# Who is the Founder of TKD...Debate!



## Spookey (Mar 5, 2005)

Dear All,

I wish to debate the theory of the creation of Taekwon-Do. This is attempted often however it is not generally the primary focus of a thread, but is rather a brief secondary happening.

Before we can induldge in the "Great Debate" let us first establish some ground work and mutual understanding. In order to do this let us discuss the first equation of the debate!

What defines an individual style or system and seperates it from the other fighting arts from which it is derived. (Example...What makes Judo not Jujitsu, Taekwon-Do not Karate, ect.)

Here we go!

TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## Miles (Mar 5, 2005)

Good topic Spookey!

 I think what separates Taekwondo from Karate-do is primarily Kyorugi (free-sparring) and Poomsae.  The basics (Kibon) are very similar with some Taekwondo having modified techniques due to the different emphasis on Kyorugi.  Please note this is only my opinion and a very broad simplified response to your question as to differentiation.

 If you look at Kukki-TKD's stances-they are very similar to those found in Okinawan karate-do-upright, higher center-of-gravity.  Japanese Karate-do, by contrast, has deeper stances.

 In comparing Kukki-TKD's kicks, they are primarily snapping kicks versus the thrusting kicks found in Karate-do (Japanese).

 I agree with MichiganTKD's post, in another thread, that the Korean government wished to differentiate TKD from Karate-do.  So, the free-sparring was changed to be continuous and full-contact with less emphasis on hand techniques.

 New Poomsae were created, first the Palgwe series, but since Kukki-TKD is really an attempt to bring people together, and since the Moo Duk Kwan and Jidokwan did not participate in the creation of the Palgwe series, the Taeguek series was later created.  These two series of Poomsae were the creation by committees of advanced practitioners, who obviously understood the philosophical underpinnings.  The Taeguek series in particular has deep meaning and the Poomse lines form the character of its meaning.

 The bottom line, to answer your question, is that there was no "Founder."  Rather, Taekwondo was, and is, a cooperativegroup effort.  Sometimes there has been more cooperation than others.

 Now, my question: Who cares if there was a single Founder?  There are multiple interpretations (let's call them "styles") wihich emphasize some technical aspects more than others.

 Miles


----------



## Spookey (Mar 5, 2005)

Dear All,

Great post...

I would agree that the different methodology of technique is a great factor in differential (as there are only so many ways to punch and kick, but many methods of variance). 

Also, patterns (whether Hyung, Poomse, or Tul) are a direct reflection of the specific methodology of a style.

Therefore, I believe that the patterns are probably the biggest factor in seperating the traditional arts as they reproduce the methodology of the style!

 TAEKWON!
 Spookey


----------



## Miles (Mar 5, 2005)

I agree that the Poomse/Hyung/Tul are a huge factor. Here is another excerpt, this time about the attempt to standardize ranks and the unification effort:

  Chapter 2, Section 8: The Unification of the Dan Promotion Test and
 Hyung (Forms)

 Now we are going to look at the system of Dan Promotion Test (Kong In 
 Seung Dan Shim Sa) of the Korea Taesoodo Association. At the time, 
 Taekwondo used different names such as Kong Soo Do, Tang Soo Do, Soo 
 Bahk Do, and Taekwondo, and the Kwans used different poomse (forms) 
 and kyorugi (sparring). The Promotion Test system conflict was the 
 most problematical issue at the time because each Kwan promoted those 
 who were not truly qualified in order to expand their Kwans and show 
 themselves as the best.

 The first Korea Taesoodo Association president, CHOI Myung Shin,
 stated: "The biggest problem we had was the Promotion Test System, 
 which needed to be set and formalized. What we did was set up an 
 Inspection Team to get rid of the differences in Hyung, Daeryun (free 
 sparring) and Kyokpa (breaking) that existed between each Kwan."

 The first Promotion Test was held at the Kuk Min Hwe Eui Dang on
 November 11, 1962. The Korea Taesoodo Association supported
 the event, along with the Korean Amateur Sports Association (KASA), 
 the Daehan Jaekeon Kukmin Un Dong Bonbu (political party) and the Dae 
 Han Ilbo Sa (Korea Newspaper Company).

 There were 25 judges and they included: CHOI Myung Shin (Oh Do
 Kwan), LEE Nam Suk (Chang Moo Kwan), LEE Chong Woo
 (Jidokwan/Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan), UHM Woon Kyu (Chung Do
 Kwan), PARK Chull Hee (Kang Duk Won), LEE Young Sup (Song
 Moo Kwan), HYUN Jong Myung (Chung Do Kwan/Oh Do Kwan),
 HONG Jong Pyo (Kang Duk Won/Heung Moo Kwan), KIM Soon Bae
 (Chang Moo Kwan), KIM Soo Jin (Jidokwan), LEE Byung Ro
 (Jidokwan), KO Jae Chun (Chung Do Kwan/Oh Do Kwan/Chung
 Ryong Kwan), LEE Kyo Yun (Han Moo Kwan), BAEK Joon Ki
 (Chung Do Kwan/Oh Do Kwan), among others.

 At the event, CHOI Myung Shin said: "The Korea Taesoodo
 Association did not improve because of the many conflicts between the 
 many opposing sides. However, we are now in a good position to change 
 that due to the May 16, 1961 Coup de tat. In the past, we promoted 
 people without due consideration, but I'm so glad that we are now 
 doing the right thing and can determine and extract the real martial 
 artists." 


 This same section goes on to recite which Poomsae/Hyung/Tul was required for dan ranks. It included the Chang Hon Tul. Note however, this was several years before the committee to create the Unified Poomsae was created.  Sorry for the "cut-and-paste" jobs and long posts, but the information is invaluable.

  Miles


----------



## Flamebearer (Mar 5, 2005)

I think another think you should look at in differentiating MA styles is the geometry, or shapes, that the styles are dependent on. (I actually wrote a paper on this.) 

For example, in Aikido, they like to do a lot of circular movements - rolls and deflections and so forth.

In Karate, a "hard" style, the strikes and kicks are more or less linear.

I like to think TKD as being linear but also cubic. If you think of yourself as enclosed by two giant cubes (or refrigerator boxes or something), the cubes define your range. The inside one is your punching range. If your fist goes out of the bounds of your "box", you are off balance and can be taken advantage of. The same goes for kicks.

Just my two cents!
-Flamebearer


----------



## rmclain (Mar 5, 2005)

Good posts.

Overall, many Korean martial artists wanted a unique identity from the arts that were imported following WWII.

Of the first original schools, Song Moo Kwan, Ji Do Kwan, Moo Duk Won, Chang Moo Kwan, Chung Do Kwan were all teaching karate forms - mostly from the shorin-ryu lineage: Pyung Ahn 1-5, Sypsoo, Bassai Tae, etc. The Chang Moo Kwan differed because it taught Chinese Chuan-fa forms and techniques in addition to the karate techniques and forms. Plus, the Moo Duk Won taught something besides karate also (please have a Moo Duk Won instructor fill in this information).

Choi Hong Hi, because of his military ties, became a sort-of "poster boy" for heading up a movement for a unique Korean martial art - even though he was certainly not the most senior or knowledgable martial artist in Korea at that time. He created the Chang Hon(Blue Cottage) forms in 1950 based on his former training (he studied karate in Japan), but gave the forms names to commemorate events unique to Korean history in an attempt to make a unique identity away from anything, "Non-Korean."

Under his leadership and backed by govt. support, he solicited many martial artists to forget their previous training an teach the newly created "uniquely Korean" requirements. Many were eager to accept this duty, since the govt. gave out salaries for these people - which in war-torn S. Korea was a big deal.- most were very poor.

Later, the unification continued with the establishment of the Korean Taesoo Do in 1961, which became the Korean Taekwondo Association (KTA) in 1965. 

The first forms created by this organization were the black belt forms used today in WTF schools: Koryo, Kum Gang, Baek Jae, Tae Baek, Jee Tae, etc., in December 1967. These were meant for black belt grade holders.

In 1973, the first clinics were held by the KTA for the new Gup-ranked forms called, "Palgue." Eight Palgue forms were created.

In 1974, the WTF (was KTA) created the Tae Guek forms to replace the Palgue forms and a new version of Koryo was created. The reason for the change was because a Korean Master who continued to teach the early kwan teachings instead of only teaching the new made-up requirements was the first to publish the Palgue forms in a book in 1973. This made made lots of elected WTF members angry that one of them hadn't done it first.

The following is a good letter to the editor from a Korean Grandmaster that was around during the early kwan days and witnessed the changes from the early 1950's until today.

http://www.kimsookarate.com/articles/closed-arts.html


R. McLain


----------



## Spookey (Mar 5, 2005)

So it can be agreed that prior to the creation of the Chang Hon Hyungs, the other kwans were using the existing patterns of other arts.

Therefore, it would be fair to summise that Choi Hong Hi created the first pattern set unique to Taekwon-Do!

TAEKWON!

Spookey


----------



## FearlessFreep (Mar 5, 2005)

_
I like to think TKD as being linear but also cubic. If you think of yourself as enclosed by two giant cubes (or refrigerator boxes or something), the cubes define your range. The inside one is your punching range. If your fist goes out of the bounds of your "box", you are off balance and can be taken advantage of. The same goes for kicks._

*very* intesresting observation about working the box for a certain range and going outside the box causing a loss of balalnce


As for the rest, I guess..who cares?

Who created jazz, who founded country/western?  Does it really matter?


----------



## Mithios (Mar 6, 2005)

Miles,
 Could you put down what forms were originally req. at what rank. From the book you mentioned. Thank's,
 Mithios


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

rmclain said:
			
		

> Good posts.
> 
> Overall, many Korean martial artists wanted a unique identity from the arts that were imported following WWII.
> 
> ...


I actually have this mag and article.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

Back in the 1970's, I was getting ready for my TKD black belt. My instructor, Charles Parks, was straight from Korea. His English was ok, but it sounded funny to us. Master Parks, as we had called him, was a very talented martial art instructor. He had many great skills. Over the many years, I had become personal friends with him. Eating diner at his house. Going to movies, places, and out for diner. Meeting other Koreans and Korean organizations. We became best friends. Then he told me, in confidence, true situations. Incidentally, Parks wasnt his birth name. The Koreans used Parks, Kim, Choi, Yee, Lee, Rhee, etc., as common.



First, he had performed many promotional feats of Chi/Qi/Ki. He told me how he had propped, or staged those demonstrations. They were false, like a magic show of illusion. After finding out these secrets, I and some friends that were amateur magicians, and belonging to a Magicians Guild, had reproduced easily. My belief in Chi/Qi/Ki, was shattered and I have become skeptical with anyone discussing it nowadays.



Second, he had told me truths about Tae Kwon Do development. Which later, I have come to find out that he was finally, speaking the truth. Apart from him speaking exaggerations, somewhat not whole truth, although not lies, in the beginning years and my beginning training.



At first, he lead everyone to believe that TKD was ancient. Centuries old. Then he said it had developed from an ancient art called Tae Kyon. Then he had said Korean arts were around since the Three Kingdoms. After 20 years of knowing him, he told me that Tae Kwon Do was merely developed in the 1950s. (Which my research later had also confirmed)



The Japanese, during World War II, had dominated and controlled all of Asia. They were ruthless, some say worse than the Nazis. Every town and country went through cruel physical punishment. But this was not enough, the Japanese want to deculturize. Meaning that they went about destroying anything that gave each town and country culture identity. They wanted these conquered places to be Japanese and to control. They destroyed many things, including old texts.



After the war, Korea, like many countries, had to rebuild. Not only buildings and structures, but cultures as well. The Japanese hit Korea harder than most Asian countries. Some Korean scholars had kept some old text and documents. But others had to be re-made from memory of many elders. Thus, some are not of actual truth, but speculations.



The Korean Government wanted a National Art. A National past time, or sport, to unify the nation. Japan had Sumo and Judo. America had wrestling, boxing, baseball, etc. The result was the gathering of many Korean martial artists. They pooled their techniques and structured one organization. The so-called father, or person to do this, was a Korean General named Hong Hi Choi.



The Korean Government wanted to promote this new National Art, which was named generically, The Art/Way of Kicking and Punching-Tae Kwon Do. Next, they wanted to link its origins historically, so they set about re-structuring Korean history, thus having Tae Kwon Do linked to ancient and historic Korean culture.



Upon trying to promote it further, that had current Korean martial art masters, go to other countries. With huge government finances, money, financial support, these Korean master opened Tae Kwon Do schools everywhere, and in abundance, per chain schools, in many cases.



This is where Master Parks came to America. He was a martial artist, but much of his martial art training was from China, and Chinese military. But, as all of the Korean Masters, they wanted to state that their art is strictly Korean. And why shouldnt they? After all they were Korean people. They were born in Korea. They wanted to bring back pride to their country.



Now, this is where the controversy starts. People that trained under these Korean masters, were also lead to believe these huge fabrications and not so whole truths. Later, many martial art scholars, people who study martial arts, but their history, development, origins, etc., have come to discover many inadequacies in the Korean martial art history. Thus, causing much denial and rejection of these scholars.



Master Parks, told me how he had met Gen Choi, and that the Korean government gave him huge funding to open as many Tae Kwon Do schools as possible. The Korean Government took care of all documentations, per giving him a new birth certificate/name, passports, family history (not his own) with fabricated family photos and other documents. And how the Korean Government, had paid many researchers, like historians and archeologists, to conjure many tales and inadequate findings.



In the past couple of decades, there is a power struggle between the founding members of Tae Kwon Do. Many have formed their own organizations or associations. Some went as far as to rename their art and pull away from using the name Tae Kwon Do. Thus, these too, had to fabricate their history and background.



This is the same as the Shaolin Bandwagon. Things are exaggerated to hold substance.



I have long stopped practicing Tae Kwon Do, as well as Korean arts. I still have a respect for them and that they do develop skill and discipline. Just like any created martial art per century, all have benefits. But many, have fabricated history or history based upon speculation. This is to glorify, their name or art. This does not have to be so.



Further Interent research Sites Please read each one:



http://www.sos.mtu.edu/husky/tkdhist.htm



http://fight.sphosting.com/nauta.html



http://www.barrel.net/



*MODERN TIMES*

http://www.pastornet.net.au/response/articles/15.htm



http://paperwindow.com/tkd/



http://ryanshroyer.tripod.com/faq/why_shotokan.html



http://www.martialarts.org/korean.htm



http://www.freewebs.com/tkm_martialart/taekwondo.htm


----------



## rmclain (Mar 6, 2005)

Spookey,

Yes, I would agree that Choi Hong Hi created the first forms unique to Taekwondo.

I don't practice the ITF forms, but one of my 6th Gup students transferred in from a place he was a 1st Dan in ITF TKD and studied their forms.  It's interesting because he is learning the Pyung Ahn forms with me, and occasionally makes the remark, "Oh, I just found out where the technique in <insert ITF form> came from." - Since Choi was a karate student before.

R. McLain


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

R. McLain,

May I ask where did you get your references from? This is not to discredit you, but I would like to read and locate them for future reference.

Any links or such?


Thanks


----------



## Brad Dunne (Mar 6, 2005)

I have long stopped practicing Tae Kwon Do, as well as Korean arts.

If you don't mind me asking, do you still train and if so, in what?  I'm just curious, for there seems to be a lot of negitive information surfacing. On another site, someone that lives in Korea stated that there are very little, if any, adults training in Korea,  just children and almost all stop after grade school. It almost sounds as if the arts are on the verge of dying out in Korea.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

A.) Who are you asking?


B.) Negative, no. People are starting to realize, because of its over-satuation, that there is more out there.


