# Looking for in depth information on Naihanji Hyungs



## Jep

I'm about to start writing up a paper on the history, meaning and characteristics of the Naihanji Hyungs, but have been unable to find much, if any, decent information on them. I asked my instructor where to look, and she suggested I hit up some forums for help, so here I am. 

I have a general idea about what the hyung is about, but I'm looking for something more concrete to base my paper around. 

If you could provide some information, or some suggestions of where to find the information, I would be very grateful. 

Thank you. 

 - Jep


----------



## exile

Jep said:


> I'm about to start writing up a paper on the history, meaning and characteristics of the Naihanji Hyungs, but have been unable to find much, if any, decent information on them. I asked my instructor where to look, and she suggested I hit up some forums for help, so here I am.
> 
> I have a general idea about what the hyung is about, but I'm looking for something more concrete to base my paper around.
> 
> If you could provide some information, or some suggestions of where to find the information, I would be very grateful.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> - Jep



Hi Jepfirst of all, is the Naihanji hyung you mention a TSD `cognate' form of the Naihanchi kata widely practiced in several Okinawan/Japanese karate styles, the one Gichin Funakoshi spent nine years practicing, studying and working out the bunkai for as his primary training? Because if it is, I think I can help you out quite a bit... but first let me know. It definitely looks like `more than coincidence', but one never knows...


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

The naihanji, or keema, hyung, from what I know, are all based on the horse - obviously.

The only other thing I know is that they provide a good means of self defense when your back is close to a wall, since you move in a straight line horizontally, without need of stepping backward or forward. They require a -lot- of hip rotation to get any power as well. I know keema hyung cho dan through sam dan, so if you have any questions on the moves, I might be able to provide some help there. I have a video of myself performing keema hyung ee dan (no sound) that also might be good reference, I guess, but if I take your meaning correctly you know the forms already and just need information about their history. There...dunno. C.S. Kim has a book (which I need to buy one of these days) on traditional TSD, and from what I hear it's excellent. Might be worth a look.


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

JT,
These hyung are some of the best defensive tactics hyung in our system. If you look back to the Okinawan instructors of the past, the one who was known for being the toughest in the street, and made Bunkai the center of his training, Choki Motobu, called Naifhanchi Cho Dan; The only kata that you really need to know. He felt so strongly about this kata that he stated; if you can only choose one kata to learn and spend the rest of your life training with, it should be this kata.

The techniques in this hyung are such that if performed correctly, with the correct mind set, every technique is a finishing technique (fatal blow), with the exception of the disengagements at the end of each line.

I have spent many years working on these hyung with Okinawan and Japanese instructors to learn the Bunkai. Each of them have brought the principles and concepts of their respective Sokes to the training. 

Contact me directly and I will forward you specific info and video that you will find beneficial.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

What, no Korean instructors were good enough? If it's a TSD form, you'd think that's where you'd want to go.


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> What, no Korean instructors were good enough? If it's a TSD form, you'd think that's where you'd want to go.



JT, Naihanchi was an Okinawan form that was one of the main courses of instruction for the Okinawan masters who became the teachers of the Japanese karateka, and, later on, of the original Kwan founders. It got into KMA because those Korean masters trained it under people like Funakoshi and Kanken. But there is excellent reason to believe that, historically, the Korean masters were not taught the fullest and deepest bunkai for these formsthat the bunkai underlying Matusumura's and Itosu's practice, for example, were probably a lot different and more combat-specific than what Funakoshi himself learned in the next generation, and it is widely conceded that the next generation after Funakoshi got a lot less of the directly `martial' apps. So yes, it makes perfect sense to go to the source, particularly the Okinawan karateka who still probably maintain the closest version of the fighting systems that kata like Naihanchi encode.

What I was going to suggest to Jep, in fact, was that he take a look at the `Bunkai-Jutsu' series video on Naihanchi (Passai is also on there) by Iain Abernethy, maybe the foremost pioneer of `bunkai recovery' in the progress kata-interpretation movement centered in the UK, with people like Stuart Anslow and Simon O'Neil leading the charge in hyung interpretation based on Abernethy's methodology. The Naihanchi video that IA has on the bunkai and oyo for the Naihanchi is beautifully produced and shows the wealth of severely effective techniques concealed within that kata. As Master Penfil correctly states, this was regarded by the older generation of Okinawan masters as one of the jewels in the crown of martial arts training, actually a whole martial arts _system_ on its own. If I were doing research on any given kata, I'd definitely move heaven and earth to find out how IA's analysis of it ran, and it this case you have the tremendous advantage of actually being able to _see_ what he's talking about.


----------



## Makalakumu

Jep - first of all, welcome to MT.  Second of all, here are some threads that might be of some interest...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21508&highlight=Naihanchi

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34853&highlight=Naihanchi


----------



## Ian wallace

my history on hyungs is very poor but i was once told that the the naihanji hyung's where once one long hyung but was later split into three forms due to how long it was, i know that it translats to "the iron horse",  its a form that teaches you how to defend and attack while your back is against a wall, i also once heard that it was taught to people who had to fight on a horse. but as you know there is alot of storys in T.S.D that people get wrong due to poor interpretations or the famous "chinese whisper" but i hope the little info helped!!!
Good luck with your Essay!!

Ian Wallace

Tang Soo !!!!


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Ian,
I know that many think that this hyung series was once one long hyung and the split into 3, but that is totally incorrect.

In the beginning there was only Cho-Dan. Itosu later developed/created Ee-dan and Som-Dan...


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

JT,
You don't need to be so defensive of the Korean masters/grandmasters. If you read KJN Hwang Kee's final book, he discusses the Okinawan connection and relationship to our hyung.

Open your eyes and your mind to the early past. That is where all of the answers are...


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Exile, 
Thank you for that excellent post.

I must elaborate on the level of Bunkai that Funakoshi was able to pass on to his student that would eventually be passed down to those like Hwang Kee.

In Shigeru Egamis Book: Karate-do, Beyond Technique, Egami wrote; 

The master (referring to Funakoshi) did not teach us the Bunkai for the kata, as he had not himself, learned it from Itosu prior to moving to Japan. 
 (Shigeru Egami was Funakoshi's senior-most student)

If Funakoshi had not learned the Bunkai prior to leaving Okinawa, and had only learned the kata itself, then there is absolutely NO WAY that the Korean Kwan heads that trained in this lineage could have brought the Bunkai to their respective students. 

Hwang Kee, and the others were left with an empty shell of a system to teach and the responsibility of developing their own ideas for what the techniques could have been intended to be. I dont fault Hwang Kee or any of the others. They all did the best that they could with what they had to work with at the time, and from them, we all became the Tang Soo Do practitioners that we are today.

Here is the important piece of the puzzle for those of you who choose to get hung up on having to keep everything in Korean context; Hwang Kee never intended for us to live in a box/dead art. By tracing back the roots of the system and the hyung/kata that we train with, we are breathing new air into our art and expanding on that which has been given to us. Just like a parent hopes that his/her child will surpass all that they themselves could be, Hwang Kee want us to take Tang Soo Do to new highs and establish an environment of constant UPGRADE with all that we do.

By training with the older systems and bringing back to life that which has been lost by so many, we are fulfilling Hwangs dream


----------



## Ian wallace

I always thought it was one hyung, i guess the more you search the more you find! thanx for that master penfil! do you know any more info on this hyung but more directed to its techinical intentions (in the moves)? i do know most but some could be a strike when others could be a block, this info could help also for the essay our friend is writeing!!


----------



## exile

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> JT,
> You don't need to be so defensive of the Korean masters/grandmasters. If you read KJN Hwang Kee's final book, he discusses the Okinawan connection and relationship to our hyung.
> 
> Open your eyes and your mind to the early past. That is where all of the answers are...



This is profoundly true of the KMAs. My impression is that for a long time Hwang Kee (in his disputes with Gen. Choi over the future course of the Korean striking arts at that time) emphasized the connection to earlier Chinese arts, but that later on in his life he was explicit about TSD's debt to the Okinawan tuite masters of the previous century. 

Understanding the deep debt of the TSD forms to their Okinawan/Japanese sources in no way diminishes the pivotal role of the kwan founders in the development of the Korean offshoots of those earlier forms of the art. But as Master Penfil emphasizes, the _key_ to many of the technical elements are to be sought and, ultimately found, in the ideas and discoveries of the Okinawan masters. 

I only wish that Taekwondo had preserved as much of its links to its Okinawan sources that TSD did. Some of you TSDers out there may not realize how lucky you are to have forms like the Pyung-Ahns (from Itosu's Pinan/Heian katas), Naihanchi, Bassai and some of the other original `total system' hyungs, taken over literally from the O/J sources which the kwan founders were taught, as part of your curricula. I'm very fortunate: my sabumnim is deeply familiar with the Pyung-Ahn hyungs. But the WTF's efforts to snuff out the technical linkages between TKD and its Okinawan roots have been successful enough that there are probably fewer than one in fifty TKD dojangs which employ instructors who know the Pyung-Ahns, let alone the other Okinawan-source forms you folks learn as a matter of normal curriculum. Even the Palgwes were eliminated from the KKW curriculum because they are so evidently recombinations of Okinawan/Japanese kata sequences (in my subversive dojang, we learn the Palgwes instead of the Taegeuks). Count your blessings!


----------



## crushing

I very much appreciate the information that has been exchanged in this thread.  I've been curious about the Naihanchi forms and their application.

Given our curriculum, I must also belong to a subversive TKD organization.  After the Ki-chos we started in on the Pyung-Ahns with Nohai, Naihanchi, and Shipsoo to round it off to eight hyungs along with the Palgwes.  I think the Taegeuks and the Bassai and Koryo forms are down the road yet for me.

I've also really appreciated the videos of forms posted by upnorthkyosa.  It's interesting to see the difference in how some of the techniques in the forms are done differently from my organization.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> JT,
> You don't need to be so defensive of the Korean masters/grandmasters. If you read KJN Hwang Kee's final book, he discusses the Okinawan connection and relationship to our hyung.
> 
> Open your eyes and your mind to the early past. That is where all of the answers are...



I was only expressing my belief that studying an art doesn't require studying another art, except for comparison out of interest. Researching a past iteration only shows a historical footnote; you can learn how best to get power out of a form best by doing it. 

In regards to Ian's question, most quality books detail the moves for each hyung, but if you want info on a specific part of cho dan, ee dan, or sam dan, I can help you there (more with cho dan and ee dan, since I only learned sam dan a month or two ago). The main thing is to use your hips for power; crossing for blocks and pulling back the retracting hand fast and hard help, but in this form especially waist power is crucial. 

In regards to exile's comment about the pyung ahn forms, I agree. I hear they were originally one long form, broken up to make it easier to learn, though I've no details on exactly how that worked. What I do know, though, is that the 5 pyung ahn forms are core to TSD simply because of their effectiveness and variety of moves. At the C.S. Kim schools, black belts now have "required" pyung ahn forms for tests (though we have to know all of them, if we're asked to perform them) just because of how well they teach moves and combinations with stance shifts and all the other little technical things necessary to make the whole form work. Part of the cho dan test, in fact, is performing gi cho hyung sam bu, then all the pyung ahn forms, in sequence, with no choon bee in between forms. Good for in neh, too, I guess. 

If they're from Okinawan styles, cool. I'll still practice them Tang Soo Do-style, though.


----------



## exile

crushing said:


> Given our curriculum, I must also belong to a subversive TKD organization.  After the Ki-chos we started in on the Pyung-Ahns with Nohai, Naihanchi, and Shipsoo to round it off to eight hyungs along with the Palgwes.  I think the Taegeuks and the Bassai and Koryo forms are down the road yet for me.



Boy, CR'g, you sure _do_ belong to a subversive dojang if you folks do those forms. That's a rarity among rarities in the TKD world, I'd say! Taegeuk and Koryo, that's pretty much the norm, but Naihanchi and Bassai in your outfit? Your chief instructor sounds like someone with a background in TSD, if not karate!



