tends to skew things.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Tez3 said:


> WOW! That's quite some insinuation.


Well, they one quite often. For those of us old enough to remember the Olympics when East Germany and other socialist countries dominated it's tough for amateurs to compete with Government sponsored systems where people are recruited by the 10s of thousands  and their full time job is to train. Then from those 10s of thousands you get the couple dozen elite athletes.   I recall a referee meeting before the  1997 Championships where a 4th Dan from NK was used as an example and he did patterns which were critiqued by the Seniors and I am thinking "Heck, looked pretty damn good to me."   He went on to win the gold.   Another NK athlete took the Gold for the Turning (roundhouse) Kick  set at 9'7". They bordered on the superhuman.   But then again that is what helped General Choi spread TKD in the 1950's and 1960's . He recruited top talent nicknamed the Korean Supermen  and they went on demo tours.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Well, they one quite often. For those of us old enough to remember the Olympics when East Germany and other socialist countries dominated it's tough for amateurs to compete with Government sponsored systems where people are recruited by the 10s of thousands  and their full time job is to train. Then from those 10s of thousands you get the couple dozen elite athletes.   I recall a referee meeting before the  1997 Championships where a 4th Dan from NK was used as an example and he did patterns which were critiqued by the Seniors and I am thinking "Heck, looked pretty damn good to me."   He went on to win the gold.   Another NK athlete took the Gold for the Turning (roundhouse) Kick  set at 9'7". They bordered on the superhuman.   But then again that is what helped General Choi spread TKD in the 1950's and 1960's . He recruited top talent nicknamed the Korean Supermen  and they went on demo tours.



Ehm... General Chois demo team in the 50-70s consisted of South Koreans...


----------



## Acronym

Now this is fascinating. North Korea vs Japan.

Though both use SW, what I find striking is that Japan still punches more Shotokan esque, even though ITF TaeKwonDo is well established in Japan since several decades back.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Well, they one quite often.



Not "often". When you retired in 2004 from ITF judging, they were undefeaten in forms since they first entered in the 80s. That's why I was curious if this streak has ever ended.

However, Russia is actually beating them in free sparring these days at the World Championships.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Ehm... General Chois demo team in the 50-70s consisted of South Koreans...


Sir, - Again - comprehension issues.    When  a government funded program allows recruitment of thousands or 10's of thousands of top notch athletes and full time training, the ability to develop "Super Humans" is much easier   than when you have self funded part time athletes who may choose a certain activity.   Same idea.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Not "often". When you retired in 2004 from ITF judging, they were undefeaten in forms since they first entered in the 80s. That's why I was curious if this streak has ever ended.
> 
> However, Russia is actually beating them in free sparring these days at the World Championships.



Sir, are you no changing  some comparison, however irrelevant from Pattern to Sparring competition? 

Not just these days. I know the Russians won team sparring in 1997,  (I know because I was there. )  There may have been other team sparring winners as well. No point in checking on it.  and NK individual competitors did not always take the gold in sparring. So what is your point in highlighting the NK athletes success?   Is it that somehow they would produce a flawless video?


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Sir, are you no changing  some comparison, however irrelevant from Pattern to Sparring competition?
> 
> Not just these days. I know the Russians won team sparring in 1997,  (I know because I was there. )  There may have been other team sparring winners as well. No point in checking on it.  and NK individual competitors did not always take the gold in sparring. So what is your point in highlighting the NK athletes success?   Is it that somehow they would produce a flawless video?



I was refering  team competitons in both forms and sparring. 

In individual sparring, Thomaz Barada beat them all the time.


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> I was refering  team competitons in both forms and sparring.
> 
> .


Post # 652 you state " Not "often"

. "When you retired in 2004 from ITF judging, they were undefeated in forms since they first entered in the 80s"     

So are you now claiming undefeated in "TEAM"    forms   and sparring or just forms?       

Of course you know why   "... they first entered in the 1980's"    

I still have no idea what this has to do with the discussion.


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Post # 652 you state " Not "often"
> 
> . "When you retired in 2004 from ITF judging, they were undefeated in forms since they first entered in the 80s"
> 
> So are you now claiming undefeated in "TEAM"    forms   and sparring or just forms?
> 
> Of course you know why   "... they first entered in the 1980's"
> 
> I still have no idea what this has to do with the discussion.