----------



## Brad Dunne (Mar 6, 2005)

A.) Who are you asking?  

47MartialMan

B.) Negative, no. People are starting to realize, because of its over-satuation, that there is more out there.

Just what is the "more out there"?

Thanks for the reply


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

A.) Who are you asking? 47MartialMan

Not to sound sarcastic, but I had gave you the answer in my long post.

B.) Negative, no. People are starting to realize, because of its over-satuation, that there is more out there.

Just what is the "more out there"?
More martial arts without excessive needs for excessive promotion or other.
More martial arts that openedmore schools that give more choices. Using the analogies of automobiles or religion.

Thanks for the reply
Thank you likewise


----------



## Spookey (Mar 6, 2005)

Question (related to the thread!),


Before 1955 the kwans were practicing existing arts (mainly Tang Soo Do). They also called their "art" something other than Taekwon-Do (Mainly Tang Soo Do). 

Choi Hong Hi coined the name Taekwon-Do (which previously stated was not widely accepted by the other kwan jangs), was also the first to create patterns specific to this art (which were not widely accepted by the other kwans), created a system of rank not generally used in the original kwans, and created guidelines for competition in the (not widely accepted) art of Taekwon-Do.

So, basically, no one was interested in Choi Hong Hi and his Taekwon-Do. However, once he had gained international recognition for the new art, the Korean government and the kwan leaders decided that somehow they were the creators of this internationally accepted art of Taekwon-Do. 

Has it ever dawned on us that the original had to come first?

~Chang Hon Patterns = 1950's
~Pal-Gues = 1970's
~ITF = 1966
~WTF = 1973

In conclusion, I believe Choi Hong Hi (and company) created an international art called Taekwon-Do. Then after the success of Taekwon-Do, the Kwan Jangs (who were previously unaccepting of Taekwon-Do) as well as the Korean government chose to use the reputation of TKD as a means of international recognition for their country. 

The Korean Kukkiwon did succeed in bringing the kwans together (a great acomplishment). Also, they did manage to create a unique art seperate from Karate (and Taekwon-Do). The only thing they have yet to do is name their art! Instead they chose to use the international recognition previously gained by the dictator that wouldnt follow their rules...

TAEKWON!
Spookey

(Please choose to debate as opposed to FLAME!)


----------



## Miles (Mar 6, 2005)

Mithios said:
			
		

> Miles,
> Could you put down what forms were originally req. at what rank. From the book you mentioned. Thank's,
> Mithios


 No problem, Mithios.  Here's the section speaking about the first unified Dan Test:

 ***

 Chapter 2, Section 8: The Unification of the Dan Promotion Test and
 Hyung (Forms)

 Now we are going to look at the system of Dan Promotion Test (Kong In 
 Seung Dan Shim Sa) of the Korea Taesoodo Association. At the time, 
 Taekwondo used different names such as Kong Soo Do, Tang Soo Do, Soo 
 Bahk Do, and Taekwondo, and the Kwans used different poomse (forms) 
 and kyorugi (sparring). The Promotion Test system conflict was the 
 most problematical issue at the time because each Kwan promoted those 
 who were not truly qualified in order to expand their Kwans and show 
 themselves as the best.

 The first Korea Taesoodo Association president, CHOI Myung Shin,
 stated: "The biggest problem we had was the Promotion Test System, 
 which needed to be set and formalized. What we did was set up an 
 Inspection Team to get rid of the differences in Hyung, Daeryun (free 
 sparring) and Kyokpa (breaking) that existed between each Kwan."

 The first Promotion Test was held at the Kuk Min Hwe Eui Dang on
 November 11, 1962. The Korea Taesoodo Association supported
 the event, along with the Korean Amateur Sports Association (KASA), 
 the Daehan Jaekeon Kukmin Un Dong Bonbu (political party) and the Dae 
 Han Ilbo Sa (Korea Newspaper Company).

 There were 25 judges and they included: CHOI Myung Shin (Oh Do
 Kwan), LEE Nam Suk (Chang Moo Kwan), LEE Chong Woo
 (Jidokwan/Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan), UHM Woon Kyu (Chung Do
 Kwan), PARK Chull Hee (Kang Duk Won), LEE Young Sup (Song
 Moo Kwan), HYUN Jong Myung (Chung Do Kwan/Oh Do Kwan),
 HONG Jong Pyo (Kang Duk Won/Heung Moo Kwan), KIM Soon Bae
 (Chang Moo Kwan), KIM Soo Jin (Jidokwan), LEE Byung Ro
 (Jidokwan), KO Jae Chun (Chung Do Kwan/Oh Do Kwan/Chung
 Ryong Kwan), LEE Kyo Yun (Han Moo Kwan), BAEK Joon Ki
 (Chung Do Kwan/Oh Do Kwan), among others.

 At the event, CHOI Myung Shin said: "The Korea Taesoodo
 Association did not improve because of the many conflicts between the 
 many opposing sides. However, we are now in a good position to change 
 that due to the May 16, 1961 Coup de tat. In the past, we promoted 
 people without due consideration, but I'm so glad that we are now 
 doing the right thing and can determine and extract the real martial 
 artists."

 The following is the actual procedure for the first National Promotion
 Test (Jun Kuk Seung Dan Shimsa Dae Hwe) of the Korea Taesoodo
 Association:

 1) Opening of the Promotion Test; 2) Courtesy; 3) Revolution Public
 Pledge; 4) Opening remarks by Promotion Test Chairman CHOI
 Myung Shin; 5) Performance of test and judges consideration; 6) Review 
 and Comment of Judges; 7) Dan Certificate award ceremony; 8) Manse Sam 
 Chang (Korean version of Banzai; "Manse! Manse! Manse!"); 9) Closing 
 of the Promotion Test.

 One thing that was special about this first Promotion Test was the
 inclusion of the Revolution Public Pledge, because South Korea was 
 under a military regime at the time.

 HONG Jong Pyo (72 years old in 1999) kept the paperwork for the
 event and stated: "For 3rd Dan promotion and higher, the three areas
 tested were Hyung (forms), Daeryun (sparring) and Nonmun (written
 examination). The 1st Dan candidates were required to perform hyung 
 from the 5 Pyong Ahn Hyung, Chul Ki Chodan Hyung (Chul Ki #1), 
 Naebojin Chodan Hyung (Naebojin #1), Ja Won Hyung, and
 Hwarang Hyung."

 At the time, the promotion test consisted of Hyung (forms), Shihap
 (sparring) and Nonmun (written examination). The Sparring portion of 
 the Promotion Test was conducted under the following rules:

 1) Hogu (chest protector) must be worn on the upper body, and gloves 
 must be worn on both hands;

 2) The judges consisted of one Center Referee, four Corner Judges, and 
 two Jury members. The Center Referee has the responsibility to 
 determine the winner and is in charge of the contest. The Corner 
 Judges were placed at each corner of the ring and scored points using 
 red and blue flags. The Jury's responsibility was to calculate and 
 tabulate the scoring of the Corner Judges.

 3) The size of thecompetition area is 8 x 8 meters; 4) The length of 
 the competition was one round of three minutes.

 With respect to the Hyung (form) portion of the examination, the
 examinees chose two forms from the following group:

 2nd Dan forms: Balhan Hyung Dae; Chul Ki E Dan Hyung (Chul Ki #2); 
 Naebojin E Dan Hyung (Naebojin #2); Kima E Dan Hyung (Kima #2); Choong 
 Moo Hyung.

 3rd Dan forms: Ship Su Hyung; Pal Sae Hyung; Yon Bi Hyung; Dan
 Kwon Kyung; No Pae Hyung; Ge Baek Hyung; Ul Ji Hyung.

 4th Dan forms: Chul Ki Sam Dan Hyung (Chul Ki #3); Naebojin Sam Dan 
 Hyung (Naebojin #3); Kima Sam Dan Hyung (Kima #3); Ja Un Hyung; Jin 
 Soo Hyun; Am Hak Hyung; Jin Dong Hyung; Sam Il Hyung; Jang Kwon Hyung.

 5th Dan forms: Kong Sang Kun Hyung; Kwan Kong Hyung; Oh Ship Sa Hyung; 
 Ship Sam Hyung; Ban Wol Hyung; Pal Ki Kwon Hyung.

 At the time, the Hyung (Poomse) were adapted from Karate as was the 
 Daeryun (Kyoruki). In the 1950's, CHOI Hong Hee's Chang Hon Ryu forms 
 Ge Baek and Choong Moo used at the Oh Do Kwan was included in this 
 promotion test. HONG Jong Pyo criticized CHOI Hong Hi and the Chang 
 Hon Ryu: "CHOI Hong Hi is a historical figure, and he was brave, but 
 at one time, he had a strong connection with former ROK President RHEE 
 Syng Man and tried to kiss up to him with those forms. He also made 
 the Eui Am Hyung."

 Candidates for 3rd Dan and above also had a Nonmun, or written
 examination requirement. The 1st Exam question was "Please explain the 
 importance of the unification and standardization of the different 
 Hyung." As the question shows, the biggest problem of the Korea 
 Taesoodo Association was the unification of the different Kwan 
 methods. However, as time went on, the written examination was taken 
 out of the testing requirements.

 During this time period, the main focus of every Kwan was to foster
 the attitude of a martial artist, as well as develop the basic 
 techniques, movement and philosophy of each Kwan. The training of 
 Hyung was from Karate, and Daeryun or sparring techniques and 
 specialties varied depending on each Kwan's specialty.

 ***

 Coming Up:  Chapter 2; Section 9: The Founding of the Korea Taekwondo 
 Association 

 ------------------------------

 Sorry for yet another long post folks!

 Miles


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

This will be interesting:

Coming Up: Chapter 2; Section 9: The Founding of the Korea Taekwondo 
Association


----------



## Miles (Mar 6, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> In conclusion, I believe Choi Hong Hi (and company) created an international art called Taekwon-Do. Then after the success of Taekwon-Do, the Kwan Jangs (who were previously unaccepting of Taekwon-Do) as well as the Korean government chose to use the reputation of TKD as a means of international recognition for their country.
> 
> The Korean Kukkiwon did succeed in bringing the kwans together (a great acomplishment). Also, they did manage to create a unique art seperate from Karate (and Taekwon-Do). The only thing they have yet to do is name their art! Instead they chose to use the international recognition previously gained by the dictator that wouldnt follow their rules...
> (Please choose to debate as opposed to FLAME!)


 



			
				RMclain said:
			
		

> : Choi Hong Hi, because of his military ties, became a sort-of "poster boy" for heading up a movement for a unique Korean martial art - even though he was certainly not the most senior or knowledgable martial artist in Korea at that time. He created the Chang Hon(Blue Cottage) forms in 1950 based on his former training (he studied karate in Japan), but gave the forms names to commemorate events unique to Korean history in an attempt to make a unique identity away from anything, "Non-Korean."
> 
> Under his leadership and backed by govt. support, he solicited many martial artists to forget their previous training an teach the newly created "uniquely Korean" requirements. Many were eager to accept this duty, since the govt. gave out salaries for these people - which in war-torn S. Korea was a big deal.- most were very poor.


 Spookey, I believe you are correct that Gen Choi created the first set of indigenous Korean forms.  Not to minimize his contribution, but to put it into perspective, I've culled RMclain's post which states the itnernationalization  of the art much more succinctly than I could.

 I disagree with you as to the that the Kwan Jang were unaccepting of unification under the Taekwondo banner, but they understandably had their own ideas as to what should be done-that's human nature.

 Taekwondo is the name they chose ultimately to call their art.  Gen. Choi was part of the board which named the Art, but he was not senior in terms of martial art experience.  GM SON, Duk Sung was the most senior martial artist on the naming committee.  Gen Choi later requested that GM Son promote him (Choi) to 6th dan, so Gen Choi acknowledged he was junior to GM Son.

 Miles


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

So, is Tae Kwon Do considered a karate type and in analogy Hapkido considered Jui-Jitsu type?


----------



## Miles (Mar 6, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> So, is Tae Kwon Do considered a karate type and in analogy Hapkido considered Jui-Jitsu type?


 No, I think Taekwondo, while having roots in Karate-do, is not a type thereof but a separate art which has and continues to evolve.  This is similar to both Judo and Hapkido which have roots in Ju-jitsu but are separate arts as well.

 Miles


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

Good point...anyone else?


----------



## Marginal (Mar 6, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> I have long stopped practicing Tae Kwon Do, as well as Korean arts. I still have a respect for them and that they do develop skill and discipline. Just like any created martial art per century, all have benefits. But many, have fabricated history or history based upon speculation. This is to glorify, their name or art. This does not have to be so



Did you just cut and paste all that from various web sites?

Why?


----------



## rmclain (Mar 6, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> R. McLain,
> 
> May I ask where did you get your references from? This is not to discredit you, but I would like to read and locate them for future reference.
> 
> ...


Much of what I write, anyone can find on the internet. 

My direct instructor is Grandmaster Kim Soo - from the Taekwondo Times Magazine "Letter to the editor" article you have. He tells me about the martial arts available following WWII until he came to the US in January 1968. He is from the original Chang Moo Kwan and Kang Duk Won, beginning in 1951, and was there to witness the development of what became Taekwondo. He firmly refused teaching the newly created Taekwondo-only curriculum in Korea and immigrated to the US to have the freedom to teach and pass along his original teachers' legacy. Many instructors were angry with him for teaching what they considered "unpatriotic/non-Korean" martial arts.

Sort-of strange he had to take those teachings out of Korea to preserve them.  There is a rising interest of what has been lost because of the push for a nationalistic art and sport.  He has been invited in Korea to lecture at the Cultural Museum the past several years.  Here is a link to photos and story about his visit:

http://www.kimsookarate.com/gallery-present/koreaTrip0804/KoreaTrip_pt2.htm

http://www.kimsookarate.com/gallery-present/LectureKyongBok/lectureKyongBok_1.htm


His web site: http://www.kimsookarate.com

R. McLain


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

Marginal said:
			
		

> Did you just cut and paste all that from various web sites?
> 
> Why?


What copy and paste from what various web sites? Please explain so that I may respond properly


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

_My direct instructor is Grandmaster Kim Soo - from the Taekwondo Times Magazine "Letter to the editor" article you have. He tells me about the martial arts available following WWII until he came to the US in January 1968. He is from the original Chang Moo Kwan and Kang Duk Won, beginning in 1951, and was there to witness the development of what became Taekwondo. He firmly refused teaching the newly created Taekwondo-only curriculum in Korea and immigrated to the US to have the freedom to teach and pass along his original teachers' legacy. Many instructors were angry with him for teaching what they considered "unpatriotic/non-Korean" martial arts.

Sort-of strange he had to take those teachings out of Korea to preserve them. There is a rising interest of what has been lost because of the push for a nationalistic art and sport. He has been invited in Korea to lecture at the Cultural Museum the past several years. Here is a link to photos and story about his visit:_

Not to sound too delectable, but visiting his site has me telling you that you are fortunate to study with him. These Korean instructors of that caliber are hard to find


----------



## Spookey (Mar 6, 2005)

Miles,


Apologies if I missed the point, but does the fact that the RoK government (for a time) or the fact that there was monitary gain for those choosing to teach have any bearing on my post?

A few more points to ponder...

1. The kwans formed the Korea TaeSooDo Association (it was renamed Korean Taekwon-Do Association at the demand of General Choi)

2. Neither the KTA, WTF, nor Kukkiwon, published any known text on THEIR uniquely Korean art (Taekwon-Do) until almost two decades after the original text by General Choi on the art of Taekwon-Do.