			
				JT_the_ninja said:
			
		

> I was only expressing my belief that studying an art doesn't require studying another art, except for comparison out of interest. Researching a past iteration only shows a historical footnote; you can learn how best to get power out of a form best by doing it.



I don't think it's so much a question of studying one art by studying another art, in this case. To my mind, it's more like something along the following lines: you run across a proverb or saying in one language that doesn't necessarily make much sense. So you might assume it's just a bit of random nonsense. But you subsequently discover that the proverb was actually borrowed into that language, in translation, from a different language, and in that second language, one of the crucial words in the saying has a double meaning, so that the saying is a pun expressing some sharp bit of verbal humor. It's not a perfect analogy, but the idea is, the explanation of why that particular sequence of moves is in the form may be more accessible if you look at the art which was the source of the form, and whose practitioners still have a memory of what the specific apps were that the form movement were encoding. It saves you a lot of trouble in terms of extracting the combat meaning of the form yourself, where there are so many possibilities to consider and so many misleading paths that you'd prefer to avoid. Since these patterns originated in Okinawa and the memory of their original combat scenarios is yet green there, so to speak, it makes sense to consult with the Okinawan masters who are most likely to understand the logic of application of the movement recorded in the forms in question. It's not so much a matter of generating power as of understanding, for example, that that apparent `uppercut' movement wasn't intended as an uppercut, but part of a trapping move locking up the assailant's forearm, which leads to an immediate take down with a low sidekick as a finishing strikethat kind of thing. 

Correct performance of the hyungs is very important, for surebut not so much for its own sake as much as being a necessarily preliminary to figuring out just what the counterattack tactics encoded in the forms really are. You won't get the combat technique `blueprint' from the forms if you don't practice them correctly. But a good performance is only a preliminary to hard-headed bunkai analysis and `field testing' of the oyo with a (very) noncompliant training partner.  A lot of stuff that looks good on paper in advance turns out to be a little too hard to pull off under those conditions to be really reliable in close-quarters applications on mean streets...


----------



## crushing

exile said:


> Boy, CR'g, you sure _do_ belong to a subversive dojang if you folks do those forms. That's a rarity among rarities in the TKD world, I'd say! Taegeuk and Koryo, that's pretty much the norm, but Naihanchi and Bassai in your outfit? Your chief instructor sounds like someone with a background in TSD, if not karate!


 
Rather than me plagiarize and/or paraphrase, I'll just point you to a link with more information about my organization, if you are interested: http://wmtkd.freehosting.net/


----------



## Makalakumu

JT_the_Ninja said:


> I was only expressing my belief that studying an art doesn't require studying another art, except for comparison out of interest. Researching a past iteration only shows a historical footnote; you can learn how best to get power out of a form best by doing it.


 
When it comes to TSD, studying the arts that formed the root of our hyung, *CAN* and *DOES* help you do the form better with more power.  Once you understand what you are actually doing with the moves, sometimes the entire character of the move changes.  The entire emphasis suddenly shifts to something else.  

Your comments on the "use of hip" are telling because it illustrates exactly what I'm talking about.  Sometimes "using the hip" the way TSD is showing it doesn't work with the application that one is working on and sometimes, the use of hip is completely "backward" from the way that we do it.  

The bottom line is that TSD *does not* have all of the information when it comes to its hyung.  It's like what Master Penfil said, the old Masters did the best they could with what they had and now it is up to us to give TSD an upgrade.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

upnorthkyosa said:


> When it comes to TSD, studying the arts that formed the root of our hyung, *CAN* and *DOES* help you do the form better with more power.  Once you understand what you are actually doing with the moves, sometimes the entire character of the move changes.  The entire emphasis suddenly shifts to something else.
> 
> Your comments on the "use of hip" are telling because it illustrates exactly what I'm talking about.  Sometimes "using the hip" the way TSD is showing it doesn't work with the application that one is working on and sometimes, the use of hip is completely "backward" from the way that we do it.
> 
> The bottom line is that TSD *does not* have all of the information when it comes to its hyung.  It's like what Master Penfil said, the old Masters did the best they could with what they had and now it is up to us to give TSD an upgrade.



I have to disagree here. I don't learn hyung as a series of motions but as a series of techniques. Each technique has a specific purpose, and my instructor takes special care to inform us what each move does in the form. From the beginning, we learn to think of hyung as fight sequences and to picture our opponents so that we know where to block/attack. It's not like hyung are just out there, patterns of motion. 

If you know the technique and what it does, you know what you're doing in the form. It's that simple. I can't think of a single instance in a form where I wouldn't know what I was doing or where my opponent was while doing the technique. Just going through the motions is a practice very much discouraged, at my school anyway. 

And if you think that about using the hip for power, you don't understand me. Perhaps I should use "waist" instead. You get power from your center, not just your limbs. A fan doesn't blow much if its motor isn't using enough power, and the motor is at the center. Show me one instance of it being counter-productive, and I'll show you a technique misunderstood.


----------



## exile

crushing said:


> Rather than me plagiarize and/or paraphrase, I'll just point you to a link with more information about my organization, if you are interested: http://wmtkd.freehosting.net/



Hey CR, many thanks for that pointer!


----------



## exile

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> When it comes to TSD, studying the arts that formed the root of our hyung, CAN and DOES help you do the form better with more power. Once you understand what you are actually doing with the moves, sometimes the entire character of the move changes. The entire emphasis suddenly shifts to something else.






JT_the_Ninja said:


> I don't learn hyung as a series of motions but as a series of techniques. Each technique has a specific purpose, and my instructor takes special care to inform us what each move does in the form. From the beginning, we learn to think of hyung as fight sequences and to picture our opponents so that we know where to block/attack. It's not like hyung are just out there, patterns of motion.
> 
> If you know the technique and what it does, you know what you're doing in the form.



I don't see that you guys are actually saying anything that suggests you fundamentally disagree with each other. Everyone recognizes, or should recognize, that hyungs represent technique sets, chains of  movement sequences where each sequence in the chain embodies one or more effective combat scenarios. The issue is just how to get access to those scenarios, the optimal application of each sequence for combat purposes. What Master Penfil was saying, and UpNKy underscoring, is that in carrying out the bunkai that will yield these best-standard applications, it makes a good deal of sense to seek out the imput of those who practice the martial arts from whose kata TSD _inherited_ these hyungs. There is widespread agreement amongst MA historians that the bunkai associated with these originally Okinawan kata were not taught in their full breadth or depth to the expatriate Okinawan karateka who brought karate to Japan, so that the kwan founders themselves never learned in full depth the combat applications that masters like Matsumura, Itosu, Azato and Chofu Kyan knew and taught (selectively). If that's the case, you have two choices if you want to go beyond the limits of TSD's founders' own understanding:  you work out the bunkai and oyo yourself, or you get as much information as you can on the combat apps built into to the Okinawan-based hyungs from those who are in the closest line of knowledge transmission from the masters who _created_ the kata which became KMA's earliest hyungs. 


No one's saying these are mutually exclusive choices. Certainly there's plenty of room for grappling with bunkai analysis and the associated oyo, using well-tested principles for decoding the techniques in the hyungs pioneered by karateka such as Iain Abernethy, Rick Clark and Bill Burgar. But I can't see how you can fault getting information from master practitioners of the `source art' for these hyungsamong whom a higher degree of knowledge of the original applications probaby resides than anywhere else in the world.


----------



## Makalakumu

JT_the_Ninja said:


> I have to disagree here. I don't learn hyung as a series of motions but as a series of techniques. Each technique has a specific purpose, and my instructor takes special care to inform us what each move does in the form. From the beginning, we learn to think of hyung as fight sequences and to picture our opponents so that we know where to block/attack. It's not like hyung are just out there, patterns of motion.


 
I'm sure that you do.  When I trained in SBD, I did too.  The problem is that the techniques that were shown, weren't the actual techniques that the move was supposed to be.  And there was NO parity with the interpretations.  Most of them were 2nd rate when compared to the actual intended application.



> If you know the technique and what it does, you know what you're doing in the form. It's that simple. I can't think of a single instance in a form where I wouldn't know what I was doing or where my opponent was while doing the technique. Just going through the motions is a practice very much discouraged, at my school anyway.


 
That's great!  Then why do you step into kyo cha rip jaseh at the end of the first half of Pyung Ahn Sa and O dan?



> And if you think that about using the hip for power, you don't understand me. Perhaps I should use "waist" instead. You get power from your center, not just your limbs. A fan doesn't blow much if its motor isn't using enough power, and the motor is at the center. Show me one instance of it being counter-productive, and I'll show you a technique misunderstood.


 
Moving from your center much different then the SBD concept of "use of hip."  That concept implies an emphasis twisting of the actual hips in a particular direction.  The direction of this waist twist makes a difference when performing different techniques.  

All of the tuite and nage in our hyungs require a different interpretation of this concept.  Hwang Kee only designed this concept for striking and blocking.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

It seems that you people think only people who lived centuries ago knew anything about martial arts. At least, that's the impression I get, from your comments. 

So what if the "exact" sequence of techniques originally framed by Japanese martial artists wasn't translated perfectly to Korean TSD. Did it ever cross your mind that TSD is _not _karate, not supposed to be exactly the same? And did it ever occur to you that it's possible to learn some things for yourself, without having them dictated to you? 

Even if the exact moves have changed somewhat, their application still works, and they're still good techniques. A high block still blocks high, a center punch still strikes the solar plexus (il kyock pil sal), and every other move still does what it does. I don't want to let another art dictate what's "right," when there really is no "right," as long as you have your basics right. If you know how to block, punch, kick, etc., and you know how to move your body, and you know what you're doing at any given moment, the practice thereof will make you stronger and better. 



> That's great!  Then why do you step into kyo cha rip jaseh at the end of the first half of Pyung Ahn Sa and O dan?



I'm sure you'll come up with some historical detail that's embedded here, but here's my answer:

sa dan: you've just snap kicked, and you jump (not step) into the next move, which could be either ahneso pakero makee or (depending on how you want to look at it) a kap kwan strike to the face. The front foot goes out, and the back foot follows it, both feet going in the same direction so that your power is focused in that direction. As to why they're crossed, the back leg helps to give you more stability. 

o dan: this one's a little shakier for me, but I'd say it's most of the same reasons. You're not leaping, but since you're not taking the time to pick up your right foot and step out into chungul jase or hugul jase, you might not have the requisite room, or time. The left foot comes right behind the right, still with both feet pointed forward. Again, this could be either a block or strike - you just smashed the one opponent's head with your elbow, so he's on the ground and someone else is coming at you. 

Any more questions? It's hard to get out exactly what I mean through words, and I'm sure there's a lot more I have still to learn (if I think of it, I'll ask my sa bom nim tomorrow night more about these instances), but from my observations and from things I've heard from instructors, this is what I have to say in those matters.

So again, what Okinawan schools do is fine, and I'm not about to pass judgment on them for not doing their forms the way I do mine. We have different styles, so there are going to be some differences. I seem to recall Bruce Lee once saying that, since all humans have the same basic body structure, they're all going to fight alike. How you choose to express each technique is determined by who trained you and how you find most effective. We're no dumber than people 500 years ago, since they were just people too.


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

JT,
You are very strong minded about what you are learning, and as a student should, you have strong loyalty to your grandmaster. That is all good, and should always be as such.