Team forms only. I asked question,  no need do get defensive about it. I thought you were a judge every event and could give some insight on the evolution of judging


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> Team forms only. I asked question,  no need do get defensive about it. I thought you were a judge every event and could give some insight on the evolution of judging



Events I judge included:

Specialty breaking, Individual Patterns, Team Patterns and individual sparring.   It's been a long time but I don't recall for certain if I judged team  sparring.   Pretty certain I did not ever get assigned to power breaking. 

Judging has changed a lot. from simple stuff to like having each judge keep track of warnings and minus points to having score table do it, from scoring patterns in several categories to head to head patterns and just designating winner to I believe some sort of electronic scoring now for sparring.   (We used pencil and paper. )


----------



## Acronym

Earl Weiss said:


> Events I judge included:
> 
> Specialty breaking, Individual Patterns, Team Patterns and individual sparring.   It's been a long time but I don't recall for certain if I judged team  sparring.   Pretty certain I did not ever get assigned to power breaking.
> 
> Judging has changed a lot. from simple stuff to like having each judge keep track of warnings and minus points to having score table do it, from scoring patterns in several categories to head to head patterns and just designating winner to I believe some sort of electronic scoring now for sparring.   (We used pencil and paper. )



How do you decide between two competitors doing form with neither of them making any mistakes, and deliveries being very similar? Did you guys have an additional citeria that settled it? Like some small detail?


----------



## Earl Weiss

Acronym said:


> How do you decide between two competitors doing form with neither of them making any mistakes, and deliveries being very similar? Did you guys have an additional citeria that settled it? Like some small detail?



 Knowing I had some top notch competitors with few flaws I noted where they started their pattern and  if there were no other deciding factors the one closes to their startingg point would win.   They were seldom "equal"  in this factor.   I cannot speak for others.


----------



## Tez3

Acronym said:


> *President Clinton to Peter Jennings "Don't go there"*




I'm sure this come under the 'no politics' rule on MT.


----------



## Tez3

Earl Weiss said:


> Well, they one quite often. For those of us old enough to remember the Olympics when East Germany and other socialist countries dominated it's tough for amateurs to compete with Government sponsored systems where people are recruited by the 10s of thousands  and their full time job is to train. Then from those 10s of thousands you get the couple dozen elite athletes.   I recall a referee meeting before the  1997 Championships where a 4th Dan from NK was used as an example and he did patterns which were critiqued by the Seniors and I am thinking "Heck, looked pretty damn good to me."   He went on to win the gold.   Another NK athlete took the Gold for the Turning (roundhouse) Kick  set at 9'7". They bordered on the superhuman.   But then again that is what helped General Choi spread TKD in the 1950's and 1960's . He recruited top talent nicknamed the Korean Supermen  and they went on demo tours.




Imagine thinking it's odd that Koreans do well at their national sport.I
I remember the old Olympics very well, I also think if being patient were an Olympic 'sport' you'd be winning gold!


----------



## dvcochran

@Earl Weiss said:
“Well, they one quite often. For those of us old enough to remember the Olympics when East Germany and other socialist countries dominated it's tough for amateurs to compete with Government sponsored systems where people are recruited by the 10s of thousands and their full time job is to train. Then from those 10s of thousands you get the couple dozen elite athletes. I recall a referee meeting before the 1997 Championships where a 4th Dan from NK was used as an example and he did patterns which were critiqued by the Seniors and I am thinking "Heck, looked pretty damn good to me." He went on to win the gold. Another NK athlete took the Gold for the Turning (roundhouse) Kick set at 9'7". They bordered on the superhuman. But then again that is what helped General Choi spread TKD in the 1950's and 1960's . He recruited top talent nicknamed the Korean Supermen and they went on demo tours.”

In a different circuit (WT(F)) but I have very much had to deal with the government sponsored competitors. 
And Germany was very good in WT competition as well. 
For my ‘88 run to the Olympics there was a noticeable “lean” toward SK but hey, they initiated the Olympic push so you have to kind of get it.


----------