3. Provided documentation when read in full will plainly show that the term Taekwon-Do as well as the original forms (both coined by Choi) were not accepted among the kwans as they prefered the term Tae Soo Do and the Pyong Ahn Hyungs (Heian Katas of Shotokan) as well as other pre-existing patterns developed for other arts.

Being that I was hoping for debate, I will humby request subjective analysis of my post and more specific replies as opposed to generalizations that fail to directly address my posts!

TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## Marginal (Mar 6, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> What copy and paste from what various web sites? Please explain so that I may respond properly


I asked you if you had cut and pasted that from various web sites. You post was not at all clear on if you actually ever studied TKD, or were just reposting an anecdote from someone else, and culling info from a Google search as your linkography seemed to indicate. 

If you did just copy that information from other web sites and (by extension) other people, why did you bother?


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 6, 2005)

You mean my long post here did not indicate that I had studied? Hmmn...maybe it didnt post.I apologize for the confusion:
Yes, I had studied TKD


----------



## Marginal (Mar 7, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> You mean my long post here did not indicate that I had studied?



No. It wasn't clear if you were pasting in an anecdote you found on a web site, or posting your own experience. 

Hence my question.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 7, 2005)

In what form would you not think it was mine by me using "I"?


----------



## DragonFooter (Mar 7, 2005)

To me very simple,Taekwon-do evovled from karate. When the evolution is completed the techniques executed have a Korean flavour. Hence that was probably the roots of Taekwon-do. Since the techniques and combat style are executed distinctively from Karate, Gen. Choi propose to gather these techniques under the name Taekwon-do. Gen Choi founder of the first TKD style? You bet!


----------



## Teh Tot (Mar 7, 2005)

Im going to have to disagree with you on a part of your post about who came first. 

General Choi started his form of Taekwon-Do in a Japaneese prison to aleviate the bordom and to keep phisically fit. His cellmate and jailer became his students and when he was liberated in August 1945 he became a luitenent in the korean army and teaching his entire company. Ill post more on this a bit later.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 7, 2005)

Marginal-I do not mean to sound sarcastic. Allow me to re-start this. Taken it from the opposite or "in someone elses' shoe":

Looking back at the post (my) and its length, it would appear to be cut and pasted. Per maybe a plagerized, parody, or excogitated.

For whatever the reason, this is an assumption from you that it came from a website. 

In essence, to clear the matter, I had cut and pasted it-but from my own creation, per using MS Word. This program was "opened" at that time, so I had used it in conjunction with the forum. I cannot do this often because of malfunctions.

Peace


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 7, 2005)

Given that the Koreans had suffered under almost 40 years of Japanese oppression (and I do mean suffered), it is entirely understandable that the senior Tae Kwon Do instructors would certainly NOT want a Korean martial art that used Japanese forms. There will be a certain amount of Japanese influence because of the instructors' backgrounds, but how can you have a Korean martial art and practice Japanese forms? This is almost saying "Practice Karate forms because you Koreans don't deserve forms you developed yourself. You are not smart enough to do that." Don't forget, someone created the Japanese forms as well. They didn't just appear at the whim of the gods.
Think about it. America is annexed by the Soviet Union, which proceeds to wipe out all signs of American culture, history, language, and pride. You must think, speak, and act Russian. After they are defeated, forgive me if I'm a little hesitant to consciously adapt Russian norms to my way of thinking. And if someone rejects American attempts at independant thought in favor of Russian thought because it is more traditional, they'd be a little suspect. Why consciously stay with the customs of the country that brutalized your nation for 40 years? Better to assert American independence and start over with new ideas.
Tae Kwon Do is the same way. I do not acknowlege Choi as the Founder of Tae Kwon Do. To do so neglects everyone else who played a part. He was a pioneer and leader. As Miles stated, he was more or less the Face of Tae Kwon Do at that point because of his military credentials. I do give him credit for being the first to introduce forms that consciously brought a Korean identity to Tae Kwon Do. I do think his forms, however, more or less just introduced techniques that the other kwans were already doing. One forms showcased Tae Kwon Do's spinning and jump kicks. Those were already being done in Chung Do Kwan. The forms just didn't reflect that. Much like today-the modern TKD forms of the WTF do not contain the kicking techniques it is famous for. Perhaps the new forms will remedy that.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 7, 2005)

_There will be a certain amount of Japanese influence because of the instructors' backgrounds, but how can you have a Korean martial art and practice Japanese forms? This is almost saying "Practice Karate forms because you Koreans don't deserve forms you developed yourself. You are not smart enough to do that."_ 
How true, anyone with years, or decades of expeience could and should to this to get out of oppression.


_Don't forget, someone created the Japanese forms as well. They didn't just appear at the whim of the gods._
And someone had shown or created these as well...And so on....

How interesting....


----------



## Miles (Mar 7, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> Miles,
> Apologies if I missed the point, but does the fact that the RoK government (for a time) or the fact that there was monitary gain for those choosing to teach have any bearing on my post?


 No problem. You implied that AFTER Taekwondo was successful internationally that the ROK got on board. My point was that actually, it was BECAUSE the ROK Government sent the instructors all over that Taekwondo became more popular. You were giving Gen Choi credit for what actually was the ROK Government's practice.




			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> 1. The kwans formed the Korea TaeSooDo Association (it was renamed Korean Taekwon-Do Association at the demand of General Choi)


 I believe you are correct. I think that General Choi had the political backing and the authoritarian style necessary to push for the change in the name.




			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> 2. Neither the KTA, WTF, nor Kukkiwon, published any known text on THEIR uniquely Korean art (Taekwon-Do) until almost two decades after the original text by General Choi on the art of Taekwon-Do.


 This is not correct. I believe Gen Choi's first edition of his Textbook was in 1965, correct? (My textbook is the second edition, in 1975, but it states 1st edition was in 1972-I believe there was a previous text, it is my understanding it was printed in 1965 and contained the Pyung-Ahn hyung, not the Chang Hon tul). I also understand that GM LEE, Won Kuk of the Chung Do Kwan wrote a text, "Taekwondo Kyobon" in 1968 containing the earliest Taeguek series and the yudanja poomsae as well.

 Regardless of whether Gen Choi published in 1965 or 1972, I have a book published by the World Taekwondo Federation in 1975 called "Taekwondo (Poomse)." Since the WTF only came about in 1973, I think that is pretty timely to get a book translated into English. And it is only 8 yrs after Gen Choi's book with the Pyung Ahn hyung and 1 yr after his Textbook. However, there may have been books written in Hangul before the Poomse book was published. But it was was nowhere near two decades after Gen Choi's book as you have stated.




			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> 3. Provided documentation when read in full will plainly show that the term Taekwon-Do as well as the original forms (both coined by Choi) were not accepted among the kwans as they prefered the term Tae Soo Do and the Pyong Ahn Hyungs (Heian Katas of Shotokan) as well as other pre-existing patterns developed for other arts.


  I am not sure what you are saying or asking here?  Are you asking me to provide documentation or saying that you have done so?

  Assuming it is the former.....
 In 1959, Gen Choi was President of the Korea Taekwondo Association but that organization folded during the political turmoil in 3/61 in which there was a coup d'etat by General Park, Chung Hee.

 On 9/16/1961 the Korea Tae Soo Do Association was formed with Colonel Nam Tae Hi representing the Oh Do Kwan. Several notable 1st generation instructors: Gen Choi, Hwang Kee, Dr. Yoon (Jidokwan), and Ro, Byung Jik (Sang Moo Kwan) opted to not participate. At the meeting, Colonel Nam and GM UHM, Woon Kyu (Chung Do Kwan) tried to get the name "Taekwondo" accepted but were unsuccessful.

 On 8/5/1965, the name of the same group was changed to the Korea Taekwondo Association. The ITF was formed on 3/22/1966. So the term "Taekwondo" was accepted by the Kwans before the ITF was formed. 

 The quote I provided previously stated that essentially Shotokan kata and Gen Choi's Tul were used at the earliest Dan Promotional exam. I am not (conceding or  denying that Gen Choi's series pre-date the KTA's Committees to create the "unified poomsae."

 Since he did not seek anyone else's cooperation, I am sure it was easier for him to create his tul. It is always more difficult to do things by Committee but the KTA sought to bring the various Kwans together-anyone of the Kwan Jang could have done what Gen. Choi did.



			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> Being that I was hoping for debate, I will humby request subjective analysis of my post and more specific replies as opposed to generalizations that fail to directly address my posts!


 Am I doing better? 

  Miles


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 7, 2005)

But the thrwad states:
Who is the Founder of TKD...

Not what influenced or history of...

So can a founder be one that organized and got it going?


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 7, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> But the thrwad states:
> Who is the Founder of TKD...
> 
> Not what influenced or history of...
> ...


Well the founder has to be GOD plain and simple for without him no Martial Arts.


----------



## Marginal (Mar 7, 2005)

terryl965 said:
			
		

> Well the founder has to be GOD plain and simple for without him no Martial Arts.



I'd be more likely to credit the serpent for that one.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 7, 2005)

Can't be God.....I met some Christians that believe that martial arts are unholy.....


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 7, 2005)

In my opinion, the Founder is the person who organizes the curriculum, developes the technique, creates the rules, and provides the overall framework for a style or art. There is no denying that Gen. Choi was influential in Tae Kwon Do's development. Not because he was supremely talented, but because his military rank and ambition allowed him to push for and get things accomplished that others perhaps wouldn't have been able to do.
However, there is a difference between promoting an art and creating one. In my opinion, as I stated previously, I think Gen. Choi took credit (perhaps more than he should have) for establishing an art that, essentially, already existed. It seems to me that his forms consisted of approximately 1/2 Shotokan and the other half of various techniques already included in the other Kwans' curricula. You cannot create what already exists. In my opinion, the real credit for developing the basis of what we call Tae Kwon Do goes to Won Kuk Lee, Chung Do Kwan founder. He is the one who devised many of the principles Tae Kwon Do uses today. He was also the first instructor to get Tang Soo Do accepted by the military and police in Korea. The fact that "Tang Soo Do" became "Tae Kwon Do" doesn't change the fact that GGM Lee was the originator of many of the foundations of Tae Kwon Do, and that his students (Choi, Nam, and Uhm among them) would go on to grow and evolve Tae Kwon Do into what it is today.
Choi was the founder of ITF style Tae Kwon Do, not necessarily the art itself.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 7, 2005)

Miles,


Per my understanding the private instructors of the ITF gained recognition internationally. If I am incorrect, please list nation and demo team (by year of first contact) to validate your point!

Secondly, I have text (in English) titled "Taekwon-Do the Art of Self Defense" written by General Choi (copyright 1965) which plainly displays the original Chang Hon Hyungs (it does however give reference to the Heian Katas and also contains a few as "supplimental" for TKD training based on the role they played in the creation of TKD). The book was published 1965, was in English, and contained the early Chang Hon Hyungs!

I am still waiting for someone to dispute the points I am raising and hoping for a true debate!


TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 7, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> Miles,
> 
> 
> Per my understanding the private instructors of the ITF gained recognition internationally. If I am incorrect, please list nation and demo team (by year of first contact) to validate my point!
> ...


This is a book? What is the title and/or publisher?


----------



## Marginal (Mar 8, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> This is a book? What is the title and/or publisher?


 Sounds like "Taekwon Do" The first edition of the TKD Encyclopedia.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 8, 2005)

Is such a "biased reference"?


----------



## Spookey (Mar 8, 2005)

Sir,

Nam Tae Hi was most certainly a student of the Chung Do Kwan. However, I have never seen one lick of info stating that Choi Hong Hi ever was a student. Furthermore, I challenge you to show me otherwise.

Choi Hong Hi was awarded an "Honorary" Black Belt by the Chung Do Kwan and nothing more.

Chung Do Kwan was TSD prior Choi's involvement...Yup, they were still doing Korean Karate!

TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 8, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> Sir,
> 
> Nam Tae Hi was most certainly a student of the Chung Do Kwan. However, I have never seen one lick of info stating that Choi Hong Hi ever was a student. Furthermore, I challenge you to show me otherwise.
> 
> ...


Who is this directed to?

And do you have a good links?


----------



## Spookey (Mar 8, 2005)

Mr. 47,



The post was properly titled  " Note to MichiganTKD"...



Miles,

I find it hard to believe that in my hand I hold a Korean Publication that was written by a man deamed a "traitor" by the RoK Government. Even harder to believe is that there was an earlier text written by a man in good standings with the RoK that has yet to have been disclosed!

After all, wouldn't such a text have allowed the RoK to discredit Choi's claims once and for all?



TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## Marginal (Mar 8, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> Is such a "biased reference"?



Depends on what you're trying to prove to an extent I beleive. What it mainly illustrates is that TKD had its roots in Shotokan with the oldest set of Hyungs practiced. If you're trying to prove that this demonstrates the absolute formative root of TKD... 

That's when personal reality steps in and things become a train wreck.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 8, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> Can't be God.....I met some Christians that believe that martial arts are unholy.....


Well kicking for christ is one of the biggest MA organization in the united states, and if I not mistaken they believe in GOD. Most Monks believe in Budda and that would be almost the same. If I'm not mis taken alot of different styles believe in some sort of higher spirtit, that would be there GOD kinda. Now your comment I have meet devil worshipers that believe MA is unholy what is your point.
       See without God we would not be here you know the heavens and the earth. So in my opion without GOD no MA.
       I do see what some of you are getting you stated TKD plain and simple the founding father OH yea that would be GOD! No matter how you put it if you go back far enough it leads back to GOD. To let you know it was from Okinawa that TKD mostly came from a little batch of land, which had a karate base from japan as we all know which karate came from the kung fu base which came from some other place which came from someother place so see TKD is just one person justification of a elder Art that he learned from somebody else. In my opion it is pointless to argue over who started the Art every person that is from a different organization has there way of th starting pont of TKD. Most would say Choi others say no who are you going to believe, I was not there at that time and most liking non of us was, only the one's that was there know for sure.


----------



## Miles (Mar 8, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> Miles,
> 
> I find it hard to believe that in my hand I hold a Korean Publication that was written by a man deamed a "traitor" by the RoK Government. Even harder to believe is that there was an earlier text written by a man in good standings with the RoK that has yet to have been disclosed!
> 
> After all, wouldn't such a text have allowed the RoK to discredit Choi's claims once and for all?


1.  I believe you have the book which I referenced earlier-it was 1965 and it did contain the Pyung Ahn/Heian forms.  I believe 1965 predates Gen Choi's visit to North Korea (which may have caused him to be viewed as a traitor) I have no knowledge that the ROK government ever determined in a court of law that he was a traitor, do you?)

2. I don't understand why you have a hard time believing that someone other than Gen Choi could have written a book, in Korea, in Korean, which Westerners are not aware of.  Perhaps even Gen Choi could have written a book, in Korea, in Korean, which predates his 1965 book which you have.

3.  As far as discrediting Gen Choi-I don't think the KTA or the ROK Government have ever bothered.  The entire movement by the KTA was toward unification-all the Kwan Jang, except Gen Choi and GM Hwang Kee participated.  No one person was given credit for the popularization of Taekwondo though Gen Choi seems to want to take credit for it as well as the naming of the art and founding the art.  I tend to think it was much more of a group effort.


Sorry, have not had a chance to respond to your earlier post, will do so after work!   (Darn, I hate it when work gets in the way of the important things!)

Miles


----------



## Spookey (Mar 8, 2005)

Sir,

1. Prior to General Choi's cirriculum of Taekwon-Do (copyright 1965) which did indeed contain the Chang Hon Hyungs, there is no documentation of a pre existing Taekwon-Do (be it hyung or cirricullum).