There is one problem however

We have many ITF schools here in Michigan and I have had my share of experience with them. Several ITF black belts joined my school two years ago after I spent three months teaching them and many others from the school that they came from. These black belts were part of the largest group of ITF schools in the country. They did EVERYTHING exactly as they were taught by Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kim. The way that Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kim teaches every technique is incorrect (based on what the way that Hwang Kee taught it). If you are following his example, you are off balance and off center with regard to your power-line, balance points, etc. These basics being incorrect translate into your hyung being as such. When I started working with the ITF students here in Detroit, it took ten minutes of discussion and demonstration for them to see exactly what I am discussing here and from that point to this; they have never gone back to the ITF structure. It is simply wrong

This is not a matter of me trying to act like a know-it-all. It isnt a matter of; if youre not a Japanese or Okinawan practitioner you dont know anything. Hwang Kee taught vary differently then what the ITF teaches. The body angles at the rear foot, Hips and shoulder are all different. The direction that one moves his/her hips while executing defensive and offensive techniques is different. Hwang Kee taught correct physiology. I know this because of the number of years that I have spent training with my instructor, KJN C.I. Kim. KJN C.I. Kim has taught exactly as Hwang Kee taught, and will never change the way that he executes or teaches technique. I have personally trained with Hwang Kee in past years. I was able to experience first hand how Hwang taught. This is how I know that my instructor never changed his way from Hwang Kees way.

After 35 years of training I am a 7th Dan. I didnt get promoted by KJN C.I. Kim up the ranks through the years without being able to demonstrate what I know to be accurate. As a gup member of your association there is much that you (admittedly) dont know, and there is much that your Sa Bom Nim does not know as well. Every time that one of us here on the discussion board tries to pass along good information to you that will assist you in your growth, it is for us, a matter of extending to you, that which we have worked hard over the years to uncover for the sole purpose of helping you grow with a little less strain in finding the things that we had to search for.

When we discuss what we have learned from the Okinawan and Japanese variants, we are not dogging our Korean instructors, and we are not changing the name of our systems from Tang Soo Do to anything else. Hwang Kee himself said; Tang Soo Do is the ULTIMATE martial art because in his way of thinking, Tang Soo Do denies no technique. If you read his book, Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do you will see two pictures, side by side. One picture is of a Neanderthal man coming out of the jungle being attacked by a Saber-Tooth Tiger and the other is of a Sherman Tank firing its gun. Hwang wrote of these two pictures that; these pictures are both examples of Tang Soo Do. As far as Hwang Kee was concerned, he didnt create Tang Soo Do. Tang Soo Do began with the first conscious action of the first human that raised his/her hand in defense against man or beast.

Hwang Kee also wrote in the same book; it is regrettable to have to discuss that there are men who seek to claim that they created the origin of the art that they teach. What ever we, as teachers, teach, we have been taught by someone else. We may at times derive new ideas and concept from what we have been taught that we think of as our own ideas and concepts, but without the seed being planted by those who came before us, we would not have had the basis for such discoveries. 

Hwang Kee and the other Korean masters who chose to incorporate the Okinawan kata into their own systems were only taught the sequential movements that make up these hyung. They were never given the Bunkai, Henka and Oyo that were originally devised by the creators. Like many others out there teaching, I have been blessed to have access to that lineage and teach it to who ever is interested. 

Make some time in your schedule and come to Detroit for a couple of days. I will personally show you what the difference is in what you are doing, and what you should be doing

What you will learn in a short time will positively effect everything that you will do from that point forward, but only if you are willing to invest in yourself to make the trip and the effort. The door is open. Step inside


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## exile

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> JT,
> You are very strong minded about what you are learning, and as a student should, you have strong loyalty to your grandmaster. That is all good, and should always be as such.
> 
> There is one problem however
> 
> We have many ITF schools here in Michigan and I have had my share of experience with them. Several ITF black belts joined my school two years ago after I spent three months teaching them and many others from the school that they came from. These black belts were part of the largest group of ITF schools in the country. They did EVERYTHING exactly as they were taught by Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kim. The way that Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kim teaches every technique is incorrect (based on what the way that Hwang Kee taught it). If you are following his example, you are off balance and off center with regard to your power-line, balance points, etc. These basics being incorrect translate into your hyung being as such. When I started working with the ITF students here in Detroit, it took ten minutes of discussion and demonstration for them to see exactly what I am discussing here and from that point to this; they have never gone back to the ITF structure. It is simply wrong
> 
> This is not a matter of me trying to act like a know-it-all. It isnt a matter of; if youre not a Japanese or Okinawan practitioner you dont know anything. Hwang Kee taught vary differently then what the ITF teaches. The body angles at the rear foot, Hips and shoulder are all different. The direction that one moves his/her hips while executing defensive and offensive techniques is different. Hwang Kee taught correct physiology. I know this because of the number of years that I have spent training with my instructor, KJN C.I. Kim. KJN C.I. Kim has taught exactly as Hwang Kee taught, and will never change the way that he executes or teaches technique. I have personally trained with Hwang Kee in past years. I was able to experience first hand how Hwang taught. This is how I know that my instructor never changed his way from Hwang Kees way.
> 
> After 35 years of training I am a 7th Dan. I didnt get promoted by KJN C.I. Kim up the ranks through the years without being able to demonstrate what I know to be accurate. As a gup member of your association there is much that you (admittedly) dont know, and there is much that your Sa Bom Nim does not know as well. Every time that one of us here on the discussion board tries to pass along good information to you that will assist you in your growth, it is for us, a matter of extending to you, that which we have worked hard over the years to uncover for the sole purpose of helping you grow with a little less strain in finding the things that we had to search for.
> 
> When we discuss what we have learned from the Okinawan and Japanese variants, we are not dogging our Korean instructors, and we are not changing the name of our systems from Tang Soo Do to anything else. Hwang Kee himself said; Tang Soo Do is the ULTIMATE martial art because in his way of thinking, Tang Soo Do denies no technique. If you read his book, Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do you will see two pictures, side by side. One picture is of a Neanderthal man coming out of the jungle being attacked by a Saber-Tooth Tiger and the other is of a Sherman Tank firing its gun. Hwang wrote of these two pictures that; these pictures are both examples of Tang Soo Do. As far as Hwang Kee was concerned, he didnt create Tang Soo Do. Tang Soo Do began with the first conscious action of the first human that raised his/her hand in defense against man or beast.
> 
> Hwang Kee also wrote in the same book; it is regrettable to have to discuss that there are men who seek to claim that they created the origin of the art that they teach. What ever we, as teachers, teach, we have been taught by someone else. We may at times derive new ideas and concept from what we have been taught that we think of as our own ideas and concepts, but without the seed being planted by those who came before us, we would not have had the basis for such discoveries.
> 
> Hwang Kee and the other Korean masters who chose to incorporate the Okinawan kata into their own systems were only taught the sequential movements that make up these hyung. They were never given the Bunkai, Henka and Oyo that were originally devised by the creators. Like many others out there teaching, I have been blessed to have access to that lineage and teach it to who ever is interested.
> 
> Make some time in your schedule and come to Detroit for a couple of days. I will personally show you what the difference is in what you are doing, and what you should be doing
> 
> What you will learn in a short time will positively effect everything that you will do from that point forward, but only if you are willing to invest in yourself to make the trip and the effort. The door is open. Step inside
> 
> 
> Yours in Tang Soo Do,
> 
> 
> Master Jay S. Penfil
> 
> 
> TANG SOO!!!



Terrific post, Master Penfil. 

I only wish that I had your patience and forebearance, but alas...


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Master Tolstoy,
Thank you for those kind words

I meet with members of other associations and for that matter, other systems on a regular basis. I am always the Bad-Guy in the beginning, but within a relatively short time things change, and what I discuss is clearly understood.

I have developed a thick skin and a great deal of patience as a result of such encounters, and have established many awesome relationships as a result of the interactions.

Anyone who is interested in training with me is always welcome, and its always about good times and good training. The great thing about such involvements is that, just as I bring a great deal to the table, I know that you do as well. We can, and will learn much from one another. This gives me a chance to become a student all over again every time that I step on the training floor.

Please contact me at any time for some great conversations. _That is how good relationships begin _


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


*TANG SOO!!!*


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

At the same time, I must point out that Choong Jae Nim C. S. Kim has considerably more experience than you, has worked very hard to make sure his TSD is traditional, and to that end trains at his old school in Korea about once every year or so. For that reason, I'll tend to trust him and look skeptically at anyone who says he teaches incorrect technique (IIRC, he also studied under Grandmaster Hwang Kee). 

If you've seen students who are off balance, those are the students who would be corrected by Choong Jae Nim for bad stances. That's all I have to say in regard to that. 

In regard to bunkai, henka, and oyo, even if I knew what those were, I don't know if I understand how you still seem to think that only certain human beings have the capacity to understand and to learn. The human body only works in certain ways. 

However, with all this said, I feel we've gone very far from the original topic of this thread. Perhaps we should return to discussion of the keema/naihanji hyung?


----------



## Makalakumu

JT_the_Ninja said:


> At the same time, I must point out that Choong Jae Nim C. S. Kim has considerably more experience than you, has worked very hard to make sure his TSD is traditional, and to that end trains at his old school in Korea about once every year or so. For that reason, I'll tend to trust him and look skeptically at anyone who says he teaches incorrect technique (IIRC, he also studied under Grandmaster Hwang Kee).
> 
> If you've seen students who are off balance, those are the students who would be corrected by Choong Jae Nim for bad stances. That's all I have to say in regard to that.
> 
> In regard to bunkai, henka, and oyo, even if I knew what those were, I don't know if I understand how you still seem to think that only certain human beings have the capacity to understand and to learn. The human body only works in certain ways.
> 
> However, with all this said, I feel we've gone very far from the original topic of this thread. Perhaps we should return to discussion of the keema/naihanji hyung?


 
All of this regards Naihanchi and its relationship to TSD.  

I'll demonstrate.  

When you learned naihanchi, what did you learn that prepared you to learn that form?  What did you learn that helped you understand its applications?  How was this systemized in the curriculum?  What formal methods were used to convey this information?

Look, if you have no idea what bunkai, oyo or henka are, then you've stripped 90% of the depth out of the hyung you practice.  This stuff is NOT apparent when you are studying a book (or the internet, I might add) and that is as far as many people went, back in the day.

Anyone can learn this stuff, you just need to be more open to the actual source.


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

JT,
At no time did I ever say that; 


JT_the_Ninja said:


> In regard to bunkai, henka, and oyo, even if I knew what those were, I don't know if I understand how you still seem to think that* only certain human beings have the capacity to understand and to learn. The human body only works in certain ways.*


 

I am not a Super-Human, nor am I a practitioner that seeks to claim that I am greater then you, Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kim or anyone else. What I teach (and what is taught by many in the world martial arts community) isnt rocket science. I teach these concepts and principles and philosophies to practitioners all over the country and most everyone that I have worked with has been able to understand and put to use that which I have shared with them. 

Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kim was very close to KJN Hwang Kee when he was in Korea in the early days. I have not only watched ITF members in training, I have Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kims full video set and have studied the way that he demonstrates and teaches technique. I have also been present to watch one of his seminars that he conducted here in the Dojang of SBN Richard Collins, Jr. several years ago, and as I stated; I spent time on the floor in seminars with KJN Hwang Kee, and have trained directly under KJN C.I. Kim since 1983. KJN C.I. Kim performs to the letter, everything as Hwang Kee taught it. 

There are serious differences in what the ITF teaches from what Hwang Kee taught, and you dont need me to tell this to you. Pick up a copy of KJN Hwang Kees book and study it for yourself. I dont think that anyone to date has written a more detailed book on the execution of technique in any system. KJN Hwang Kee laid out the proper angles for every part of the body, for every technique in HIS system with clear explanations as to how and why they should be performed as such. 

We can go on with this subject from now till the end of time, but until you are able to open your mind to what so many of us have already learned and come to understand, this will all be a waste of time. The things that I teach, and that many others now teach as well were never taught in Korea. Chun Jae Nim C.S. Kim has most likely never been exposed to these things. If you choose to stay in the Fog of the Unknown and hold fast to what you think is right, none of us, my self included has the right to twist your arm. The invitation stands. If you never choose to accept it, I will not be ill-effected, as I already know this stuff. 

With this said, I will end my input here in this thread. 




Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

upnorthkyosa said:


> All of this regards Naihanchi and its relationship to TSD.
> 
> I'll demonstrate.
> 
> When you learned naihanchi, what did you learn that prepared you to learn that form?  What did you learn that helped you understand its applications?  How was this systemized in the curriculum?  What formal methods were used to convey this information?
> 
> Look, if you have no idea what bunkai, oyo or henka are, then you've stripped 90% of the depth out of the hyung you practice.  This stuff is NOT apparent when you are studying a book (or the internet, I might add) and that is as far as many people went, back in the day.
> 
> Anyone can learn this stuff, you just need to be more open to the actual source.



What did I learn? I learned that I was going to learn a new form which would challenge me and which would require that I work harder at techniques and maintaining a proper stance. I learned that it required a lot of waist snap and attention to my movements. I learned the movements, what each was, what each does. 

The method of my instruction was thus: I was shown the form, in person, by my instructor, and he went over it with me until I got it halfway decent, then let me practice, correcting me all the way. He still corrects me, because I can always improve my technique. I would never want to have to learn a form from a book. 

I don't understand why you're talking about this mysterious subject of bunkai, when from what I gather all it means is learning how best to get power out of your moves, which I already learn. If it's some mystical force thing, then sorry, but that holds no water with me. 

And a final note to Master Jay: Hwang Kee didn't create TSD. He created the MDK school of training, which, although it is the kwan under which I practice, is still mutable and subject to change. You don't think martial arts are invented in a day, do you? 

Anyway, with that, I think *I'll* end my discussion here, since we don't seem to be communicating our respective points.


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> What did I learn? I learned that I was going to learn a new form which would challenge me and which would require that I work harder at techniques and maintaining a proper stance. I learned that it required a lot of waist snap and attention to my movements. I learned the movements, what each was, what each does.
> 
> The method of my instruction was thus: I was shown the form, in person, by my instructor, and he went over it with me until I got it halfway decent, then let me practice, correcting me all the way. He still corrects me, because I can always improve my technique. I would never want to have to learn a form from a book.
> 
> I don't understand why you're talking about this mysterious subject of bunkai, when from what I gather all it means is learning how best to get power out of your moves, which I already learn. If it's some mystical force thing, then sorry, but that holds no water with me.
> 
> And a final note to Master Jay: Hwang Kee didn't create TSD. He created the MDK school of training, which, although it is the kwan under which I practice, is still mutable and subject to change. You don't think martial arts are invented in a day, do you?
> 
> Anyway, with that, I think *I'll* end my discussion here, since we don't seem to be communicating our respective points.



This is probably going to be futile. But nothing wrong with a bit of futility, so here goes...

You've `gathered' that bunkai is about `getting power out of your moves?' You gathered way wrong. Bunkai means analysis of the movements which a given kata/hyung comprises, to understand what combat _move(s)_ it's encoding. The reason that's necessary is because the language of description for karate-based MA movements makes reference to things like `stance', `block', `punch' and so on which are almost never the actual _moves_ in the combat scenario that that part of the kata is instructing you aboutsomething that Itosu warned us about he _devised_ that misleading form of description at the end of the 19th century. Example: at the begining of Palgwe Sa Jang there is what is typically described as a double block (middle-outward and rising) simultaneously, followed by an uppercut delivered by the rising block arm under the middle-blocking arm, followed by a throat strike from the middle blocking arm. In fact amost none of this description corresponds to the actual intended combat moves. A far better analysis of what moves these movements actually correspond tothe bunkai of this part of the hyungis provided by some of the better bunkai for Pinan Shodan, _which is the source of this sequence_. The rising arm deflects upward and traps, a roundhouse thrown at your head; while you knock the assailant's hand upward, you turn your other side toward the assailand, thrust your arm on that side to the other side of his upward deflected arm (the psuedo `middle outward block') and simultaneously crank your `middle block' forearm back while thrusting his now trapped, raised punching forearm around your `middle blocking' arm, by thrusting your `high blocking' arm gripping his punching arm forwardthat's what that movement is used for, _not_ and uppercut!while you press hard on his would-be punching arm and apply leverage, hyperextending his shoulder. A sharp turn of your body and he'd _down_ on the ground, where you can finish him off any number of ways. The bunkai is the reanalysis of the kata/hyung so that you can see past the deliberately deceptive labellingItosu's innovation, to get karate accepted in the Okinawan public schools, one he was upfront about. Bunkai deciphers the actual techniques to be applied; the oyo is the _application_ to combat of the new understanding of the work done by the kata movements as interpreted by shrewd bunkai. 

It's very clear from you description of how you `learn' a hyung that you've never been taught how to extract the actual combat application of the movement sequences so that you understand what the various possible applications corresponding to the ultra-simplistic move descriptions as `blocks'/`stances'/`punches' are. Of course we have a communication problem: Master Penfil, upnorthkyosa and I are assuming a framework for decomposing patterns into optimal combat scenarios which you clearly are unfamiliar with and, based on your ignorance of this procedure (which was a standard part of karate training when the kata were being created or formalized), you mistakenly assume it to be some `mystical' force or other rubbish having to do with `power generation' (where did you get an idea like _that_ from)? Becauseagainyou simply don't know what it is, or how to do it. You flat-out don't know that bunkai, oyo and henka (analysis of technique variations) are parts of standard, garden variety traditional karate training; because you apparently can't be bothered to google `bunkai', say, and check out the Wikipedia entry for it or the more than 225,000 entries for it; because, apparently, the part of Master Penfil's post in which he quoted Hwang Kee as saying that Funakoshi himself had never been taught the full bunkai for many of the kata he taught sailed right past you. `Mystical power generation' is the best you could come up with for a standard element of traditional karata kata training? 

You _bet_ there's a communication problem, JT.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Sorry, but I can't let that go.

Now that you've explained what bunkai is, you're still wrong about the way I train.

If you're familiar at all with C.S. Kim schools, we train with a series of forms-based sparring drills, where each drill is taken directly from one of the pyong ahn forms. The fact is that I *do* know what I'm doing with each move/sequence. In fact, that's part of how my instructor teaches me a form (and consequently how I show them to my juniors) -- he explains what's going on in relation to what I've just been doing, where my enemy is, and why each move happens where/when it does. If bunkai is just learning what move is doing what, then that's basic to any understanding of a form. Are there really schools that just show you the moves and expect you to do them? 

...I take that back - I have seen some schools who do that, and some even in the ITF. I will say, though, that my do jang is not one of those. 

Okay, *now* I'm done with this discussion, unless another question about part of the keema hyung comes up for which I have an answer (or part of one).


----------



## Chizikunbo

JT_the_Ninja said:


> And a final note to Master Jay: Hwang Kee didn't create TSD. He created the MDK school of training, which, although it is the kwan under which I practice, is still mutable and subject to change. You don't think martial arts are invented in a day, do you?


 
I dont think Master Penfil made any reference to Dojunim Hwang having created Tang Soo Do, his references were to _his system_. He specified neither Tang Soo Do nor Moo Duk Kwan. If you are ITF you do not practice Moo Duk Kwan for that matter, you may practice in Moo Duk Kwan lineage but unless you *ARE* a current member of the US Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation, you do not practice under the Moo Duk Kwan, and are not Moo Duk Kwan. I am pretty sure Master Penfil did not make any reference to martial arts being created in a day, in fact he did the opposite through a culmination of his posts, he has presented much viable information that you can take advantage of, or not. In any case, you said 





> although it is the kwan under which I practice, is *still mutable and subject to change.*


 This is what Master Penfil has been trying to get across (





> If you choose to stay in the Fog of the Unknown and hold fast to what you think is right, none of us, my self included has the right to twist your arm


)
He has presented information that could allow you to progress, change if you will, and through his repeated attempts you shun it, and then argue in favor of it? I have to admit I am perplexed.
I will close by quoting from Grandmaster Robert Trias' last martial arts seminar in 1989 which is profoundly relevent here:



> If only you knew what you just dont know, and now I have no time left to help you. Go and seek the knowledge that is being shown today, and if you find somthing you are not doing and belive the new knowledge to be correct, change it.


In this case, this is really the only way to find the true *Tang Soo Do!*
Yours in the arts,
--Josh


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Josh,
This quote from Robert Trias, Soke was great. Where did you find it? Please forward your source to us all.

In 1972 I was a member of the USKA (United States Karate Association), founded and headed by Mr. Trias. When I lived in Arizona I visited his dojo, but unfortunately, he was not available to receive visitors,

I did meet him briefly at the 1972 USKA Grand Nationals in Parma, Ohio, but at that time I was only 13 and a beginner. I didnt have the knowledge base, age or rank to be able to engage him in any kind of meaningful discussion.

He was however one of the major pioneers of the martial arts here in the USA. His contributions to the growth of the martial arts in the USA were (at that time) unmatched by anyone that I can recall.



Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## Chizikunbo

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> Josh,
> This quote from Robert Trias, Soke was great. Where did you find it? Please forward your source to us all.
> 
> In 1972 I was a member of the USKA (United States Karate Association), founded and headed by Mr. Trias. When I lived in Arizona I visited his dojo, but unfortunately, he was not available to receive visitors,
> 
> I did meet him briefly at the 1972 USKA Grand Nationals in Parma, Ohio, but at that time I was only 13 and a beginner. I didnt have the knowledge base, age or rank to be able to engage him in any kind of meaningful discussion.
> 
> He was however one of the major pioneers of the martial arts here in the USA. His contributions to the growth of the martial arts in the USA were (at that time) unmatched by anyone that I can recall.
> 
> 
> 
> Yours in Tang Soo Do,
> 
> 
> Master Jay S. Penfil
> 
> 
> TANG SOO!!!


Hello Master Penfil,
this quote is actually mentioned in a book my very good friend, and teacher wrote, Hanshi Gordon Garland, entitled 'The Art of The Jo, Cane and Te no Euchi'. Hanshi Garland actually fought in WWII with Trias Soke, and later they worked together on the railroad. Hanshi Garland is a master weapons maker, and was one of, if not the first to make kobudo weapons in the states. He also was responsible for introducing the Jo to the US at large through USKA seminars etc. Trias Soke wanted all karate ka to learn the art of the jo, as he had learned about it in his studied in japan. He promoted a student to 4th dan, and sent him to Japan with a letter of reccomendation to learn the art of Muso Shindo Ryu Jodo, when the student returned he walked into the USKA HQ, and announced he had arrived, and obtained a dan ranking, Trias Soke was excited and asked him to show him what he learned, and the student replied that everything he had been taught was a secret and he could share nothing. He was kicked out of the HQ and not allowed to return for many years. Hanshi Garland owned a joint dojo with the student and eventually learned Jo Do from him, and introuced it through means of the USKA...
Sorry for hijacking the thread LOL
--josh


----------



## robertmrivers

To reply to the original question, more info concerning the TSD Naihanchi is going to have to be researched via Okinawan sources... 

Naihanchi is an Okinawan kata, therefore anyone on the Okinawan side, either local teachers or even on any of the forums woud be helpful. There are plenty of books on the subject. Watashi no Karate Jutsu by Choki Motobu by his son Soke Chosei Motobu would be a great place to start.

I, and others, can give personal opinions, but it would be more beneficial from your training to find some print sources for your research.

One personal note, though. Many argue that personal development and training can add all of the power you need to the techniques..."the body only moves in so many ways" I believe is the arguement. This is true, but perception within the form varies greatly depending on experience. For example, when you look left, block left and step left...the attack is not coming from the left as many people think... and it is not a block... and it is not a step or stomp...

It is the principles of extracting the true technques that are taught in Okinawa that reveal the true meaning... not repeating the movements 1,000 times and letting the body naturally develop its own timing and power...that is different. If you are still doing a down block and a hook punch against someone while you are against a wall, then you may want to re-think what you are doing...

Also, I don't care how long someone trained in Korea...if the Koreans themselves are not doing it right and have not been doing it right since the dawn of the development of the art, then perhaps you should listen to someone else. Master Penfil knows what he is talking about...

Respects

Rob Rivers
Motobu Ryu


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

*Josh,*
I went on line to look for Hanshi Gordon Garlands book, entitled 
*The Art of The Jo, Cane and Te no Euchi*. 
I could not find it anywhere.