2. Prior to General Choi there was no other Kwan practicing a "uniquely Korean" art. As previously stated they were practicing pre existing arts...

3. If you are credited with the name and documentation shows that you are the first to create the material (ie hyungs), and the first to create a cirricullum for progress through said material, it should well be argued that you created it!

I have been provided with no information to dispute these points and therefore will continue to hold these beliefs as self evident until provided with documentation to the contrary!

TAEKWON!
Spookey

(Miles, have a great day at work my friend)!


----------



## Zepp (Mar 8, 2005)

Spookey my friend, you're making a few too many assumptions.



> 1. Prior to General Choi's cirriculum of Taekwon-Do (copyright 1965) which did indeed contain the Chang Hon Hyungs, there is no documentation of a pre existing Taekwon-Do (be it hyung or cirricullum).



Don't you mean, there's no formally published documentation in English which you've been able to find?  As one possible example: We know that both the RoK military and Seoul police learned hand-to-hand techniques from kwan instructors in the late 40's and 50's.  Wouldn't you think they probably had some form of documantation to assist them in their training?



> 2. Prior to General Choi there was no other Kwan practicing a "uniquely Korean" art. As previously stated they were practicing pre existing arts...



This depends on what you consider to be "uniquely Korean."  The Chong Hon forms might have unique elements in them, but Choi still created them using his knowledge of Karate (and maybe Tae Kyon, if you believe the stories).  The other kwans may have started out practicing pre-existing arts, but it wasn't long before they began to develop what they had into something new.  There are are no truly unique arts.



> 3. If you are credited with the name and documentation shows that you are the first to create the material (ie hyungs), and the first to create a cirricullum for progress through said material, it should well be argued that you created it!



Being the first to publish a book on the art doesn't make you the art's creator.  While Choi Hong Hi deserves credit for creating his own material and curriculum, that doesn't make him "the founder" of Tae Kwon Do.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 9, 2005)

Sir,

1. The Korean peninsula was under the oppressing rule of Japan until the end of 
    WWII (1947 I believe). All documentation thus far has shown that the original 
    five kwans all practiced the cirricullum of a pre-existing art (primarily TSD).
    Furthermore, I challenge you to provide text specific to TKD predating the 
    book "Taekwon-Do the Art of Self Defense" by Choi Hong Hi!

2. "Uniquely Korean" is a phrase we have been using during the course of this 
    thread to indicate the art which was to unify the kwans that was not Karate, 
    Gung-Fu, ect. (pre-existing)

3. From all available points of resource yet to surface Choi Hong Hi was the first 
    person to present the art of TKD to the public. He presented an art in its 
    entirety (methodology, ettiquette, system of rank, cirricullum, ect.) this is
    the reason I am compelled to believe he is the FOUNDER of Taekwon-Do!

TAEKWON,
Spooks

ps. I am sorry to post the same points over and over, I do feel it necessary to debate this issue until I am presented with facts leading to a different concusion.


----------



## Miles (Mar 9, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> 1. Prior to General Choi's cirriculum of Taekwon-Do (copyright 1965) which did indeed contain the Chang Hon Hyungs, there is no documentation of a pre existing Taekwon-Do (be it hyung or cirricullum).


 GM LEE, Kyo Yoon (founder of Taekwondo Han Moo Kwan) wrote a book published in 06/1965 in Korea, in Korean, the English translation of the title is "Taekwondo Textbook For A Million Taekwondoists." If there were a Million practioners of Taekwondo 9 months before the creation of the ITF (03/1966), were they all Gen Choi's students? I believe not. Could a Million people falsely believe they were practicing something other than Taekwondo? I believe not.



			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> 2. Prior to General Choi there was no other Kwan practicing a "uniquely Korean" art. As previously stated they were practicing pre existing arts...


 How was Gen Choi's art uniquely Korean whereas the practices by the other Kwan Jang were not? Gen Choi stated himself that the Oh Do Kwan accepted Chung Do Kwan rank at face value since their trainings were similar. Did you not state that your father had Chung Do Kwan rank?

 I will posit that the free sparring, which is the trademark of Taekwondo, has been continuous full-contact since the early 1960's. This has not changed in Kukki-Taekwondo. When I started training, in the ITF in 1975, the sparring was point-not unlike NASKA.



			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> 3. If you are credited with the name and documentation shows that you are the first to create the material (ie hyungs), and the first to create a cirricullum for progress through said material, it should well be argued that you created it!


 Each instructor has their own interpretation of the curriculum and material. For example, I teach breakfalls and throws, but know several TKD instructors who do not. 

 As far as the name of the Art, you have not commented on why Gen Choi seeks to take credit for the work of the naming committee, on which sat his senior, GM SON, Duk Song?



			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> I have been provided with no information to dispute these points and therefore will continue to hold these beliefs as self evident until provided with documentation to the contrary!


 Spookey, I don't think I am going to change your mind, nor do I think you will change mine. But, I am happy to explore these points with you since it is clear you love TKD as do I. 

     Miles


----------



## rmclain (Mar 9, 2005)

Just as an "aside" from the discussion.  I saw someone wrote something about sparring.  The following is a photo from 1958 at a demo for S. Korean President Syngmann Rhee.  They had a full contact sparring session as a demo with body padding. Apparently this was a new thing at that time.

R. McLain 

http://www.kimsookarate.com/gallery-old-days/58_Demo/58_demo.htm


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 9, 2005)

rmclain said:
			
		

> Just as an "aside" from the discussion. I saw someone wrote something about sparring. The following is a photo from 1958 at a demo for S. Korean President Syngmann Rhee. They had a full contact sparring session as a demo with body padding. Apparently this was a new thing at that time.
> 
> R. McLain
> 
> http://www.kimsookarate.com/gallery-old-days/58_Demo/58_demo.htm


 Very nice picture have anymore please send.


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 9, 2005)

rmclain,

 Thanks for posting the video.  In the future, please start a separate thread for an off-topic post or find an appropriate thread that may already exist.

 Thank you


----------



## rmclain (Mar 9, 2005)

Sorry.  I thought that the photo was relevant to the discussion of Taekwondo development in Korea.

R. McLain


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 9, 2005)

I pulled it up, and you're right.  My bad - sorry.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 9, 2005)

terryl965 said:
			
		

> Well kicking for christ is one of the biggest MA organization in the united states, and if I not mistaken they believe in GOD. Most Monks believe in Budda and that would be almost the same. If I'm not mis taken alot of different styles believe in some sort of higher spirtit, that would be there GOD kinda. Now your comment I have meet devil worshipers that believe MA is unholy what is your point.
> See without God we would not be here you know the heavens and the earth. So in my opion without GOD no MA.
> I do see what some of you are getting you stated TKD plain and simple the founding father OH yea that would be GOD! No matter how you put it if you go back far enough it leads back to GOD. To let you know it was from Okinawa that TKD mostly came from a little batch of land, which had a karate base from japan as we all know which karate came from the kung fu base which came from some other place which came from someother place so see TKD is just one person justification of a elder Art that he learned from somebody else. In my opion it is pointless to argue over who started the Art every person that is from a different organization has there way of th starting pont of TKD. Most would say Choi others say no who are you going to believe, I was not there at that time and most liking non of us was, only the one's that was there know for sure.


Most Buddhist monks to not beleive in Buddha as a God.

Are we discussing the foundation and other contributions for the art?
Or the person whom "coined" the art's name/term?
Or the person that promoted it?


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 9, 2005)

First off I said almost, second I'm just trying to make a point that anybody and everybody has there way of thinking. All I know is I can say something to you, you can repeat it to somebody else and so on and so on and by the time it gets back to me it was change just enough to alter the origial statement. So if any of you was there first hand then I'll believe in they way I was tought and you will be probaly believe what you was told by your Master. Thay is the point I'm trying to make.


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 9, 2005)

Terry,

While I don't have a problem with the idea that perhaps God gave us the ability to practice martial arts and understand them, martial arts systems themselves are, by definition, artificial. Someone created the specific styles we practice. So while God perhaps gave us the ability to practice Tae Kwon Do, an individual or individuals created Tae Kwon Do as we know it.
I'll even buy that perhaps God inspired some of the contributors of the art. But it remains that human beings created it. Who is a matter of debate

Incidentally, some forms of Buddhism look at Buddha as a God. Others simply see him as the Enlightened One.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 10, 2005)

Miles,


Thank you for the information give me a time to look it over and I will respond in full!

I will comment on my Fathers certification through the Chung Do Kwan. He was certified through the CDK (which was practicing the Chang Hon Hyungs of General Choi). Prior to accepting the Chang Hon Hyungs, the CDK was practicing Karate (Heian Katas) and was a self stated TSD gym!

Regarding my Father, he held rank through the Oh Do Kwan, Chung Do Kwan, and Moo Duk Kwan. Later, he held rank issued by the ITF, the Vietnamese TKD Federation, the Kukkiwon, and was present at the creation of the USTF!

We love TKD (just as you stated)!

TAEKWON,
Spooks


----------



## Spookey (Mar 10, 2005)

MILES,



Can you provide me with any bibliography related to the book in reference. Also, could you provide me with the Korean title of the Book!



Truly would be a find!

TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 10, 2005)

MichiganTKD said:
			
		

> Terry,
> 
> While I don't have a problem with the idea that perhaps God gave us the ability to practice martial arts and understand them, martial arts systems themselves are, by definition, artificial. Someone created the specific styles we practice. So while God perhaps gave us the ability to practice Tae Kwon Do, an individual or individuals created Tae Kwon Do as we know it.
> I'll even buy that perhaps God inspired some of the contributors of the art. But it remains that human beings created it. Who is a matter of debate
> ...


Michagan I was just making a point, you see there sre so many calms about TKD and who did what, that only the one's that was there would know for sure also the member that was there could interpet things in there own way. As far as the way Ma started there is a book that was written by a gentleman that said MA was brought down from the sky's in a shinning light, his interpitation was they come from people from outer space. I don't have the book in the house but this weekend I'll look it up it's in the garage. A bit weard for me but that is his thought about the way MA was started. For every claim there's a counter claim. I hope you can see everyone's dilima. Every person needs to be right and every organization has there way of thinking.


----------



## Miles (Mar 10, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> MILES,
> Can you provide me with any bibliography related to the book in reference. Also, could you provide me with the Korean title of the Book!


I don't have that particular book by GM LEE (i.e. 1965 book).  The book I have by him listed the referenced book in its bibliography (along with several others he has written).  Sorry, I don't have the Korean name of the book-only it's English translation.

BTW and somewhat off-topic (sorry Shesulsa!)-your father must be a fascinating source of information!

Take Care,

Miles


----------



## DuneViking (Mar 10, 2005)

Greetings all,

I think, from the plethora of responses, there is no 'one' founder as others have suggested, but more of a community evolution. I also think it would be interesting to see what 'Korean" techniques survived from before the Japanese occupation, if any.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 10, 2005)

MichiganTKD said:
			
		

> Terry,
> 
> While I don't have a problem with the idea that perhaps God gave us the ability to practice martial arts and understand them, martial arts systems themselves are, by definition, artificial. Someone created the specific styles we practice. So while God perhaps gave us the ability to practice Tae Kwon Do, an individual or individuals created Tae Kwon Do as we know it.
> I'll even buy that perhaps God inspired some of the contributors of the art. But it remains that human beings created it. Who is a matter of debate
> ...


But what if one disbeleives that God, of any from, had nothing to do with it? What about individuals who do not beleive in God, or the Bible as "by God". Shouldn't these people have free will and are alllowed to get disguted when they see something like this posted?


----------



## TigerWoman (Mar 10, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> But what if one disbeleives that God, of any from, had nothing to do with it? What about individuals who do not beleive in God, or the Bible as "by God". Shouldn't these people have free will and are alllowed to get disguted when they see something like this posted?



This is off topic, please make a new thread for this question. BTW, "disbelieves" and "had nothing" is a double negative which says,  believes that God has something to do with it, so I would restate that in your new thread. This would probably would be best in the Study anyway. Thanks!  TW


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 10, 2005)

TigerWoman said:
			
		

> This is off topic, please make a new thread for this question. BTW, "disbelieves" and "had nothing" is a double negative which says, believes that God has something to do with it, so I would restate that in your new thread. This would probably would be best in the Study anyway. Thanks! TW


Sorry, I am trying.....I have such a strange writing/posting style.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 10, 2005)

TW sorry about bringing up God in this thread was'nt trying to start a holy war just trying to make a point that no-one is willing to understand. My humble apologies.

Terry Lee Stoker


----------



## TigerWoman (Mar 10, 2005)

Terry, I understand your point, no worries.  But for those who want to discuss the humans involved in the origination of TKD, its hard to stay on track when other questions are introduced. Hence my suggestion. TW


----------



## shesulsa (Mar 10, 2005)

TigerWoman, I think MartialMan brought up God in reference to the discussion that arose from terryl965's post that God created TKD.  Not necessarily off-topic, but ... well, not exactly contributive either.

 47MartialMan, be sure your posts are pertinent to the conversation and, if you think it might not be exactly pertinent, then quote someone so you can have a reference for your point.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 10, 2005)

But how did theology come into it? The subject is of TKD creation, not mankind. But whoa, then we are into the evolution realm.

Back to the real topic and a question-

Do most TKD practioners realize and/or acredit anyone in particular?


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 10, 2005)

47 Martialman Probaly for the most part General Choi is the founding father, well atleast in my realm of thinking. 
Thank you Shesula and TW, I will try to stay on topic


----------



## Spookey (Mar 11, 2005)

Miles,

I have visited the Kuk Mu Do (Han Mu Do) official webite. I too saw the reference to the book. My next questions/comments are as follows:

1. What patterns did the Han Mu Kwan practice prior to the Pal-Gwe and Tae Geuks?

2. The "Modern History of Taekwon-Do" (which was often quoted in the early portion of this thread), states the Han Mu Kwan to be a TSD gym...just wondering when this changed?

TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 11, 2005)

For ITF students, Gen. Choi is considered to be the founder of TKD-a title he did little or nothing to dispute.

For many if not most WTF students, Tae Kwon Do is considered to be the product of the various Kwans coming together.

For many Chung Do Kwan students, Won Kuk Lee is considered the founding father of modern Tae Kwon Do since he was the first to teach.

It all depends on who you ask and their affiliation.

Something that separates Korean culture from other cultures: They tend to look at the various products of their culture in evolutionary terms. In other words, their sports, language, culture, and history evolved over time. If you ask a Japanese karate student "Who created Karate, or who created this style?", they will tell you "Gichin Funakoshi founded karate" or "Chojun Miyagi founded goju-ryu". If you ask a Korean "Who founded Tae Kwon Do?" they will tell you that Tae Kwon Do is a natural product of Korean evolution. Different people contributed to it over the years. There is no single founder.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 11, 2005)

But the term? Who coined the term?


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 11, 2005)

Spookey,

Han Moo Kwan became Tae Kwon Do at the founding of the KTA. The Korean gov't essentially told all Kwans "Join the KTA and become Tae Kwon Do or lose your gov't recognition" Up until that time, the Tae Kwon Do movement was essentially a Chung Do Kwan-Oh Do Kwan project. By no means did all Kwans accept "Tae Kwon Do" as their name. One advantage that Gen. Choi had: a lot of influence with the Korean gov't because of his military rank. In fact, one of the reasons why there is TKD Moo Duk Kwan and TSD Moo Duk Kwan is because some schools joined the KTA, while the ones under Ki Hwang refused.
Before the KTA was founded, the name of your style was pretty much whatever the Kwang Jang said it was. You had almost as many style names as Kwan names.
However, we don't have conclusive proof that Gen. Choi invented the name "Tae Kwon Do". He says he did, Son Duk Song says he did. Won Kuk Lee says the Instructors consulted a Korean dictionary and came up with the phrase. We most likely will never know.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 11, 2005)

MichiganTKD,

I am well aware of the history of the KTA and it's absorbtion of the Kwan system. Also, you are probably well aware that many kwans after joining the KTA continued on as TSD gyms even after joining the KTA!