Please post the ISBN number and where you purchased it.

If you are able to pick up a copy and send it to me I will send you payment for what ever it costs. Thank you


*Sensei Rivers,*
Thank you for your input here on this subject

If you could post the ISBN number for *Watashi no Karate Jutsu* I would appreciate it. I have trained in Motobu-Ha S h i t o-Ryu here in Michigan under Shihan Garner Train since 1997. Shihan Train is an excellent instructor, and trained directly under Soke Shogo Kuniba in his home in Virginia for 15 years. Much of what I teach with regard to Bunkai, Henka and Oyo came from this lineage.

I would enjoy anything written by the Motobu family.

Also, please contact me directly when you have a moment to talk. I would like to get to know you and if possible, get together for some good training

248-561-5700


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


*TANG SOO!!!*


----------



## robertmrivers

Master Penfil

I lied...Motobu Sensei's publication of his father's book is in Japanese... this is the one I referred. I should have referred Patrick McCarthy's English Translation. I looked everywhere for it and could only find it on McCarthy's web-site:

http://www.koryu-uchinadi.com/motobu_choki_book.htm


I will give you a call soon. 

PS. Should Shihan Train talk about a pain in the a$$ student of his in Virginia, he is probably referring to one Rob Rivers...no relation of course 

Rob


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Sensei Rivers,
Did you train with Garner???

He will be here in my dojang/dojo in April for our grand opening!!!

When did you last see him?


I am looking forward to your call...


----------



## robertmrivers

Still Do!!

Primarily in Hakko Ryu (3rd dan). He came down here in July for Motobu Sensei's visit. We try to get up there and bring him down here at least 2 or 3 times a year. 

We definitely need to coordinate something. Talk to you soon

Rob


----------



## robertmrivers

Oh...if you don't mind, let me see what I am doing in April, maybe I can introduce myself to you and sneak a little HR in... What's the date?

Rob


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

robertmrivers said:


> To reply to the original question, more info concerning the TSD Naihanchi is going to have to be researched via Okinawan sources...
> 
> Naihanchi is an Okinawan kata, therefore anyone on the Okinawan side, either local teachers or even on any of the forums woud be helpful. There are plenty of books on the subject. Watashi no Karate Jutsu by Choki Motobu by his son Soke Chosei Motobu would be a great place to start.
> 
> I, and others, can give personal opinions, but it would be more beneficial from your training to find some print sources for your research.
> 
> One personal note, though. Many argue that personal development and training can add all of the power you need to the techniques..."the body only moves in so many ways" I believe is the arguement. This is true, but perception within the form varies greatly depending on experience. For example, when you look left, block left and step left...the attack is not coming from the left as many people think... and it is not a block... and it is not a step or stomp...
> 
> It is the principles of extracting the true technques that are taught in Okinawa that reveal the true meaning... not repeating the movements 1,000 times and letting the body naturally develop its own timing and power...that is different. If you are still doing a down block and a hook punch against someone while you are against a wall, then you may want to re-think what you are doing...
> 
> Also, I don't care how long someone trained in Korea...if the Koreans themselves are not doing it right and have not been doing it right since the dawn of the development of the art, then perhaps you should listen to someone else. Master Penfil knows what he is talking about...
> 
> Respects
> 
> Rob Rivers
> Motobu Ryu



Hey, I see you're not a TSD practicioner. That's cool. Don't say your system is any better than ours. Our basic techniques and forms may have originated elsewhere, but now we've made them ours. Okay? If it was originally something else in another style, cool. That may shed some light on what other people thought. Now, however, they're taught differently because the forms _themselves_ have changed. There is _no_ right vs. wrong issue here. I'm not arguing that the way they do it in Okinawa isn't a valid way. 

All I'm saying is quit with the TSD-bashing - and that goes for you TSD people too! The Koreans have _not_ been doing it wrong all these years, they've been doing it their way, and correctly their way. I personally find their way very effective. The keema hyung not only show me how to fight while I'm against a wall, they ensure that I'm practicing a good horse stance and using my waist for power instead of my shoulders. Don't come in here, Mr. Japanese-style, and tell us you're better than us. That's rude and ignorant, and maybe an issue for which a moderator should deal with you.


----------



## Makalakumu

JT_the_Ninja said:


> Hey, I see you're not a TSD practicioner. That's cool. Don't say your system is any better than ours. Our basic techniques and forms may have originated elsewhere, but now we've made them ours. Okay? If it was originally something else in another style, cool. That may shed some light on what other people thought. Now, however, they're taught differently because the forms _themselves_ have changed. There is _no_ right vs. wrong issue here. I'm not arguing that the way they do it in Okinawa isn't a valid way.
> 
> All I'm saying is quit with the TSD-bashing - and that goes for you TSD people too! The Koreans have _not_ been doing it wrong all these years, they've been doing it their way, and correctly their way. I personally find their way very effective. The keema hyung not only show me how to fight while I'm against a wall, they ensure that I'm practicing a good horse stance and using my waist for power instead of my shoulders. Don't come in here, Mr. Japanese-style, and tell us you're better than us. That's rude and ignorant, and maybe an issue for which a moderator should deal with you.


 
JT

What if I told you that by listening to some of these Okinawan and Japanese practicioners, you could have a much deeper understanding of the form?  Would you be able to accept that?  Think of it as learning how to see things from a different perspective.

This is an open door, JT, and no body has to be right or wrong.  Us TSD practicioners who seem to be bashing our art are meerly standing on the other side of the door.  If you want to come through fine, if not fine, but the end result is that it will change your art.

It changed everything about my art.  Take a look at this...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34158

This is the curriculum in my school and its all there, right in the forms, if you know where to look for it.  They link everything together and those connections give it more meaning and even more usefullness.  

This is all just a journey in which we are all moving toward a better understanding of what me know.  I've taken alot of steps on my journey and none of them have been wrong for me.  And I still have a long way to go.

More food for thought...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31764
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32622
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31800
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43916


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> Don't come in here, Mr. Japanese-style, and tell us you're better than us. That's rude and ignorant, and maybe an issue for which a moderator should deal with you.



I didn't notice any rudeness or ignorance&#8212;or name-calling or belligerance&#8212;in Mr. _River's_ post, at least. 

People are trying to tell you that there's a source of insight into something you do which you haven't accessed&#8212;the guy who wrote the code for software you use constantly is available to give you ideas on how to use it better&#8212;and you write posts like the one I'm quoting from? 

You're making a _great_ impression, JT... :EG:


----------



## robertmrivers

Now, Now, Now...

I must apologize...I read back through my post and the last sentence where I used the word "wrong" was inappropriate. It was not my intent to compare styles or flame any particular style...

I would like to mention, though, that the question was how to find more information on the Naihanchi. JT, your stance on the matter is very rigid and because of your devotion to the Korean method (which is admirable by the way), you are shutting the door on, not just "another way of doing it", but historical fact. In doing so, you are setting the example to others that they should not research their history. I just don't agree with this. Simply, to get a better understanding of Naihanchi...the history, the philosophy, and the higher meaning you MUST look elsewhere. I AM NOT talking about getting a higher understanding of how to punch or how to fight against a wall... everyone can work on that on their own. I have seen plenty of TSD people who can punch a hole through many an Okinawan stylist. What I am talking about is getting a higher understanding of Naihanchi as an actual historical document. And, you can't learn about the past if you are not willing to dig. Digging usually brings up things we are not too crazy about but we deal with it and move on. I have dug up plenty of my own skeletons during my journey that contradict truth but I have always been encouraged to bury those skeletons elsewhere and keep digging for the truth.

As an Okinawan stylist, I have also done my share of research. For example, research into Naihanchi always leads to Motobu Choki as this was the only kata he taught as he felt it contained everything one needs. So, who better to talk to about this than Motobu's son, Motobu Chosei Soke. Next thing you know, Motobu Sensei is in my living room eating dinner with my family. This year will be his third visit. 

And it goes deeper. I have looked into the Chinese roots of Naihanchi and how it came to be in Okinawa focusing especially on the specialized tactics found in the kata. THIS is why when I hear about "fighting against a wall" I just can't let it go. It is just not historically accurate. If you want to modify the technique...any technique, to fight against a wall go for it. Every system on earth has it, including karate. Applying this tactical concept is essential to true self defense. But, everyone needs to admit that the reason they choose Naihanchi to use as a wall fighting kata is the pattern. You can do the same thing with any of the kata...this doesn't make them wall fighting kata as well. Historically speaking, the pattern is only there to help the practitioner remember the form. It lays no significance as to the meaning of the form...in fact, the movements were set in certain patterns and directions to INTENTIONALLY mislead on- lookers. In the case of Naihanchi, the originators were successful on a global scale! 

There is no "mine is better" arguement here. However, at times, different instructors are going to have a "my historical perspective of this particular topic may be a bit more accurate than yours". But, that will only come out when a particular question is asked...as in this case concerning the research of Naihanchi. In my case, no offense is intended. I am trying to answer questions concerning a topic that always ends in a "mine is better than yours" arguement. I hope I can make my points without anyone going there. In college, I didn't think my professors were "better than me". They simply knew more about the subject than I did at the time and I was, in fact, the one asking the questions in an effort to learn more. If I started an arguement with a professor every time they corrected me I would still be in college.

Shotokan instructors go back to Okinawa all the time to learn the roots of what they learn. Some convert but most continue practicing Shotokan the way it was taught to them. TSD practitioners have a great art full of power, as well. Nobody is asking them to convert, either. Learning about the past is not going to "entice" one to convert. The roots of my family are in Scotland... it doesn't mean I want to start wearing a kilt.  I am not the one asking the questions. It is TSD students who are asking the questions so that they can better understand what they are doing. All I am doing is answering the questions. Following the example of Shotokan and Okinawan karate practitioners alike, students must be encouraged to research the history of what they do. Tang, afterall, refers to China...not Korea. If you are not thinking about the "why" of that (beyond the technical definition), you're missing a really fun part of the journey. Karate, before it was called karate in Okinawa, was called Todi (To-China, Di- Hand) or as we say in Korean...Tang Soo. We are all linked brothers and sisters. Resistance is futile! It is always a real privilege helping those who want a little more info. I enjoy working with TSD practitioners as much as Japanese and Okinawan stylists. In fact, the respect level of some TSD schools in on a different scale. I really look forward to seeing some of you some time as well.  

UPNORTH:
FINALLY, I finished the first installment of the video clip I had talked about. Sorry it took so long. I have decided that I am going to do a 2 minute or so lesson concerning many of the things discussed here (this one is 2:25). The first topic, as we had discussed, will be on the importance of the angles in the kata and why they are more important than people think. The next installment, which I have already started on, will be on stance work...where the changes came during the formation of Shotokan and beyond and some short insights from the stancework found in Okinawa. 
Again, I am doing this simply because people are interested and have asked for it. It has actually been a pleasure putting this together. Perhaps this video method will be more productive than my typing method. Just remember, they are 2 minute clips demonstrating things that take years to understand. But, I think it looks pretty good and is easy to follow. I need to compress it still and then I will post it on my web-site for people to watch should they choose to. We can then put the link here unless you know of a better way to do it.

Best Regards to All

Rob


----------



## robertmrivers

UPNORTH:

I read back over your curriculum and really respect the time you put into developing it. In the spirit of research, have you considered (perhaps you've done it already) finding the Korean terminology for the tricky terms like "Newaza" or "Kyusho" or even "Gall Bladder 20" (Feng Chi in Chinese, Gall bladder line in Japanese is Tan Kei). I think this information would be extremely beneficial to your students. It would also set you apart as I haven't seen a lot of Chinese to Japanese to Korean martial arts terminology reference books. Having something for the Kyusho (Tsubo) points in Korean would be pretty slick. 

Just a thought. What you have looks great.

Rob


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Sensei Rivers,
This was an awesome posting, filled with great content as to thought process and a way to a deeper understanding of All of our arts.

The questions that I have at this time for JT the Ninja are: 
1) What other system(s) of martial art have you trained in besides Tang Soo Do?
2) How many different associations have you trained with in Tang Soo Do, besides ITF?
3) In ITF, how many different Sa Bom Nims have you trained with (in different schools that do not train together on any regular basis)?
4) Beyond writing stuff on the internet discussion boards, how do you dig up the information that you use for your research?

I am asking these questions to you (JT the Ninja) to establish what expertise you truly bring to the table, and how you can be so tunnel versioned in a discussion that is participated in by so many others that have serious levels of experience that are above and beyond any of the Sa Boms that you are involved with in the ITF.

As you read this post and seek out the answers to the questions that I have asked understand that I am first and foremost a Korean system practitioner, and the senior student to the Moo Duk Kwan grandmaster viewed by EVERY one of the Korean grandmasters alive today as the best of the best to have ever come from the Moo Duk Kwan. I am in NO WAY bashing Koreans

I simply have an extensive history, most uncommon in the Tang Soo Do world with regard to what I have studied, and who I have had the honor and privilege of studying with.

As I stated to you on several of these posts already, we can go around for ever on this board espousing your opinion vs mine and never get anywhere. The best thing for you to do is take my offer seriously and make a trip to Detroit. I will open your eyes inside of one training session, and you wont get hurt in any way, shape or form. One session and you will loose all of this fear of the unknown.

In the end, you will, as I do, still train in Tang Soo Do, but with a far greater understanding of what you are doing. The ITF simply doesnt teach these things, and you will never understand them if you dont experience them first hand

I have been involved in Okinawan and Japanese martial arts longer then I have been involved with Korean martial arts. When I met Shihan Train in 1997 I already had a good understanding of the principles that we teach. What he was able to expose me to catapulted me LIGHTYEARS ahead of where I was. Every Tang Soo Do practitioner that I have shared these principles and concepts with has walked away from our training sessions with eyes wide open, and singing all kinds of praises for the information that had been exchanged.

Guess what!!! None of them have changed to studying Okinawan or Japanese martial arts. They are all still Tang Soo Do practitioners. They just have a deeper understanding for all that they have been taught and all that they will learn as time goes on.

Tang Soo Do came to us through KJN Hwang Kee, but he didnt originate it. He took a system of kata that had come from Shotokan and taught it to Koreans, who then moved around the globe and taught it to the rest of us. Shotokan was the brain-child of Gichen Funakoshi, but what he incorporated into it at its conception came from Okinawa (his homeland). The To Di (To Da-_as I learned it_) referred to by Sensei Rivers was the origin or the systems that we know as Tang Soo Do and Shotokan, as well as Shito Ryu, Wado Ryu, Goju Ryu and so on, and so on. Ryukuan Kempo is in there as well with its Tuite and Kyusho Jutsu. All of these systems came from the combination of Okinawan and Chinese systems merging their individual principles and concepts together.

When the Koreans returned from Japan with Karate, they had learned it from Funakoshi. Funakoshi didnt know the Bunkai; he just taught the kata as an exercise. Funakoshi didnt even learn the Pinan series from Itosu directly. He learned them from Kenwa Mabuni after he arrived in Japan. Mabuni didnt teach Funakoshi the Bunkai either.

If the Koreans were learning the Kata from someone who didnt know the Bunkai, how could they teach it to you and me? 

Training in the Okinawan and Japanese variants of our system has given me the knowledge and insight into what we should have learned from the beginning. Now we do.


Spend a little time and come visit me I dont bite, I just open eyes. When you return to your home dojang, everything that we have said will make perfect sense and you will be able to make the advancements that we have discussed in a much shorter timeframe then we did.

Sensei Rivers, I am looking forward to our interaction in the future. I will post the date of our April grand opening as soon as I have it.

I have to again, take a moment to thank *John Kendrowski* for helping manage this Tang Soo Do discussion board as he does He is always on his toes, making sure that the topics are solid and thought provoking. We have enjoyed many great threads here as a result of his thoughtfulness.


Also, The weekend of May 19th & 20th I am hosting Sensei Vince Morris here in my school for a series of training session. The different sessions will be set up based on Gup/Kyu ranks. Dan ranks/ Senior Dan Ranks and one session for Law Enforcement ONLY.

Sensei Morris is originally from Brittan, and earned his 6th or 7th dan in Shotokan there under Asano Sensei. Sensei Morris also spent 6 years training with Oyata Sensei in Okinawa. I have participated in 2 previous seminars with him here in Michigan and I can tell you that he is among the worlds finest instructor of Bunkai.

EVERYONE is welcome to come and participate for this weekend of awesome training!!! Contact me directly for more information.


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


*TANG SOO!!!*


----------



## exile

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> When the Koreans returned from Japan with &#8220;Karate&#8221;, they had learned it from Funakoshi. Funakoshi didn&#8217;t know the Bunkai; he just taught the kata as an exercise. Funakoshi didn&#8217;t even learn the Pinan series from Itosu directly. He learned them from Kenwa Mabuni after he arrived in Japan. Mabuni didn&#8217;t teach Funakoshi the Bunkai either.



This is overall a terrific post, M. JSP. Here's my question: Funakoshi is said to have trained exclusively with the Naihanchi kata set for almost a decade.  What was he actually _doing_ with it? I gather from what you write that he didn't actually train the oyo for the Okinawan bunkai? But nine years seems an awfully long time just to do the performance... Was it that Itosu and Mabuni didn't actually discuss the bunkai with him because he wasn't at that level, in their estimation&#8212;not quite good enough to be entrusted with the true apps encoded in the movements? 

I ask only because there seems to be this lingering sense in various places that the real combat superstars of that era, like Motobu and others, didn't actually think much of GF as a technician/combatant, but that he was a first-class self-promoter and was better than anyone else at marketing karate (and himself). Does any of this have the ring of truth?


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Master Jay: 

1) None. I'm a Tang Soo Do student, there's not enough time or physical energy to train in another style, at least not for me. I practice one art as hard as I can push my body, so what I can do I can do better than if I spread myself around. 

2) None. I don't consider that to be a requisite. I train under Sa Bom Nim Robert Venturino at the Oakmont C.S. Kim Karate school, International TSD Federation.

 3) Although I almost exclusively train at my home school in Oakmont (I don't have a car or the money to be driving everywhere), I have trained at the main dojang in Monroeville, under C.S. Kim personally. That is also where I take my recertification tests. Through those, I've come into contact with other kyo sa nim and sa bom nim around the area. I also go to the National All-Martial Arts Tournament sponsored by Master Kim every year, held in Pittsburgh (again, I don't have a car or money, so I go to tournaments when I can and where I can), so that I can meet and compete against practicioners from other schools, not just TSD. If you want to "enlighten" me, I'll be there this May. 

 4) I learn what I learn in class, from my sa bom nims. What I say is what I've learned in class and as I practice the forms myself. Note that I have identified myself several times as an e-dan; I'm nowhere near a master.

What all of you don't seem to realize is that while I entirely respect other martial arts and their forms, especially ones from which TSD got its forms (btw, Hwang Kee didn't bring TSD to Korea --- TSD has been studied for centuries, as historical evidence shows), I do recognize that I train under TSD, so whatever similarities the forms I have learned will have with those of other styles, they are still separate forms, with potentially very different moves and different applications. I do not judge any form based on its moves, nor do I care if some people do some techniques differently due to style differences. All I ask is that nobody tell me that TSD is really _only_ a debased or copied version of another martial art. The people who created and shaped TSD through the years got their ideas from all over the place: the Tang in Tang Soo Do is a reference to the Tang dynasty in China, and even on my dobok there are Chinese characters (according to the Korean mode). I fully accept that not all of the moves and forms of my style were created out of the blue by the original TSD masters. 

I also fully believe, however, that the forms as they exist in TSD today are just as valid, and to learn them is to do them and to learn them well is to study what each move does. That does not implicitly require me going back previous to the creation of TSD to learn how to do do what has been handed down, in one form or another, over the 1500-year history of Tang Soo Do. 


robertmrivers: I realize my post to you was a bit incensed, but I've put up with people downplaying the validity of TSD for a while now. Sorry for whatever undue offense you took from that. You will admit, though, that it sounds a bit odd for someone who doesn't study TSD to be lecturing those who do. You might also note that I didn't hinge my respect of the keema hyung completely on them being useful when you're against a wall; I like them more because they focus on movement control, timing, and proper technique. For being among the shortest of hyung, they pack a punch.


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> (btw, Hwang Kee didn't bring TSD to Korea --- TSD has been studied for centuries, as historical evidence shows),



No, it hasn't. And you have absolutely no documentation to support this dojang fantasy-lore, because there _is_ none for those time-depths in Manchuria and Korea.  If you bother to consult the work of the two professional MA historians who've spent more time than anyone else studying the history of KMA, Daking Burdick (_JAMA_, 1997) and Stanley Henning (_JAMA_, 2000) you'll learn (i) that there is absolutely no reliable documentation for what was going on on the Korean peninsula 1500 years ago, that the earliest MAs in Korea that there's any documentation for are Chinese boxing/wrestling styles, (ii) there is no archaeological evidence, in the form of tomb-cluster paintings/scultpure or anything else that support the presence of a uniquely Korean MA at ancient time depths,  and (iii) that Tang Soo Do and Kong Soo Do were interchangeable terms for the arts that the Kwan founders brought back from Korea after training under Okinawan karateka in Shotokan, Shudokan and Gojo-ryu styles, names they themselves gave to what they taught, both of which are cognates for karate (`China hand/empty hand'). 




JT_the_Ninja said:


> I do recognize that I train under TSD, so whatever similarities the forms I have learned will have with those of other styles, they are still separate forms, with potentially very different moves and different applications.



To the extent that it's possible make any sense of this text, it's clear that you've seriously missed the point here too, apparently. The Kwan founders came back with the various kata _without applications for those kata._ The bunkai, the technical application of kata movements as combat moves, _were not taught to the Kwan founders for the most part_. If you do a little actual research you'll find that by the time the Kwan founders started studying their karate, the basis of dojo training was no longer the one-on-one or few-on-one kata-based tech application approach that was common in Okinawa thirty years earlier, but the mass training kihon regime with very little in the way of bunkai application, if any. And it's not at all clear that the Kwan founders put much energy, if any, into recovering the original bunkai that were the whole _point_ of the kata. More and more, it's evident from people who were there, and their students, that training consisted of isolated tech practice, mass-movement kihon drills, and all the stuff that the Kwan founders themselves underwent as students. Period. 



JT_the_Ninja said:


> I do not judge any form based on its moves, nor do I care if some people do some techniques differently due to style differences.



Huh? What are you _saying_ here?? You don't judge any forms based on its moves... You mean, you're not judging how good the form is?? You're not _supposed_ to do that, so why would you?? What you _are_ supposed to do is extract the combat applications of kata moves. That's what bunkai is, and that's what Jep is asking about: in-depth study and analysis of Naihanchi, if I recall more or less correctly. And who said anything about different techs due to style differences? Regardless of style, two given interpretations of a kata/hyung move may be equally effective, or not. There is a whole literature on what makes one bunkai, one set of combat interpretations, more street-effective than another; look at Burgar's _Five Years, One Kata_ or Wilder and Kane's _The Way of Kata_, if you need to have the checklists spelled out for you.



JT_the_Ninja said:


> All I ask is that nobody tell me that TSD is really _only_ a debased or copied version of another martial art.



Do you actually _read_ the posts that the (extremely!) patient respondents to your own posts send you?? Who has said that KMAs are a `debased/copied' version of _anything_? But whether you like it or not, the technical content of KMA is deeply and primarily tied to the technical content of the Okinawan arts those Korean systems are built on&#8212;and yes, JT, there is a well-documented history which shows that KMAs _are_ built on a O/JKMA platform, regardless of how much someone might wish it weren't so. 