There are those today that believe that Tae Kwon Do is merely another (more modern) name for Tang Soo Do. We know otherwise.

So, from your post I can determine that the Han Mu Kwan began to refer to itself as TKD after it's forced inception into the KTA. What we now seek to determine is whether they actually began the practice of TKD at that point in time or if they continued to teach TSD...

I can tell you I am Abe Lincoln, but that does not mean I am!

TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 11, 2005)

Reference Book Tae kwon Do by Yeon Hee Park:

The earliest records of TKD practices date back to about 50 b.c. During this time, Korea was divided into three kingdoms Silla, which was founded on the Kyongiu plain in 57 b.c.; Korguryo, founded in the Yalu River Valley in 37 b.c.; and Baekche founded in the southwestern area of the Korean pennisula in18 b.c. Evidence of the practice of Tae; Kyon ( the earliest known form of TKD) has been found in paintings on the cieling of the Muyoung-Chong, a royal tomb from the Koguryo dynasty. These and other mural painting show unarmed combatants using techniques that are virtually identical to those of modernday TKD. Of particular interest are details that show the use of the knife hand, fist ans ckassical fighting stances, all componants of modern TKD.

     Althrough TKD first appeared in the Koguryo kingdom, it is Silla's warrior nobility, the Hwarangs, who are credited with the growth and spead of the Art throughout Korea. Of the three kingdoms, Silla was the first to be formed, butit remained the smallest and least civilized. ItsCoastline was constantly under attack by Japanese pirated. After Silla appealed for help against the continual harassement by the Japanese pirates, King Gwanggaeto, the 19th in the line of Koruryo monarchs, sent a force of 50,000 soldiers into neighboring Silla to help the smaller kingdom drive out the pirates. It is at this time that Yaek Kyon is thought to have been introduce to Silla's warriors class, handed down in strict secrecy to a few select Sillan warriors by early Master of the Art.

    These Taek Kyon-trained warriors became known as the Hwarang. Founded initially as a military academy for the young nobility of Silla.

Just thought I would throw this in the mix and see where it leads.


----------



## Whitebelt (Mar 11, 2005)

Direct answer to the question.  Tae Kwon Do was developed when Karate, Judo and Kendo where introduced to Korea. Genral Choi only created the Federation to promote it around the world.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 11, 2005)

Whitebelt,


The thread is titled "Who is the Founder of TKD"...the post you made is in no way a direct answer. Let us look at your post~!

Kendo is the Founder of TKD (That doesnt work)
Karate is the Founder of TKD (Doesnt work either)
Judo is the Founder of TKD (Not that one either)...

In what way is this a direct answer? To be short, IT ISNT!

TAEKWON!
SPookey


----------



## Miles (Mar 11, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> Miles,
> 
> I have visited the Kuk Mu Do (Han Mu Do) official webite. I too saw the reference to the book. My next questions/comments are as follows:
> 
> ...


  Spookey,

 Sorry, I do not know what patterns the Han Moo Kwan practiced prior to the creation of the Palgwe and Taegueks. I have never seen the official Han Moo Kwan website, though there are a number of Han Moo Kwan people in Michigan: GM KIL, Sang Sup being most prominent. I will likely see him at a tournament on 3/26 and will ask him if I get a chance.

 The book I have by GM LEE, Kyo Yoon is entitled "A Guide to Taekwondo" and it has several photos of GM KIL, Sang Sup and his students in it.  It also has poomsae from Taeguek 1 through Jitae.  In his preface, GM LEE, Kyo Yoon does not even mention his own important role in the formulation of Taekwondo...again, a sign that it was a collaborative effort.

  Are you relying on strictly patterns as far as what is or is not TKD?

 MichiganTKD accurately described the political situation in which the Kwans were brought together. It is my understanding that the Oh Do Kwan and Chung Do Kwan did use the Taekwondo name while others called their art Tang Soo Do, Tae Soo Do, or Kong Soo Do. But, they came together to be Taekwondo (with the exception of a portion of the Moo Duk Kwan which maintained itself as Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do).

  This is what the Modern History says about Han Moo Kwan:

  <<Chapter 1: The Development of the Kwans

  Chapter 1, Section 8: Han Moo Kwan

  LEE Kyo Yoon founded the Han Moo Kwan in August 1956, and it
  was the leader of the new schools in the mid 1950's. Even now, LEE
  Kyo Yoon denies that the Han Moo Kwan was a split from the
  Jidokwan. After the Chosun Yun Moo Kwan's CHUN Sang Sup was
  kidnapped to North Korea during the Korean War, everything was in
  chaos, so LEE Chong Woo opened the Jidokwan, and he himself
  opened the Han Moo Kwan. Therefore Han Moo Kwan's root is not
  Jidokwan, but rather from the Chosun Yun Moo Kwan. This is LEE
  Kyo Yoon's claim.

  LEE Kyo Yoon says: "In November 1950, I came back to Seoul and
  taught Tang Soo Do (Taekwondo). But the Choson Yun Moo Kwan's
  LEE Jae Hwang said the building I was using was a Yudo place, so he 
  insisted that I leave. After thinking for a long time, I went to visit
  Vice President LEE Sang Mook of the Korean Amateur Sports
  Gymnasium (Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan, Han Che for short) and he
  allowed me to start a Taekwondo club and teach."

  Back then, the Han Kuk Che Yuk Kwan taught boxing, Judo,
  wrestling, weight lifting and fencing as a universal gym. With the
  permission of LEE Sang Mook, LEE Kyo Yoon taught Taekwondo
  (Tang Soo Do) temporarily and secured 200 members. However,
  conflicts with LEE Chong Woo became amplified and with LEE Sang
  Mook's suggestion, he temporarily stopped teaching Taekwondo.

  Then he went to Chang Sin Dong of Jong Ro Gu, Seoul at the
  backyard of Kang Moon High School to open his own school. This
  led to the founding of the Han Moo Kwan. The period of the Chang
  Sin Dong was a hardship. He called his tent with a straw mat for a
  floor, a dojang.

  Despite this hard life, his school reputation grew and finally in
  1969, he could open his central dojang in Wang Sip Ni, Seoul.>>

  Miles


----------



## Spookey (Mar 11, 2005)

Miles,


The best site I have found regarding the current Han Mu Kwan is the website of Kuk Mu Do Kwan!

Regarding patterns...They play an integral part in determining what is and is not TKD. For instance, if you are practicing the Pyuang Ahn Hyungs (Pinan or Heinan Kata) I do not see how that is TKD as it is plainly Karate-Do (Tang Soo Do). This is my primary reason for the inquiry.

Traditional Martial Arts pattern sets are a direct reflection of the system or styles cirricullum. The katas of Karate are representative of Karate, not Taekwon-Do! 

TAEKWON!
Spooks


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 11, 2005)

I guess I'm confuse, the question is who founded TKD. Well everything that you guy's post is after 1950 and the coaralation between Kwans so are you looking for the beginning or just past 1950 and modern TKD. In a post about three up I gave reference about Silla founded in around 57 b.c. in the Kyongiu plain. So my question to you are you looking for modern TKD or the actual history that some have written about.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 12, 2005)

MichiganTKD said:
			
		

> Spookey,
> 
> Han Moo Kwan became Tae Kwon Do at the founding of the KTA. The Korean gov't essentially told all Kwans "Join the KTA and become Tae Kwon Do or lose your gov't recognition" Up until that time, the Tae Kwon Do movement was essentially a Chung Do Kwan-Oh Do Kwan project. By no means did all Kwans accept "Tae Kwon Do" as their name. One advantage that Gen. Choi had: a lot of influence with the Korean gov't because of his military rank. In fact, one of the reasons why there is TKD Moo Duk Kwan and TSD Moo Duk Kwan is because some schools joined the KTA, while the ones under Ki Hwang refused.
> Before the KTA was founded, the name of your style was pretty much whatever the Kwang Jang said it was. You had almost as many style names as Kwan names.
> However, we don't have conclusive proof that Gen. Choi invented the name "Tae Kwon Do". He says he did, Son Duk Song says he did. Won Kuk Lee says the Instructors consulted a Korean dictionary and came up with the phrase. We most likely will never know.


Yes. i have read/heard sometihng alomg the lines of this.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 12, 2005)

Dear Sir,

The content of you earlier post (refering back to the original three kingdoms) is great information concerning the history of Korean Martial Arts in general. 

That information may be true of the history of Korean Arts in general, however, it is not reflective of the history specific to the art of Tae Kwon Do!

The modern history of Taekwon-Do is the only history specific to Taekwon-Do as all else is related to the ancient arts of the "Three Kingdoms". Regarless of affiliation (ITF, WTF, GTF, ect.) it is widely recognized that the art we practice today that is refered to as Tae Kwon Do is not an ancient art as it was created as a means of identity for the nation of Korea in a post occupational period!

TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## Miles (Mar 12, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> Miles,
> The best site I have found regarding the current Han Mu Kwan is the website of Kuk Mu Do Kwan!


 Thank you, if that is a school in Kansas? I think I have seen it.




			
				Spookey said:
			
		

> Regarding patterns...They play an integral part in determining what is and is not TKD. For instance, if you are practicing the Pyuang Ahn Hyungs (Pinan or Heinan Kata) I do not see how that is TKD as it is plainly Karate-Do (Tang Soo Do). This is my primary reason for the inquiry.


 So, if Grandmaster SON, Duk Song, the 2nd Kwan Jang of the Chung Do Kwan, teaches the pyung ahn hyung, he is not teaching Taekwondo?

I think there are quite a few Taekwondo schools where students learn several series of hyung, to include the pyung ahn series.

 Miles


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 12, 2005)

Now Spookey you said it _is not reflective of the history specific to the art of Tae Kwon Do! So ypu are looking for the Art or the sport._
_
_The modern history of Taekwon-Do is the only history specific to Taekwon-Do as all else is related to the ancient arts of the "Three Kingdoms". Regarless of affiliation (ITF, WTF, GTF, ect.) it is widely recognized that the art we practice today that is refered to as Tae Kwon Do is not an ancient art as it was created as a means of identity for the nation of Korea in a post occupational period!

Well the modern history is the sport because the WTF wants it that way along with the USA TKD and the Kukkiwon. So that would lead back to Genaral Choi.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 12, 2005)

information may be true of the history of Korean Arts in general, however, it is not reflective of the history specific to the art of Tae Kwon Do!

So the only history is post occupation, are you so wrong! You need to look upon history and quite believing everything you read about Modern TKD and look into the deep past of the Art itself.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 12, 2005)

_The modern history of Taekwon-Do is the only history specific to Taekwon-Do as all else is related to the ancient arts of the "Three Kingdoms". Regarless of affiliation (ITF, WTF, GTF, ect.) it is widely recognized that the art we practice today that is refered to as Tae Kwon Do is not an ancient art as it was created as a means of identity for the nation of Korea in a post occupational period!_

I like this though it may stir up controversy with Korean Martial Art practitioners.


----------



## TigerWoman (Mar 12, 2005)

I found this rather lengthy history of Korean martial arts.  The author says he has spent some 30 years compiling it.  For your reference, perhaps...
history reference here TW


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 12, 2005)

That was very interesting, thanks for the link


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 12, 2005)

TigerWoman said:
			
		

> I found this rather lengthy history of Korean martial arts. The author says he has spent some 30 years compiling it. For your reference, perhaps...
> history reference here TW


Very good piece of work it say's about the same as Reference Book Tae kwon Do by Yeon Hee Park:
It talks about the three kingdom but nobody brothers to read just make comments about things they have no idea about. just my humble observation.
So many people take up a sport and never really look into the Art for there Master have no ideal about the other aspect of TKD because they are sport orrientated as well.
 By no means am I saying the relates to anybody just a comment from a OLD FOOL WHO IS LOST IN HIS OWN WORLD


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 13, 2005)

Here is a link to an article in Tae Kwon Do Times that interviewed GM Won Kuk Lee about Tae Kwon Do and his place in TKD history:

http://www.tangsudo.it/html/leewonkuk.html

At the end of the article, GM Lee point blank states that "I am the founder of modern Tae Kwon Do in Korea."

I think for the most part, modern Tae Kwon Do was a collaborative effort between the Chung Do Kwan and the Oh Do Kwan. GM Won Kuk Lee started it, and it took off from there. The fact that it was called Tang Soo Do originally is irrelevant. Tang Soo Do at the time was basically a generic name for what they were practicing. If you think about it, Tae Kwon Do is a rather generic name as well.


----------



## Digger70chall (Mar 13, 2005)

excellent article thanks for posting it
 nothing like reading something directly from the source.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 13, 2005)

terryl965 said:
			
		

> Very good piece of work it say's about the same as Reference Book Tae kwon Do by Yeon Hee Park:
> It talks about the three kingdom but nobody brothers to read just make comments about things they have no idea about. just my humble observation.
> So many people take up a sport and never really look into the Art for there Master have no ideal about the other aspect of TKD because they are sport orrientated as well.
> By no means am I saying the relates to anybody just a comment from a OLD FOOL WHO IS LOST IN HIS OWN WORLD


Michagan TKD the thread states who is the founder of TKD not who fouded Modern TKD. The read was informative and very well written I concur with this article, but what about TKD post modern. Thanks and I'll wait for a reply have a great Sunday.


----------



## Marginal (Mar 13, 2005)

terryl965 said:
			
		

> information may be true of the history of Korean Arts in general, however, it is not reflective of the history specific to the art of Tae Kwon Do!
> 
> So the only history is post occupation, are you so wrong! You need to look upon history and quite believing everything you read about Modern TKD and look into the deep past of the Art itself.



The only problem with trying to link TKD to a martial discipline that died out 3000 years ago is that... It *died* out 3000 years ago.

It bears no direct or even, indirect relationship with the art that followed. It's just a cooked up link to make a modern MA appear to be steeped in thousands of years of tradition. (And honestly, who cares? Doesn't make the art you practice better or worse.)


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 13, 2005)

Keep in mind, the history of modern Tae Kwon Do dates back about 60 years. There existed Korean martial arts 1500 years ago, but it wasn't called Tae Kwon Do and how much it resembles Tae Kwon Do as we know it today is open to debate.
Therefore, when you ask "Who founded Tae Kwon Do?", you are referring to the system of Korean punching-kicking-blocking that developed post-WWII. Specifically, the art that was officially named "Tae Kwon Do" in April of 1955.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 13, 2005)

MichiganTKD said:
			
		

> Keep in mind, the history of modern Tae Kwon Do dates back about 60 years. There existed Korean martial arts 1500 years ago, but it wasn't called Tae Kwon Do and how much it resembles Tae Kwon Do as we know it today is open to debate.
> Therefore, when you ask "Who founded Tae Kwon Do?", you are referring to the system of Korean punching-kicking-blocking that developed post-WWII. Specifically, the art that was officially named "Tae Kwon Do" in April of 1955.


 Very well put, but what about those that omly believe in the sport aspect of TKD who founded that and why make so much out of it.


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 13, 2005)

Terry,

The sport aspect of Tae Kwon Do developed in the early 60's at the formation of the KTA. One of the reasons behind it was to give Tae Kwon Do its own identity. I don't know exactly WHO invented it, but I understand GM Woon Kyu Uhm was a guiding force. One of the most important aspects of the new sport aspect of TKD was the concept of continuous free fighting-the same fighting used in Olympic TKD. The other was the development of Hogu-which allowed for full contact.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 13, 2005)

Michagan Thanks for the reply, but why do you believe the sport has over taken the Art. Is the sport really that much better. free sparring has been around for years back in the old PKA late seventies and early eighties continously sparring was around in Karate base Arts. Why did it become a big deal when the hogu was invented, we used foam feet and hands just like the ISKA does know and without hogu's. Any comment would be appreciated, you know us old timers are just looking in with the Olympic, I do not consider this to be fighting it more like tag, I'm it no you are know.


----------



## MichiganTKD (Mar 13, 2005)

Terry,

Keep in mind that hand and foot pads were developed by Jhoon Rhee after he had been teaching in America for a while. In other words, developed in America to fit the needs of American fighters.
Hogu was developed in Korea in the late 50's-early 60's by Koreans in response to the changing needs of Korean free fighters. it is my understanding that the hogu design based on kendo armor (but I could be wrong).
Why did the sport aspect get so important compared to the traditional aspect? Several reasons:
1. Tournament fighting provides tangible signs of victory and success (things Americans understand)-winning, medals, trophies. It is not "bogged down" in traditional martial arts philosophy. We understand it.
2. The Olympics. Not many people outside Korea know or care about the Korean National Free Fighting Championships. But everyone knows the Olympics. Once you introduce the element of Olympic competition, everyone and their brother wants to try to attain that level. Even if very few people will ever make it that far, it's fun to imagine you are good enough. Kind of like American Idol.
3. Tae Kwon Do free fighting is very dynamic. It's hard for many younger students to appreciate forms practice or repetition. I haven't met very many young students who don't think free fighting is fun. Since modern Tae Kwon Do tends to be geared toward younger students, that's the aspect they tend to be drawn to.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 13, 2005)

Marginal said:
			
		

> The only problem with trying to link TKD to a martial discipline that died out 3000 years ago is that... It *died* out 3000 years ago.
> 
> It bears no direct or even, indirect relationship with the art that followed. It's just a cooked up link to make a modern MA appear to be steeped in thousands of years of tradition. (And honestly, who cares? Doesn't make the art you practice better or worse.)


I agree, but ot os not the better or worse in the art, just to state that it is old or intriguing.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 13, 2005)

...TOPIC...lets not get to far off track!



TAEKWON!
Spooks


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 13, 2005)

Are we...because history has a lot to do woth development of something.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 14, 2005)

And again I repeat...the thread is titled "Who is the founder of TKD" not what does TKD derive from, or from what did it evolve, or what is its foundation, ect...

Crediting ancient history (related to the foundation of what is now the Koreas) with the creation of TKD is like crediting the caveman that invented the wheel with the creation of the gasoline powered automobile. One would not exist without the other, but the relevance is undeserving in this debate!

TAEKWON!
SPK


----------



## The Kai (Mar 14, 2005)

I Think what 47 Martial man is treying to point out is the thread is takinh a turn into "what ancient, defunct art can we hang out hat on".  People are trying to make a distinction between TKD and some art that exists only in the history book.  It's all from the same root (Shotokan)


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 14, 2005)

Here is some more info:
During the Japanese occupation, many Korean boys were taken to Japan for education and training, which sometimes included intensive training in the Japanese martial arts. (Masutatsu Oyama Sensei (Choi Yong-i) was Korean, Grand Master Lee (Yi) Won-Kuk trained in Shotokan under Funakoshi Sensei, and General Choi Hong Hi, founder of ITF, was a first [size=-1](23)[/size]? Dan in Japanese Karate.)?? Other Koreans went to China as students or were stationed in Japanese occupied Manchuria as soldiers where some of them were exposed to Chinese martial arts. 


??The modern Karate of Korea, with very little influence from Tae Kyon, ...was? imported directly from China and also from Okinawa through Japan.? [size=-1](24)[/size] 

??The main differences among Tang Su Do, Karate, and Kung Fu (sic) were in how? pressure points were used and attacked.? [size=-1](25)[/size] 

?Tracing instructional lineages of the founders of the kwans back beyond 1945 inevitably leads to Japanese styles of karate. Modern Tae Kwon Do was largely created by young men who had received their original training in Japan or China before 1945, but most never reached the higher levels of their arts.? As they continued their training after Korean independence, no longer under the? supervision of their former sensei or sifu, they started from a basis of incompletely transmitted knowledge to go in a different direction to develop a new art. 

?You must also remember that at the period of W.W.II, there was a tremendous amount of prejudice against foreigners in Japan, and this definitely applied to Koreans. It still does.? Given the instructional traditions in the Japanese martial arts, this fact alone would have acted to keep most Korean students from receiving full instruction in these arts.? This may have been a very healthy thing, allowing Korean instructors to evolve their art in new directions. 

?With the end of Japanese occupation, many of these young men returned to Korea, and the result was an influx of new techniques from China and Japan which led to rapid growth in the Korean [size=-1](26)[/size] martial arts. With the exception of Tang Su Do, which is simply Japanese Karate as taught in Korea [size=-1](27)[/size]? and has retained the same kata as Shotokan, Korean black belts developed hybridized styles by combining techniques from Karate and modern Chuan Fa with indigenous Korean techniques: either their own inventions, or what could be recovered from limited experience with, or the popular idea of, Tae Kyon [size=-1](28)[/size] .? These styles became the kwans, the basis for the development of Tae Su Do [size=-1](29)[/size]? (early name for Tae Kwon Do) which became the most rapidly growing martial sport in the world.? The first national association, the Kong Su Do Association was formed in 1945 (1951, 1953?), headed by Cho Ryon Chi.? (Kong Su Do is a Korean pronunciation of the Chinese characters for Karate Do.) 
? EARLY KWANS [size=-1](30)[/size]Chung Do Kwanthe first?1944/45Won Kook YiMu Duk Kwan??1945Hwang KeeYun Mu Kwan??1945Sup Jun SangChi Do Kwan?1946Yon Kue Pyang?Ji Do Kwan?1953/54Gae Byang YunSang Mu Kwan?1953/54Byung Chik Ro?O Do Kwan [size=-1](31)[/size]strictly military1954Choi Hong Hi & Nam Tae Hi? 

?By 1950, there were 17 styles of Korean Karate. During the early 1950?s, the period of the Korean War, most Karate was taught within the military, and civilian instructors and schools were very scarce.? In 1953, the ROK 29th Division stationed on Che Jo Island was made responsible for martial arts training in the ROK army.? In 1961, the Korean government ordered the various styles to organize, and in the same year, (one source puts it in 1965 [size=-1](32)[/size] ), the Korean Tae Kwon Do Association was formed with General Choi as its first president. The Korean government decided at that time that only the 5 top styles would be sanctioned as official TKD.? The first style to be chosen was Chung Do Kwan. 

?Although the term Tae Kwon Do is of very recent origin, there is still some confusion as to when it was first used and by whom.? Grand Master Yeon Hee Park? says that at a meeting of Korean martial arts masters in April 11, 1955, (one source [size=-1](33)[/size] says that this was a meeting of Chung Do Kwan instructors)it was agreed to unify the Kwans under name of Tae Su Do.? This was the year that the Kong Su Do Association broke up.??? However, Grand Master Choi says he suggested the name, Tae Kwon Do, and it was adopted at that meeting.? Grand Master Park says that the name was changed to Tae Kwon Do in 1957 .? On September 14, 1961 the Korean TKD Association was formed. However, Grand Master Kim says that this was when the Korean Tae Su Do Association was given official membership in the Korean National Sports Association (KNSA), and that the name Tae Kwon Do was not fully accepted by all Koreans until August, 1965.? In any case, it is evident that the name, Tae Kwon Do, is of very recent origin.? It would also seem that the name was devised within the Chung Do Kwan. 

?Admission to the KNSA? brings us to the most unsettling aspect of training in Tae Kwon Do today, the emphasis which is placed on sporting competition. There can be no doubt whatever about the deliberate intent on the part of the WTF and ITF Korean Masters to convert Tae Kwon Do into a pure sport. Tae Kwon Do sparring is now an Olympic sport.?? When practiced as a sport, Tae Kwon Do techniques are strictly limited in application for safety reasons.? Dr. Un Yong Kim, the president of the WTF has said: 

??Our focus is to develop Tae Kwon Do as a universal sport...Martial art tradition,? as you know, comes from a very closed, narrow door [size=-1](34)[/size] .? and later, ? Tae Kwon Do? is gaining recognition as a well-developed world sport...The Olympics is a? large umbrella. To be sheltered under it means a great elevation in? status...We must continue to develop Tae Kwon Do into a sport.? To remain as a? martial art would be a simple matter.? All that needs to be done is to do what? people did in the old days when just a handful of people remained as hermits,? developing and learning the arts...I am a plain sports leader...the martial? arts? and other forms of arts are usually practiced within small fields? among people? who have common interests...We are working hard to achieve the glory of? attaining the world sports status...I will not bore you with the trivia of martial? arts...Tae Kwon Do came a long way as a sport in a short time.? We have? accomplished the mammoth tasks of researching its history, re-defining the? tradition, unifying the rules, and at the same time promoting it to the rest of the? world.? [size=-1](35)[/size] 

?The ITF founder and president is not only determined to have a sport, he is equally determined to gain fame as the originator of Tae Kwon Do.? His comments reveal an ego problem unbecoming to a martial arts master. 

?? It would be hopeless to try to merge Karate with Tae Kwon Do...Tae Kwon Do was? largely born on April 11, 1955...If I didn?t know anything about Karate, I? wouldn?t have invented techniques that are better than Karate...I invented a new? martial art...My goal was to make Tae Kwon Do an international sport...I hope? that Tae Kwon Do becomes an Olympic event...I invented the martial art of Tae? Kwon Do...There is now no Tae Kwon Do in my home country of South? Korea...There is no real Tae Kwon Do in South Korea...? [size=-1](36)[/size] 

?The fate of Judo is a cautionary tale for Tae Kwon Do.? Like Tae Kwon Do today, Judo was once (1950?s and 1960?s) the most popular martial art in the world.? After it became an Olympic sport, and Judo training became more and more concentrated on sporting competition, Judo lost that popularity, and today it can be difficult to find a Judo dojo, even in a major city.? This is often cited as a reason to suspect that sporting success may cause a martial art to lose its effectiveness as a martial art.? When victory in a sporting contest becomes the major criterion for excellence in a martial art, then only the young, strong, and gifted will be able to excel in that art, and they will often leave the art when they pass their peak of competitive prowess. 

?? The Japanese have devoted themselves to the study of Judo for competition.?? They have gone to extraordinary lengths to develop winning contestants and fine? champions.? I, on the other hand, have never trained for competition in my life.?? All I have ever done is trained in judo as a way of life, exactly as Dr. Kano taught.?? While the Japanese were devising competitive strategies, I was in the dojo? practising basics and kata.? I defeated the Japanese because I know judo better? than the Japanese.? The secret is to train every day in the basics.? This will make? you unbeatable.? Anton Gessink-World Judo Champion. 

?There is great pressure for Tae Kwon Do to evolve more generally into a sport with decreasing emphasis on basics, poomse training, and combat effectiveness. 

??I am concerned that basic training is often neglected.? There should be??? more emphasis on basic skills: balance, focus, strength training,???? conditioning of striking surfaces, stance.? There is a lack of preparation,??? seriousness and committment. ..Many do not have hand training, knife-?? hand training, three-step sparring, or one-step sparring. ...there is an??? over emphasis on kicking techniques in most schools.? This is another sign?? of immaturity.? [size=-1](37)[/size] 

[size=+1]The Poomse[/size] 

?Kata are central to Karate to the point where it is often said that ?kata are Karate?, and this is the justification for a special section on poomse in this history of Chung Do Kwan Tae Kwon Do.? The original kwans taught kata which were taken directly from Japanese and Okinawan styles (Shorin and Shorei [size=-1](38)[/size] ), that is kata which originated in either Okinawa or China.? Becuse of the Japanese occupation of Korea, and the Chinese invasion in 1951, Japanese and Chinese associations were distasteful to the Koreans.? For the correct development of Korean martial arts, it was considered necessary to distance these arts as much as possible from the Japanese and Chinese arts.? This would not be possible while still practicing the kata of those arts. This attitude, while understandable, has been deplored by some Korean masters: 

? ? When this shift has completely stripped Tae Kwon Do of any traditional??? forms, where is the art in this martial art?? Since any form not created??? in Korea has been cast out of Tae Kwon Do and replacement?Korean???? forms thrown together to replace them, where is the tradition to???? preserve?? How much wisdom can be gleaned from these new forms????? They are the fast food of modern martial arts-quick, fast, simple, lacking?? in nourishment, prone to cause indigestion...I consider myself???? fortunate to have learned what I have from my instructors.? I honor??? them by preserving ancient Karate and Chuan fa forms they taught me,??? and continue to hand them down to my own students.? Leaving Korea in??? 1968 meant that I escaped the tremendous pressure to throw away??? everything that I learned, join the ITF or WTF, teach only new made-up??? forms with Korean labels, and teach how to win trophies in???? tournaments.? [size=-1](39)[/size] 

?The hyung currently in use by the International Tae Kwon Do Federation, (ITF) were the Chang Hon poomse developed by Hong Hi Choi before 1965, and they are still taught. The Palgwe series and the Taeguek series? are very recent poomse which were originally introduced and adopted by the Korean Tae Kwon Do Association on Jan. 30, 1967.? Grand Master Hae Man Park (Chung Do Kwan) was one of the creators of the Taegeuk Poomse, and creator of the 6 Kibon drills [size=-1](40)[/size] . These are the basic colored belt poomse for the WTF, and they are still in development, undergoing frequent minor adjustments. One TKD school uses an independent series of poomse, the Chung Bong series, which? were developed by one man in 1974. [size=-1](41)[/size] 

? ? At the founding of the Korean Tae Kwon Do Association (KTA) the? founding members agreed to favor none of the forms of the participating schools,? but to create an entirely new series of forms in the interest of overall Tae Kwon? Do and to ensure agreement among the different schools.? A team of Korean? Grandmasters? was made responsible for carrying out this project.? This? committee created the Palgwe- Taegeuk- and the remaining nine black belt? poomse, but only a short time later, the Palgwe forms were discarded.? [size=-1](42)[/size] 

?The Taegeuk poomse were designed especially for colored belt training in Tae Kwon Do.? However, as many of the Korean masters, especially the older generation, have been trained in Japanese, Okinawan, or Chinese styles, it is hardly possible that this training could have had no influence on their development of the new Korean poomse.? Indeed, the Japanese influence is often obvious.? The poomse for the third dan grading examination, Taebek, is a very beautiful form when correctly performed, but about 40% of the techniques in Taebek come from two separate Pinan (Heian) kata (nidan and sandan). These borrowed sequences within Taebek are a perfect example of the immense unacknowledged debt which WTF TKD owes to Karate. 

?The many poomse created by the modern Korean masters since the beginnings of Tae Kwon Do in 1945? are extremely valuable for Tae Kwon Do training.? They are very new, however, and not entirely satisfactory.? Small changes continue to appear in them.? Unlike changes in the older kata which often are a result of a lack of knowledge concerning the application of a specific technique,? these changes in Korean poomse are a deliberate attempt to make the poomse deeper and to improve the effectiveness of the techniques presented.? A good recent example of this trend is the introduction of the 6th kibon exercise in the spring of 1997. In Tae Kwon Do, we are in the presence of the creation of a vital martial tradition, with the poomse which will carry that tradition into the future still in the process of development today.? This is a very exciting time to be training in Tae Kwon Do. But, there are hazards to be faced. 