JT_the_Ninja said:


> The people who created and shaped TSD through the years got their ideas from all over the place: the Tang in Tang Soo Do is a reference to the Tang dynasty in China, and even on my dobok there are Chinese characters (according to the Korean mode). I fully accept that not all of the moves and forms of my style were created out of the blue by the original TSD masters.



This is just one long, red herring. There is a history to TSD which Upnorthkyosa and Master Penfil are thoroughly steeped in and have studied extensively, and what they are trying to tell you is based on years of study and historical research, not dojang rumor.



JT_the_Ninja said:


> I also fully believe, however, that the forms as they exist in TSD today are just as valid, and to learn them is to do them and to learn them well is to study what each move does. That does not implicitly require me going back previous to the creation of TSD to learn how to do do what has been handed down, in one form or another, over the 1500-year history of Tang Soo Do.



Again the mythical 1500/2000/2500 year-old history of TSD/TKD... would you care to cite even one primary source for this claim? Are you aware that the _earliest_ references to Korean MAs are in the 15th c. _Koryo History_&#8212;which makes it clear that the content of Korean warfare arts were entirely based on Chinese systems? 1500 years?? What are you talking about?




JT_the_Ninja said:


> robertmrivers: I realize my post to you was a bit incensed, but I've put up with people downplaying the validity of TSD for a while now.



No, you haven't. No one has downplayed the validity of TSD. It's Master Penfil's whole lifework and career; you're saying he's _downplaying_ it? What people are criticizing isn't TSD. It's your technical and historical knowledge of TSD and KMAs generally that they're criticizing. Don't confuse the two.

Learn a bit more, and learn to treat the advice and knowledge of genuine masters in their arts with a bit more respect, if you want to get a fair hearing for your opinions. You're going about it 180º the wrong way, so far. Meanwhile, you've managed to derail the whole thread, which was a request by Jep for reliable, in-depth information about Naihanchi&#8212;information which a number of people have tried to provide him, and which you've responded to with a mixture of fantasy history and defenses of TSD against attacks that no one who's posted has actually _made_. If you don't want to contribute a substantive response to Jep's query, fine, but if not, would you mind letting the thread stay on topic for just a little while? It would be _much_ appreciated.


----------



## robertmrivers

Exile,

You brought up some of the recognized sources that set straight the sometimes slanted history of TSD and the other Korean arts. Unfortunately, many people think that it is an attack on TSD but it isn't. The truth is what it is.

Another source I am not sure you all have bookmarked is the Dragon Times article (volume 22) featuring an article by Dr. Robert Dhrenwend called "The Truth About Tae Kwon Do: An Historical Appraisal."

One Comment:

"...In the early 1950's the South Korean government interfered with karate in Korea with the intent of converting it into a major new competitive sport, one that the Koreans could dominate and which would bring international recognition and prestige to Korea. This new martial art/ sport was to be 100% indigenous, tracing its history to the origins of the Korean people. In their rush to give their brand new martial sport a spurious pedigree reaching back into the dim mists of antiquity, the fact that there were no indigenous Korean martial arts seems to have been regarded as irrelevent. The pitiful sham history that resulted has had evil effects on Tae Kwon Do, both in its development as a sport and for its validity as a martial art."- Dohrenwend, p. 10

You will have to order a back issue...I actually typed this. The article covers Korean martial history at great length and the list of sources (all 65 of them) should be in the library of any Korean stylist. I might be able to scan it and use OCR to convert it. Never thought about that... let me know if you would like a copy.

What does this mean to Korean stylists? NOTHING. If you train hard, keep an open mind, and always seek the truth it does not matter what martial art one chooses to study. Having solid forms but being able to back up the movements historically and technically beyond what is normally taught gives one enormous confidence and power.

JT. No worries. I didn't realize your age when we started talking about this. It would actually be best for you to train exactly the way your instructor tells you to. It is certainly not our place to try and convince you of things that you simply have not been exposed to and that we have been researching for a  longer time. This topic is hard to cover and should be introduced gradually. I would suggest, however, that before you put yourself into a discussion where people of considerable rank and experience are discussing things you don't understand completely, that you really do your homework. And I don't mean this in a condescending way. In any facet of life...martial arts, school, business, whatever, you have to be able to back up the information with reliable sources, written as well as personal. 

Also, for the record, I was not lecturing. Again, a question was asked and I answered it. TSD instructors ask me questions all of the time and I do my best to answer respectfully. Questions range from "Why do we do a back stance and karate uses a cat stance?" to the classic "Pinan Nidan, Heian Shodan, Pinahn Chodan" discussion. When you consider the direction this COULD have gone with other Karate forumites, I thought I was pretty tame. My goal is to help people get a hold of information that isn't that easy to get from an actual human being. Say when and where and I'd be happy toshow anyone some of these things personally...no strings attached. If not, there are plenty of books I would recommend as well to further understanding of the kata mindset.

Anyway... if there are any other questions concerning Naihanchi I might be able to reference a book for you or offer my opinion. 


Regards

Rob


----------



## Makalakumu

Sensei Rivers

Regarding Naihanchi 1-3, there are lots of stories regarding the history of these hyungs.  From what I've been able to gather, Naihanchi Chodan was the original and its origins are rather obscure.  The other two, however, I've read that they were created by Itosu Sensei.  Why did he do this?  There are so many applications for Naihanchi Chodan that the other two seem redundant.

Although, I have to say that the third one is really cool...

upnorthkyosa


----------



## exile

robertmrivers said:


> Exile,
> 
> You brought up some of the recognized sources that set straight the sometimes slanted history of TSD and the other Korean arts. Unfortunately, many people think that it is an attack on TSD but it isn't. The truth is what it is.
> 
> Another source I am not sure you all have bookmarked is the Dragon Times article (volume 22) featuring an article by Dr. Robert Dhrenwend called "The Truth About Tae Kwon Do: An Historical Appraisal."
> 
> One Comment:
> 
> "...In the early 1950's the South Korean government interfered with karate in Korea with the intent of converting it into a major new competitive sport, one that the Koreans could dominate and which would bring international recognition and prestige to Korea. This new martial art/ sport was to be 100% indigenous, tracing its history to the origins of the Korean people. In their rush to give their brand new martial sport a spurious pedigree reaching back into the dim mists of antiquity, the fact that there were no indigenous Korean martial arts seems to have been regarded as irrelevent. The pitiful sham history that resulted has had evil effects on Tae Kwon Do, both in its development as a sport and for its validity as a martial art."- Dohrenwend, p. 10
> 
> You will have to order a back issue...I actually typed this. The article covers Korean martial history at great length and the list of sources (all 65 of them) should be in the library of any Korean stylist. I might be able to scan it and use OCR to convert it. Never thought about that... let me know if you would like a copy.
> 
> What does this mean to Korean stylists? NOTHING. If you train hard, keep an open mind, and always seek the truth it does not matter what martial art one chooses to study. Having solid forms but being able to back up the movements historically and technically beyond what is normally taught gives one enormous confidence and power.
> 
> JT. No worries. I didn't realize your age when we started talking about this. It would actually be best for you to train exactly the way your instructor tells you to. It is certainly not our place to try and convince you of things that you simply have not been exposed to and that we have been researching for a  longer time. This topic is hard to cover and should be introduced gradually. I would suggest, however, that before you put yourself into a discussion where people of considerable rank and experience are discussing things you don't understand completely, that you really do your homework. And I don't mean this in a condescending way. In any facet of life...martial arts, school, business, whatever, you have to be able to back up the information with reliable sources, written as well as personal.
> 
> Also, for the record, I was not lecturing. Again, a question was asked and I answered it. TSD instructors ask me questions all of the time and I do my best to answer respectfully. Questions range from "Why do we do a back stance and karate uses a cat stance?" to the classic "Pinan Nidan, Heian Shodan, Pinahn Chodan" discussion. When you consider the direction this COULD have gone with other Karate forumites, I thought I was pretty tame. My goal is to help people get a hold of information that isn't that easy to get from an actual human being. Say when and where and I'd be happy toshow anyone some of these things personally...no strings attached. If not, there are plenty of books I would recommend as well to further understanding of the kata mindset.
> 
> Anyway... if there are any other questions concerning Naihanchi I might be able to reference a book for you or offer my opinion.
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rob



Hey Rob, a million thanks for the additional info. There is a great book on the history of KMAs, not the facade of legend which typically passes for it, waiting to be written, and it seems to me that you or Master Penfil or both of you are logical people to write it! 

Thanks again...


----------



## robertmrivers

Exile

I'll get right on that...what do you think Master Penfil... a coordinated effort!!!

Yeesh...I can't even imagine. I am working on one now that is in my subject area and it is still pretty time consuming. Reviewing Korean history would definitely take a while. But, who knows...there may be some interest in it.

I just posted the video I was speaking of. It is super basic...not high quality...and is only one small example (about 2.5 minutes). But it was fun making it. I've got a second being worked on now that I hope to have up in a week or so. Sorry it is not streaming. I am also going to put a .wmv version up as well. But, this thing started life as an AVI at about 325 MB. I've got it compressed down to about 11 MB. It has a little audio sync problem in the middle but I think it gets the point across. Maybe upnorth can play with it and put it somewhere productive. 

Link is here: http://www.virginiakempo.com/martial_minute.htm

Even gave it a catchy little name... 
I have had several questions asked by my students that I will address through this format as well as from Jujutsu, American Kempo, Shotokan and KMA practitioners. So, I already have a pretty good line up developing. Hopefully I can take advantage of the "picture is worth a thousand words" philosophy... I am the worst at typing!

Regards

Rob


----------



## exile

robertmrivers said:


> Exile
> 
> I'll get right on that...what do you think Master Penfil... a coordinated effort!!!



Well, you've got a customer waiting, cash in hand! 



robertmrivers said:


> Yeesh...I can't even imagine. I am working on one now that is in my subject area and it is still pretty time consuming. Reviewing Korean history would definitely take a while. But, who knows...there may be some interest in it.



There'd be a lot of interest in something like that. A condensed summary of the true state of MA in ancient Korea, a compilation of the best evidence for the MA situation in the 19th century, and a careful working-out of just how, and which, strands of Okinawan karate went to Korea, filtered through the teachings of the expatriate Okinawans like Funakoshi who struck it rich teaching a diluted karate/tuite to Japanese university students, and how these strands were woven together to form kwan-era curricula and training methods, with as much description as we have evidence for regarding just what went on in the kwan training sessions... it would be a revelation to an awful lot of people who have been as bamboozled as JT appears to be about the history of the KMAs. People need to understand just why you cannot understand where the technical content of the Korean striking arts came from without understanding the Okinawan karate sources (and their modification in the landscape of prewar Japan) which were essentially the whole content of the KMAs in the prewar period, fantasies about taekkyon and ancient indigenous arts preserved by hermit monks in remote monasteries notwithstanding. And as I say, you guys are ideally equipped with the expertise to do it. 



robertmrivers said:


> I just posted the video I was speaking of. It is super basic...not high quality...and is only one small example (about 2.5 minutes). But it was fun making it. I've got a second being worked on now that I hope to have up in a week or so. Sorry it is not streaming. I am also going to put a .wmv version up as well. But, this thing started life as an AVI at about 325 MB. I've got it compressed down to about 11 MB. It has a little audio sync problem in the middle but I think it gets the point across. Maybe upnorth can play with it and put it somewhere productive.
> 
> Link is here: http://www.virginiakempo.com/martial_minute.htm



I'll give it a tryI use a Mac platform, so wmv files are inaccessible to me. But let me see if I've got the drivers to handle this vid.



robertmrivers said:


> Even gave it a catchy little name...
> I have had several questions asked by my students that I will address through this format as well as from Jujutsu, American Kempo, Shotokan and KMA practitioners. So, I already have a pretty good line up developing. Hopefully I can take advantage of the "picture is worth a thousand words" philosophy... I am the worst at typing!
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rob



This is great stuff, Rob! Listen... you said something about scanning that _Dragon Times_ article with that great passage you sent me. I don't want to make work for you... _but_... if you do decide to do it, will you please keep me posted about it? Actually, quite a few people in the KMA fora will be interested, I'm sure....