?There is an increasing possibility that poomse practice will become more shallow, and that their development will be retarded.? This tendency will exist for several reasons (poomse are not for competition; poomse techniques are highly dangerous when correctly applied; poomse practice is more directed to the perfection of the practitioner?s character than to sporting applications, etc.). This has created? a dangerous potential for the devaluation of poomse, as the relation of the Taegeuk poomse to the rest of the training becomes more and more tenuous. 

?Although the Taegeuk poomse have a higher percentage of kicking techniques than Japanese/Okinawan kata, Clark [size=-1](43)[/size] makes the point that ?the proportion of kicks in training for sport free sparring is still not reflected in the poomse, which at this time retain many of the more practical combative techniques of the older martial arts, (emphasis mine)?. He concludes that the modern Korean style of TKD has been changing forms to reflect sporting emphasis and a Korean predilection for kicking techniques. 

?It may be expected that the poomse will continue to change to reflect the increasing emphasis on the sporting aspect of Tae Kwon Do, and the emphasis that training in modern Tae Kwon Do places on kicking.? Almost all of a TKD training session is normally spent on various aspects of kicking drill, and training for excellence in sporting competition is focused on the artificial conventions of Tae Kwon Do full contact sparring to the neglect of poomse and a reduction of their importance.? In many dojangs we find that, unlike karate, poomse are rarely central to training in Tae Kwon Do.? Indeed, some highly competitive black belts don?t know any poomse! [size=-1](44)[/size] 

[size=+1]Chung Do Kwan[/size] 
? 
?Early in the 20th century, Won Kook Yi (Lee), a Tae Kyon (sic) student, traveled throughout the Orient, returning to Korea in 1940.? In 1941, he added techniques from other styles to Tae Kyon, and developed "Tae Su Do Chung Do Kwan".? He retired in 1945, but before doing so, he named his successor as head of Chung Do Kwan, Grand Master Uoon Kyu Um.? Great Grand Master Yi is presently (1996) in retirement in the United States.? The Chung Do Kwan style was taught in secret in 1944, and in 1945, the Chung Do Kwan, the first Kwan to openly teach a native Korean Martial Art opened in Yung Chun, Soeul. In 1954, General Choi Hong Hi became ?director? (Kwan Jang Nim) of Chung Do Kwan, then the largest civilian kwan in Korea [size=-1](45)[/size] and held that position for several years [size=-1](46)[/size] . 

?A different version of these events appeared in a recent issue of Tae Kwon do Times [size=-1](47)[/size] which adds some details, but contradicts other seemingly reliable sources. According to this version, Grandmaster Lee opened his school with the tacit approval of the Japanese authorities on September 14, 1944.?? Grand Master Lee trained students until 1950, when he had to leave Korea for Japan for ?political? reasons. Duk Sung Son then became Kwan Jang Nim of Chung Do Kwan.? ?A few years later? Duk Sung Son left Korea for the United States, and only then did Uoon Kyu Um become Kwan Jang Nim. Uoon Kyu Um is mentioned among the original students of Grand Master Lee and so is Jhoon Rhee but, in this version, there is no mention at all of General Choi Hong Hi.? The omission is incorrect and was made for political reasons. 

?Finally, yet another version emerged in a 1997 interview with Grand Master Lee (Yi, Yee) which also appeared in TKD Times. [size=-1](48)[/size]? Born April 13, 1907, Grand Master Lee states that he was instructed in Tang Su Do (Shotokan Karate) when he attended a university in Japan in the 1920?s.? He identifies his instructor as ?Sensei Hunagoshi, founder of GojuRhu Karate?. He has to mean Funakoshi Sensei, founder of Shotokan Karate, not Miyagi Sensei, founder of Goju Ryu. He taught Tang Su Do for the first time in Korea at Yung Shin School Gynasium in Sa De Mun, Ok Chun Dong district in Soeul.? During the confused period following the defeat of Japan in 1945, Tang Su Do was associated with gang violence, so the government refused to allow any public facilities to teach Tang Su Do.? Grand Master Lee was forced to move and ? this was the time when I established Chung Do Kwan at Tae Go temple (Tae Go Sa) in Sorul.?? He was then forced to move to Kwan Yung Kwan in Soeul.? Later he moved his dojang to No. 80 Kyun Ji Dong district in Soeul. 

?After Grand Master Lee conducted a very successful demonstration at the YMCA Gym in Soeul, Tang Su Do again received government favor, but unfortunately, this involved pressure to support one political party.? Korea?s first President Syng Man Rhee requested that all Chung Do Kwan members apply for membership in the Korean Republican Party.? Grand Master Lee rejected the offer, and he was arrested and accused by the government of being the leader of a group of assassins.? Eventually released in 1950, he and his wife fled to Japan as political refugees. He served as Tae Kwon Do instructor to the US military for a period in the 60?s.? Grand Master Lee emigrated to USA in 1976.? In the interview, he states: ? I am the founder of modern Tae Kwon Do in Korea.? 

?The major? students named by Grand Master Lee in this interview were: 
? Un Kyu Um (Kukkiwon VP) 
? Choi Hung Hi ( Founder of ITF) 
? Jae Chung Ko (Jae Chun Ko) 
? Chong Myung Hung(Hyun) 
? Chung Ki Paek (Wan Ki Paek) 
? Chong Lim Woo 
? Pong Seok Kim 
? Sang Hung Lee 
? Seok Kyu Kim 
? Jun Yoo Eung (Introduced TKD to North Korea) 

?In 1966, the International Tae Kwon Do Federation (ITF) was formed by General Choi.? In 1967, the President of South Korea declared Tae Kwon Do a national sport.? In 1973, twenty countries formed the World Tae Kwon Do Federation (WTF) and made the Kukkiwon, a large building constructed by the Korean government for Tae Kwon Do? study, administration, and? competition, their headquarters. In 1974, the ITF had moved from Korea to establish its headquarters in Toronto.? In 1975, The WTF issued an announcement which dissolved all the kwans, and issued each with a number in order to unite Tae Kwon Do as one world sport.? Supposedly, Chung Do Kwan officially died in Korea on that date.? In fact, dan certificates are still being issued from Korea under the Chung Do Kwan name. 

[size=+1]Chung Do Kwan in the United States[/size] 

?In 1967, Grand Master Edward B. Sell, (then a 4th Dan), founded the first Chung Do Kwan school, " The Academy"? in the United States in Trenton, MI.? He also founded the Korean Tae Kwon Do Association of America in that year.? This association subsequently became the Korean Tae Kwon Do Association of America and Canada, and in 1975 (1977[?]), the name was changed to the United States Chung Do Kwan Association (USCDKA).? Note that there is also a Chung Do Kwan International, Inc., headed by a Grand Master Sung Jae Park. [size=-1](49)[/size] 

?Grand Master Sell was trained in Korea while in the USAF attached to the 6314th Air Police Squadron at Osan Air Base, Pyon Teak Kun.? His instructors while training to first dan were Mr. Myong Kil Kim and Mr. Tae Sung Yi, 3rd Dans.? He was promoted to second Dan in 1963, and? promoted to 8th Dan March, 1987. 

?In the first two USCDKA association manuals, forms are referred to as "kata", and Tag'kuk Il Chong is the same as the first Taikyoku drill in Shotokan Karate. In 1979, the Palgwe forms were taught by the USCDKA, but by 1987, these had been replaced by the Taeguek forms.? In book three, Grand Master Sell introduces the Korean terms ?hyung? and ?poomse? for forms along with ?kata?, and by 1987 the Japanese/Okinawan term "kata" has disappeared, to be replaced by the word ?poomse.? This gradual removal of Japanese/Okinawan terms and influence from Tae Kwon Do is an understandable effort to emphasize the nature of Tae Kwon Do as a Korean martial art, and to obtain Korean validation for the American association and its instructors. 

[size=+1]United Chung Do Kwan Association[/size] 

?To a certain extent, the United Chung Do Kwan Association (UCDKA) owes its existence to Master Jonathan C. Henkel, (then 1st Dan, currently 6th Dan), who was assigned to South Dakota State University (SDSU) ROTC after returning from Korea, where he had been promoted to first Dan on December 9, 1973 at the Kukkiwon in Soeul, Korea.? At SDSU, Master Henkel started Master Jeffrey Holsing in his TKD training under the auspices of the USCDKA. 

?The UCDKA was first conceived in Alabama. Under the leadership of Master Jeffrey Holsing, the UCDKA formally broke away from Grand Master E.B. Sells? USCDKA in the early summer of 1989.?? The first organizational meeting of the UCDKA was held in Brookings, SD on June 4, 1989 [size=-1](50)[/size] .? For the next 14 months, the masters and senior black belts held a series of 19 organizational meetings which established the UCDKA.?? Although there have been some changes since the autumn of 1990, by that date, the UCDKA had essentially completed its organization.? The nucleus for this new association of martial artists was largely provided by the Chung Do Kwan black belts from South Dakota, with another center of UCDKA activity in the Southeast which contributed much to the early development of the association.? Grand Master Cha Sok Park, 8th Dan, agreed to arrange the validation of UCDKA Dan ranks at the Kukkiwon in Korea.? At Grand Master Park?s recommendation, the association adopted Grand Master Daeshik Kim?s books as the authority for UCDKA poomse. 

?Much of the organization, traditions and structure of the organization were very similar to that of USCDKA, as both are Chung Do Kwan, and the original UCDKA Masters had all trained with Grand Master Sell.? Among the things which were taken from the USCDKA were the patch placement on the dobak, the student?s name in Korean and English, the design of the instructor patch, and the gup colors up through brown belt. 

?In April of 1996, the chairman of the Board of Directors of UCDKA was asked to resign his position.? The chairmanship was held by several different masters in rapid succession, but by the beginning of 1997 most of the active clubs had withdrawn from the UCDKA, which then virtually ceased to exist. 

[size=+1]American Chung Do Kwan Ltd.[/size] 

?The dojangs which had withdrawn from UCDKA came together during the early months of 1997 to form a new association, the American Chung Do Kwan Ltd (ACDKL), under Masters J. Bice and J. Henkel.? This association consists of the majority of dojangs which had formerly belonged to the UCDKA, and still follows most of the formal practices of that association.? A new constitution has been adopted by the ACDKL, and has significantly changed association structure and organization. 

[size=+1]In Conclusion[/size] 

?The idea behind writing this history was to correct some of the common errors which have crept into the instructional materials associated with Tae Kwon Do, and to present the students of American Chung Do Kwan with as accurate a history of their art and style as the sources allow. The history of Chung Do Kwan is something we can all be proud of.? It is certainly no disgrace to train in a dynamic fighting style created by an exceptional Korean martial artist which can trace its roots back through Okinawan Karate to ancient China.? Chung Do Kwan lacks ancient roots only within Korea, and this is of no importance at all.? Young growth is the most vigorous, and it is within Korea that Chung Do Kwan has developed into the style in which we train today. 

?The above history is both incomplete and often incorrect.? All suggestions for additions and corrections are always very welcome, and may be sent to the author in care of Husky Tae Kwon Do.?? However, to be usable, such suggestions must be supported by published references and/or attributable to the person supplying them. 



[size=+1]Sources[/size] 

?Bannon, D. 1994.? Pak Yon: How a Dutchman in 17th Century Korea Changed? Martial Arts History. Dojang. Summer. 1994.pp60-62 

?Bannon, D. 1996. Who Were the Hwrang? Dojang. Winter1996. pp 59-63. 

?Bishop, Mark. 1989. Okinawan Karate: Teachers, Styles and Secret Techniques. A? & C Black. London. 192pp 

?Burdick, D. 1997. People & Events in Taekwondo?s Formative Years. Journal of? Asian Martial Arts. (6):1 pp 30-49 

?Cho, S,H. 1968. Korean Karate: Free Fighting Techniques. Tuttle, Rutland. VT.? 249pp 

?Choi Hong Hi.? 1965. Taekwon-Do: The Art of Self-Defense. Daeha Publication Co.? Soeul. 304p 

?Clark, R. 1995. Korean Forms. Tae Kwon Do Times. 16(4) pp42-48 

?Cocoran, J. and E. Farkas w/ S. Sobel. 1993. The Original? Martial Arts? Encyclopedia. Pro-Action Publishing. Los Angeles.? 437p 

?Draeger, D. & R.W. Smith. 1980. Comprehensive Asian Fighting? Arts.? Kodansha. Tokyo. 207p. 

?Draeger, D. 1972. Classical Bujutsu. Weatherhill. Tokyo. 109p. 

?Draeger, D. 1972. Classical Budo? Weatherhill. Tokyo. 127p. 

?Dukes, T. ( Shifu Nagaboshi Tomio) 1994. The Bodhisattava Warriors. Weiser.? York Beach, ME. 527p 

?Ferguson, R. 1994. Is Tae Kwon Do Really a Korean Art? TKD Times. (15):2 pp? 50-55, 82 

?Haines, B.A. 1968. Karate's History and Traditions. Charles E. Tuttle Co. Rutland,? VT. 192 p. 

?Haines, B.A. 1995 (revised edition). Karate's History and Traditions. Charles E.? Tuttle Co. Rutland, VT. 192 p. 

?Hallander, J. 1993. The Truth Behind Martial Arts in Korea Today. TKD Times.? (13):5 pp 50-53. 
? 
?Hargrove, F. 1986.? The 100 Year History of Shorin-Ryu Karate.? Privately? Published. 220p. 

?Hassell, R. G. 1991. Shotokan Karate: Its History and Evolution. Focus.? Publications. St. Louis, MO. 150p. 

?Higaonna, Morio. 1995. The History of Karate: Okinawan Goju-Ryu. Dragon? Books, 226 pp 

?Johnson, N. 1994. Xen Shaolin Karate. Tuttle. Rutland 240p 

?Kim, D. 1991. Tae Kwon Do. V. 1. NANAM Pub. Seoul. 210p. 

?Kim, D. 1991. Tae Kwon Do. V. 2. NANAM Pub. Seoul. 224p. 

?Kim, D. & A B&#18667;. 1989.? Martial Meditation. ICMAEP. Akron, OH.? 372p 

?Kim, R.? 1974.? The Weaponless Warriors. Ohara. Sta. Clarita. CA 
?112p 

?Lee, J. 1995. The History of Tae Kwon Do. TKD Times (15):5 pp50-58 

?Lee, Kang Seok. 1997. Grandmaster Won Kuk Lee: Founder of Chung Do Kwan. Tae? Kwon Do Times. 17 (3) pp 44- 51 

?Lindsey, R.L. 1995. Solving the White Crane Mystery: The Heritage of the? Okinawan Systems. Dojo. Fall 1995. pp14-19 

?Liu, James J.Y. 1967. The Chinese Knight-Errant. University of Chicao. Chicago.? 242p 

?McCarthy, P. 1987. Classical Kata of Okinawan Karate. Ohara. Santa Clarita, CA.? 255p. 

?Pieter, W. 1994. Notes on the Historical Development of Korean Martial Sports- An Addendum to Young?s History & Developmemnt of Tae Kyon. Journal of? Asian? Martial Arts. (3):1? pp82-89. 

?Poliakoff, M.B.? 1987. Combat Sports in the Ancient World.? Yale? University? Press. New Haven.? 202p. 

?Ratti, O. & A. Westbrook. 1973. Secrets of the Samurai. Charles E. Tuttle.? Rutland, VT. 483p. 

?Reid, H. & M. Croucher. 1983.? The Way of the Warrior.? Overlook Press.? Woodstock. NY? 240p. 

?Rodine, Tim. 1996. From Generation to Generation to Puerto Rico. Tae Kwon Do? Times.? (16) 10 p 26 

?E.B. Sell 1973.?? Revised edition. v. #1 Tae Kwon Do Chung Do Kwan for the? Beginner. Korean Tae Kwon Do Association of? America/Canada.?? 62p 

?_______ 1973.? v. #1 Tae Kwon Do Chung Do Kwan for the Beginner and? Advanced Student. Korean Tae Kwon Do Association of America/Canada. 92p 

?E.B. Sell & B.J. Sell. 1979. Forces of Tae Kwon Do, U.S. Chung Do Kwan? Association. 240p. 

?_______1987 revised 7th edition. Forces of Tae Kwon Do. U.S. Chung Do? Kwan Association. 273p. 

?Young, Robert W.1993. The History and Development of Tae Kyon. Journal of? Asian Martial Arts. v.2 n.2. pp44-69. I hope this helps in your endevors.


----------



## Spookey (Mar 15, 2005)

Dear All,

As to create a more user friendly environment, can we limit the copy and paste, and possible suppliment the link with a small statement as to the value and content of the link?


TAEKWON!
Spookey

(ps...the copy and paste post doesnt have any statement (might have overlooked it) regarding the point you were attempting to make...HELP!


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 15, 2005)

Yes, it was a very informative post that terry 1965 made (I wonder why he calls himself that: 1965?-his birth year?)Yes, I have to remember as well instead of pasting a long post to post a link instead.

But, if one has to type such a post, using for example, MSWord, how can they post it as a link instead of a copy and paste?


----------



## Spookey (Mar 15, 2005)

Dear 47,

These lengthy posts have been nothing less than copy and paste jobs of pre-existing documents (ie. magazine artices, interviews, and thesis/research papers) that are available at numerous online sources!

Please, if you write such an intricate literary work, feel free to post it in its entirety. However, if you are using someone elses writtings, at least credit the author! Also, being that this is a debate, please feel free to make points as oppossed to randomly spouting off passages!



TAEKWON
Spookey


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 15, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> Yes, it was a very informative post that terry 1965 made (I wonder why he calls himself that: 1965?-his birth year?)Yes, I have to remember as well instead of pasting a long post to post a link instead.
> 
> But, if one has to type such a post, using for example, MSWord, how can they post it as a link instead of a copy and paste?


First off it is Terry L 965 and Terry is my 1st name L is my middle initial as in Lee and 965 was the ages of my Three boys now 10 8 and 6 as far as my birth year it is 1960 January 7th it all in my Bio.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 15, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> Dear 47,
> 
> These lengthy posts have been nothing less than copy and paste jobs of pre-existing documents (ie. magazine artices, interviews, and thesis/research papers) that are available at numerous online sources!
> 
> ...


 Well spookey it is a cut and paste job so what as far as given credit to who wrote it it all at the end of the post and the reason I just did not put a link to it I wanted people to read most people won't take the time to go to another link and read. If the power to be here at MA does not want lenghty post, then they can inform me of that, I have been here a long time and have contributed alot of personal knowledge and have gained some personal knowledge from them. And since this is an open forum how I give my infro. is up to me. I believe you are just looking for what you want people to believe what TKD is in your mind. We all have are Idea's those are mine, so be it.
Maybe one day you can see through your own self and see what other see, not that you have to accept those things just see that side of the fence.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Mar 15, 2005)

I dont mind links-I actually click on them and read every one. If I do not have the time in one particular "sitting", I have a folder on my "desktop" labeled "Things to Read". If I like the link, I will save it in my "favorites"


So, terry l, go ahead and post----"link" me, man


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 15, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> I dont mind links-I actually click on them and read every one. If I do not have the time in one particular "sitting", I have a folder on my "desktop" labeled "Things to Read". If I like the link, I will save it in my "favorites"
> 
> 
> So, terry l, go ahead and post----"link" me, man


I'll take that under advisment!


----------



## Spookey (Mar 15, 2005)

Dear Terry,

I do have a perception I call my own as do you...I am however open for debate (thus expressing an open mind)!

Please understand that I have no intention of disgracing others as you feel i have done to you. The reply I made was in reference to a post which contained lots of useable info, however (at least to my eyes) was lacking in its explanation of exactly what you point was. There was alot of info, would you care to point out some specifics. Maybe your feeling regarding the situation. I have not seen you speak you feelings regarding the matter (which was the point of the debate, to gain understanding of each others perception) as you have only posted comments made from others. What is your specific opinion regarding the creation of TKD?

TAEKWON!
SPKS


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 15, 2005)

Spookey,

I believe TKD is a long history of different styles rolled into one from alot of great instructors from the old Japanese and Okanawa styles of Karate. That does not mean post war I believe the Art of TKD was from around 50 b.c., I believe modern TKD as we now know it was brought back from Japan and Okinawa, I believe the Kwans got together to try to shed some light on there independents. WTF is regarded as the sport of TKD while other intities still preserve the Art that once was. I teach both ITF and WTF.My school is a member of AAU and USA Taekwondo. My childern are learning Olympic style right now with ITF influence to there workouts. I guess I would be consider a rebel in TKD. I first started out in Okinawa Karate and Judo for that was what my father tought. I changed over to TKD early 80's and study under Gin Kim in Southern California I choosed him for the roughness that he tought it was not water down. If you have any questionplease ask and I will try to answer best I can.

Warmest Regards 
Terry Lee Stoker


----------



## Ippon Ken (Apr 5, 2005)

Spookey said:
			
		

> And again I repeat...the thread is titled "Who is the founder of TKD" not what does TKD derive from, or from what did it evolve, or what is its foundation, ect...
> 
> TAEKWON!
> SPK


Let's clarify this once and for all. TKD, TSD, MDK or whatever other Korean karate system you want to name was founded by an Okinawan- Gichin Funakoshi. His brand of Japanized Okinawan karate was taught to a bunch of Koreans who were a part of the Japanese army during WWII. They hated the Japs' and many were put into prison for conspiring against them. Now you can see the reason for the intense nationalism expressed by Choi and others.

So before folks, like the IOC, were led to believe that TKD was a strictly Korean MA, it was really Shotokan karate. The stories I have always heard from the guys I know who served in 'Nam with R.O.K. soldiers and their brand of karate (which was said to look a lot like Shorin Ryu or Shorin-derived styles), now make sense.

Presently it is a different beast, an extremely pale representation (for the most part) of an already diluted form of Shorin + some Goju Ryu karate called Shotokan. Hence, the names of the poomse or kata. Once those were changed and the art became kicking intensive (conversely Shorin and its derivatives are at least 75% hands, arms and elbows-- this includes grappling), it became an ineffective SD system and one patterned for money-making, flash and competition. The kata are the ryu. Remember that.

You must know where you came from to know where you're going.

Of course I put all this together decades ago, but it is fun to imagine you've put 2 and 2 together and got Fo'!

Take Ones Dough, backatcha!!!


----------



## Spookey (Apr 6, 2005)

Ippon,

I wish to agree with you on a portion of your previous post!

Gichin Funakoshi should be credited with the creation of TSD and MDK. Secondarily those arts Korean proliferation should be credited to Hwang Kee, Ji Han Jae, etc.

I donot however believe that TKD is included in this listing for the following reason...Hwang Kee brought back pre-existing patterns to Korea as did General Choi. The difference lies in the fact that General Choi taught them as Karate. Later he created his Chong Han Hyungs and taught them as TKD!

Just my opinion....

TAEKWON!
SpooKey


----------



## Spookey (Apr 6, 2005)

Ippon,

One more thing...my Instructor is one of those "who served in Nam w/ RoK soldiers". He is an Oh Do Kwan instructor. He also holds rank in Shorin Ryu. His instruction has prompted me to ask this question to you!

Question,

I ask you to compare video of the early ITF (for instance the ITF Pioneers DVD) and compare it with the art of Shotokan Karate. Are there similarities, yes...is the overall the same, NO!

Think about it...San Shou shares some techniques with both Greco Roman Wrestling and Muay Thai, yet they are distinctly different in their totality!

TAEKWON!
SPooKs


----------



## Miles (Apr 6, 2005)

Ippon Ken said:
			
		

> Let's clarify this once and for all.


 Sure, til next time. 




			
				Ippon Ken said:
			
		

> TKD, TSD, MDK or whatever other Korean karate system you want to name was founded by an Okinawan- Gichin Funakoshi. His brand of Japanized Okinawan karate was taught to a bunch of Koreans who were a part of the Japanese army during WWII. They hated the Japs' and many were put into prison for conspiring against them. Now you can see the reason for the intense nationalism expressed by Choi and others.


 Tang Soo Do was the name of the art GM LEE, Won Kuk called what he was teaching.  It is the Korean pronunciation of the Chinese characters for Karate-do.  GM Lee was never a member of the Japanese army, he was a student (in fact a law student) of Funakoshi, Gichen from 1933 until 1944 when he returned to Korea (that would be just before the end of WWII).    Other Korean students in Japan studied under other Okinawan masters, notably Toyama, Kanken (that's Shudokan, not Shotokan BTW).

 Koreans "hated" the Japanese not only because they were placed in prison but because the Japanese instituted a nearly total cultural genocide during a particularly brutal occupation.  I think you need to do a little more research-start with the term "comfort woman" and you will get a glimpse of how oppressive the Japanese treated Koreans.  Actually, the equal-opportunity Japanese did the same thing to the Chinese, start with the search "rape of Nanking."




			
				Ippon Ken said:
			
		

> Presently it is a different beast, an extremely pale representation (for the most part) of an already diluted form of Shorin + some Goju Ryu karate called Shotokan. Hence, the names of the poomse or kata. Once those were changed and the art became kicking intensive (conversely Shorin and its derivatives are at least 75% hands, arms and elbows-- this includes grappling), it became an ineffective SD system and one patterned for money-making, flash and competition. The kata are the ryu. Remember that.


 There is no Poomsae (this is how the Kukkiwon says to spell it BTW) which is exactly as as seen in Shorin-ryu or Shorei-ryu or Goju-ryu.  There is no Goju-ryu in Shotokan (which does have its basis in Shorin-ryu).

 Presently Taekwondo is the most widely practiced martial art in the world. That's incredible given that after WWII, Korea had its own little civil war.

 Taekwondo is used by militaries, including those of the US and Korea (that would be ROK, i.e. South Korea), the latter still being technically at war with its Northern neighbor (that would be the DPRK).  I don't understand why a country (no matter how nationalistic), under threat of a possible invasion, would have its military train in a "pale representation of an already diluted form...of Shotokan."



			
				Ippon Ken said:
			
		

> Of course I put all this together decades ago, but it is fun to imagine you've put 2 and 2 together and got Fo'!


 I'm still studying.  I'm getting a handle on some things, but I have lots of material to work on.  

 Take Care,

 Miles


----------



## The Kai (Apr 7, 2005)

Spooke said:
			
		

> Think about it...San Shou shares some techniques with both Greco Roman Wrestling and Muay Thai, yet they are distinctly different in their totality!
> 
> TAEKWON!
> SPooKs


San Shou is a modern competive form of sparring, that has mixed in elements of Muay Thia and wrestling to win the bout.  It is more a case of reverse enginerring rather that engineering


----------



## Miles (Apr 8, 2005)

The Kai said:
			
		

> San Shou is a modern competive form of sparring, that has mixed in elements of Muay Thia and wrestling to win the bout. It is more a case of reverse enginerring rather that engineering


Todd, I've seen a few San Shou bouts on ESPN (always with Cung Le.....?)

Why do you say "reverse engineering"? (which in my mind calls for taking something already in existence and working backwards??)

Thanks!

Miles


----------



## The Kai (Apr 8, 2005)

My point was that San shou is not a traditional course of study.  So saying that Muay tahi and wrestling both appear in Kung fu would be incorrect, however MT and wrestling booyth appear in San shou-why San Shou is a modrn competetion wrapped up in a Kung Fu Belt


----------



## Spookey (Apr 8, 2005)

The Kai,

 My point still stands...just because an art contains techniques from a pre-existing art does not mean that they are merely an imitation.

 San Shou contains facets of Muay Thai and Greco Roman Wrestling (among other arts) however it is uniquly different from both

 It is well documented that Judo was derived from Juijutsu, however no one will argue that they are the same.

 Just as it has been documented that Taekwon-Do had an early basis in Shotokan Karate-Do. However, Taekwon-Do is not Shotokan and is individualized based on its own merit!

 A martial art is not defined merely by its technique, but moreso by the individual methodology of the system itself!


 IPPON KEN,

 I am interested to learn more about your "Nam era buddies"...under what Oh Do Kwan instructors did they study? Where you in Vietnam and have you studied Taekwon-Do under an Oh Do Kwan instructor? I am hoping to understand where your logic comes from other than pro Japanese propoganda (based on your name, I would say you are a fan of the Japanese arts if a practicioner at all)!

Yom Chi...TAEKWON!
Spookey


----------



## The Kai (Apr 8, 2005)

I'm sorry, but i don't disagree with you.  TKD and Shotokan have taken different paths-whatever similiarities they might have shared have less and less apparent


----------



## 47MartialMan (Apr 8, 2005)

The Kai said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, but i don't disagree with you. TKD and Shotokan have taken different paths-whatever similiarities they might have shared have less and less apparent


I guess per name and country?


----------



## Spookey (Apr 8, 2005)

47 Martial Man,

You wish to emply that the only difference between Taekwon-Do and Shotokan is the name and the counrty...to that I ask the following question:



Where in Shotokan is there such heavy methodology regarding high kicks, jump spining kicks, and multi directional kicks?

The above list is very simplistic difference between the teachings of Funakoshi and the methodology of Taekwon-Do. Another distinct difference between Taekwon-Do and the teachings of Funakoshi are the shorter, higher stances of TKD...

I await your reply!

TAEKWON!

SPooKeY


----------



## MichiganTKD (Apr 8, 2005)

I would tend to agree. Tae Kwon Do is not, and I don't think ever has been, Shotokan by another name. I will admit, Won Kuk Lee studied Shotokan while in Japan, as did many of the other Kwan Jang. However, based on what I have read about what Lee taught upon his return to Korea, it was NOT simply Shotokan. It was his unique teaching, combined with the teaching of other Masters (Gen. Choi playing a big part), that became Tae Kwon Do. 
From the outset, Tang Soo Do/Tae Kwon Do kicking was designed to reflect Korean sensibilities-directed anywhere, especially high. Also, jumping and flying kicks were given a prominent role, unlike Shotokan where they are minimized. Chung Do Kwan/Oh Do Kwan trademark techniques were the side kick and jumping side kick.
Perhaps there is a Shotokan influence, especially in basic marching technique, but it cannot be said that Tae Kwon Do is simply Korean Shotokan, given what techniques it did.


----------



## 47MartialMan (Apr 9, 2005)

_Perhaps there is a Shotokan influence, especially in basic marching technique, but it cannot be said that Tae Kwon Do is simply Korean Shotokan, given what techniques it did.__Where in Shotokan is there such heavy methodology regarding high kicks, jump spining kicks, and multi directional kicks?

The above list is very simplistic difference between the teachings of Funakoshi and the methodology of Taekwon-Do. Another distinct difference between Taekwon-Do and the teachings of Funakoshi are the shorter, higher stances of TKD..._

Hey, I am not applying there arent any differences per limitations to name and country. Like other martial arts, each influences another that such will be built upon/altered.

Of course they are different in those ways.

Thus, in tournaments, for example, one can hardly expect a Shotokan stylist to place high in a TKD tourney, or vice versa.


----------