And thanks, yet again, for all your efforts in this area!


----------



## robertmrivers

Upnorth

didn't know if you had seen this one. This is from a pretty popular bio on Sokon Matsumura, this particular one from shitokai.com. It pretty much echoes everything I have heard...

"It is said by some that a Chinese master by the                                name of Ason taught a Chinese kata by the name of                                Naifanchin in the area of Naha. Some say that the                                kata was taught in Naha-te for a while (but is no                                longer had in Naha-te styles.) Matsumura studied                                from Ason for a time. Later, Matsumura took this                                kata and broke it up into two parts: Naifanchin                                Shodan and Nidan. The origin of Naihanchi Sandan                                is more obscure. It is not a Matsumura kata at all,                                but it may have its origin in Ason's system also."

An interesting tidbit about Naihanchi... Motobu Choki studied under Itosu but he also studied extensively under Matsumora (Kosaku...not Sokon Matsumura). During a conversation I had with Motobu Chosei, Soke, he explained that his father urged his students to practice his version of Naihanchi only...and not practice Itosu's version. I am not sure why, but perhaps Itosu and Matsumora had different training philosophies and Motobu chose Matsumora's (speculation) in combination with his own revelations. 

Motobu Choki did not do Naihanchi Sandan...this may be a clue when creating a timeline for the immergance of #3. Perhaps Itosu did create it. I am sure, using the time reference, that it was created after Naihanchi 1 and 2 were formalized. But, I am not 100% sure. The version of Naihanchi Sandan I practice is from the Tozan Ryu of Shinsuke Kaneshima, a student of Shigeru Nakamura and Choki Motobu. Tozan Ryu's Naihanchi series is different than the Motobu Ryu and more similar to the way Okinawan Kenpo of Nakamura lineage do it. But, as Motobu Ryu does not have a Sandan, I had to pick it up somewhere... it is definitely a fun kata. But, I find that once you know 1 and 2... 3 seems to be the redundant one. Sandan certainly has fun timing changes in it and the added length provides more of a workout.

Anyway, sorry I can't be of more help on that one... as there is no written documentation it is hard to say. 

Regards

Rob


----------



## robertmrivers

Exile


Re:


> This is great stuff, Rob! Listen... you said something about scanning that _Dragon Times_ article with that great passage you sent me. I don't want to make work for you... _but_... if you do decide to do it, will you please keep me posted about it? Actually, quite a few people in the KMA fora will be interested, I'm sure....



If it is as easy as the ast OCR attempt I made at work it actually might happen. Will let you know in the morning.

Rob


----------



## exile

robertmrivers said:


> Exile
> 
> 
> Re:
> 
> 
> If it is as easy as the ast OCR attempt I made at work it actually might happen. Will let you know in the morning.
> 
> Rob



Terrific, I'll await your message! :asian:


----------



## Makalakumu

robertmrivers said:


> Upnorth
> 
> didn't know if you had seen this one. This is from a pretty popular bio on Sokon Matsumura, this particular one from shitokai.com. It pretty much echoes everything I have heard...
> 
> "It is said by some that a Chinese master by the name of Ason taught a Chinese kata by the name of Naifanchin in the area of Naha. Some say that the kata was taught in Naha-te for a while (but is no longer had in Naha-te styles.) Matsumura studied from Ason for a time. Later, Matsumura took this kata and broke it up into two parts: Naifanchin Shodan and Nidan. The origin of Naihanchi Sandan is more obscure. It is not a Matsumura kata at all, but it may have its origin in Ason's system also."
> 
> An interesting tidbit about Naihanchi... Motobu Choki studied under Itosu but he also studied extensively under Matsumora (Kosaku...not Sokon Matsumura). During a conversation I had with Motobu Chosei, Soke, he explained that his father urged his students to practice his version of Naihanchi only...and not practice Itosu's version. I am not sure why, but perhaps Itosu and Matsumora had different training philosophies and Motobu chose Matsumora's (speculation) in combination with his own revelations.
> 
> Motobu Choki did not do Naihanchi Sandan...this may be a clue when creating a timeline for the immergance of #3. Perhaps Itosu did create it. I am sure, using the time reference, that it was created after Naihanchi 1 and 2 were formalized. But, I am not 100% sure. The version of Naihanchi Sandan I practice is from the Tozan Ryu of Shinsuke Kaneshima, a student of Shigeru Nakamura and Choki Motobu. Tozan Ryu's Naihanchi series is different than the Motobu Ryu and more similar to the way Okinawan Kenpo of Nakamura lineage do it. But, as Motobu Ryu does not have a Sandan, I had to pick it up somewhere... it is definitely a fun kata. But, I find that once you know 1 and 2... 3 seems to be the redundant one. Sandan certainly has fun timing changes in it and the added length provides more of a workout.
> 
> Anyway, sorry I can't be of more help on that one... as there is no written documentation it is hard to say.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rob


 
I've read that before and I've read some other contradictory information, but hearing it from a higher level Okinawan-te practicioner definitely carries a little more weight.  Will it ever be possible to peice together a distinct lineage for this stuff, or was so much information lost during WWII that it will be impossible?

Here is something that kind of throws a monkey wrench in to what is written by Matsumura.  In our version of Naihanchi Chodan (I've attached it at the bottom) there is a distinct opening and closing move.  Both Ee and Sam dan start from the ready stance (choon be).  Why does chodan have the distinctive opening move and the others do not?  Does your version of these forms have a similar characteristic?  

The reason I ask is because I'm wondering at how much our hyung has changed from the original version of this kata.


----------



## Makalakumu

robertmrivers said:


> I just posted the video I was speaking of. It is super basic...not high quality...and is only one small example (about 2.5 minutes). But it was fun making it. I've got a second being worked on now that I hope to have up in a week or so. Sorry it is not streaming. I am also going to put a .wmv version up as well. But, this thing started life as an AVI at about 325 MB. I've got it compressed down to about 11 MB. It has a little audio sync problem in the middle but I think it gets the point across. Maybe upnorth can play with it and put it somewhere productive.
> 
> Link is here: http://www.virginiakempo.com/martial_minute.htm


 
This is a great video and you are right, its very basic, but it's also absolutely essential for TSD people to see.  Discussion of these aspects of the forms almost completely missing in most TSD/SBD dojangs.  

Anyway, with your permission, I'd like to ask the site administrator to host the video on his site so I can share this with my teacher and my students.  This is a different perspective then the one that I approach this move.

I see the angles as evasions and counterattacks followed by a throw that puts uke on his back.  If you think of this section as a series of three moves, the first is the initial defense and counter attack.  The 45 degree angle sets up strikes to li-18 and gb 24 and the third-combined with the directional change, shows the throw.

IMO, this video needs its own thread.  I noticed that you are online now, would you care to start it and add your own explanation?


----------



## robertmrivers

Upnorth

Both of the Motobu Ryu Naihanchi start from the same position, similar to the way that video starts chodan. Sandan, typically, starts from a position where the two fists are tight against each other in front of the groin.

So, all three, the way we do it, have a preliminary movement before the "first technique".  I have seen other schools bring the elbows up straight from the ready position in number 2.  There are definitely variations on that one. I studied the Chodan of Shobayashi Shorin Ryu (Eizo Shimabukuro), then the Okinawan Kempo version (Seiyu Oyata), even the Wado Ryu version until finally I have committed to the Motobu Ryu method. All four methods are taught in Okinawa/ Japan and they  are all different with different ways of starting and stopping. So, don't sweat the differences too much. The interesting things become "why" they are different. But there are always going to be differences from style to style. The TSD version you sent me looks a lot like the Shotokan method. Looks good.

Regards

Rob


----------



## robertmrivers

> The reason I ask is because I'm wondering at how much our hyung has changed from the original version of this kata.



Sorry! Forgot to answer your question... The version you posted is not that different AT ALL. Some of the timing is different, but the movements are all pretty much present and accounted for! Learning a more "Okinawan" perspective with that foundation would be easy! You certainly wouldn't have to relearn anything...

As far as the video... I think I would rather just let it fly on its own. There is NO WAY that I would have the time to answer all of the questions. As I said, a picture is worth a thousand words. There is so much to discuss there that I would have to set up shop here at the screen and type all day. But, you, my friend, can do whatever you want with it. Post it anywhere you think it would help... However, I am shivering in fear at the thought of some who would watch it without reading this post and bombard me with unrelated comments!!! 

There are essentially (and not in every case) three phases of learning...kihon, tuite, kyusho. Within each phase, there are several stages of learning where the technique is evolving. What you see there is a good kihon technique. And by kihon, I don't mean literally that it is basic, I mean that it falls into the kihon phase as the Tuite has not been added to it yet and the Kyusho implications are not discussed. The tuite isn't in it yet, but you might be able to see where it would fit. The kyusho could be there if (remember...it is not just knowing the names of the kyusho points, but in what order they need to be struck...) you are watching where the spear hand is going, the strike on the arm at LI, the leg points and finally the strike on the neck (your choice depending on where you set it up...ST9,10, LI, SI, or GB 20).

Regardless, the important thing is that the angle is important. Here is one of the major points in a nutshell.

In explicating kata there is a concept that, if you do the same thing twice, once left, once right, there is little significance to it because you are simply practicing each side. In the case of that particular movement in the video, many KMA's move on the 180, then the second movement steps in on the same line, as in the end of Pinan Nidan (Pyungahn chodan). SO, we are in essence doing the same movement 4 times there at the end (twice on the left, twice on the right). The significance is that there is originally an angle there which now removes the "practicing both sides" link in the first two steps on the left side. The entire left side is now its own technique and then the entire right side becomes the "practicing the other side". 

Basically, whoever removed the angle (probably happened on the trip from OKinawa to Japan) did not understand the significance of keeping it in there. The kata was "simplified". Or, they did it on purpose...

Naturally, the way I did the low knife hands and the stance also play a part... if one is applying a back stance, for example, as in Shotokan/ TSD, then the range, shifting, timing, and power are all shifted elsewhere and this concept as well as the reason for having the cat foot stance get lost in the shuffle. There is a way, that I have been teaching, that allows for the back stance to work in that same technique but that requires a little re-programming which there isn't enough time in the day to type...but rest assured, there is NO need to change the TSD forms...drastically anyway. It is mostly perception that needs to be shifted.

So, don't hesitate to ask anything at all...but, certain things will be impossible to explain like this. ALL of the questions asked I record and will try to touch on them in future video installments somehow.

I hope this helps

Regards
Rob


----------



## robertmrivers

Oh, one more thing...

I realize that not everyone steps straight...plenty use the angles as I have demonstrated...I was just showing the importance of the angle. The single low knife hand actually becomes its own stand alone technique...as do most of the techniques in kata. Basically, everytime we move (not after every combination) in a kata...another fight ends...

This is why I like showing these principles to TSD instructors in particular...the hyung are not so different that we have to relearn a form before we can get to the good stuff...

Rob


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

I am enjoying this thread more and more

Sensei Rivers,
This entire post was great, but I want to draw attention to this line in particular



robertmrivers said:


> but rest assured, there is NO need to change the TSD forms...drastically anyway. It is mostly perception that needs to be shifted.


 
This is what I have been saying all along 

I have never told any Tang Soo Do practitioner that they have to leave Tang Soo Do and take up Okinawan or Japanese systems. I have stated clearly that; it isnt about changing the way that you perform the technique (in most cases); its the mind-set that you have as you perform the techniques.

What do you perceive as the OYO as you are executing the technique? 
Is the technique a response to a punch, a grab, a kick? 
What direction is the attack coming from? 

As you perceive these things:
Where is your center? 
Where is the attackers center?
How are you constructing a correct power-line?
What are you doing with either hand?
Why did you choose the stance that you are now in?
_And so on, and so on_

The only problem I have with those who do their version (as I see it) incorrectly is that they cant explain any of what I just laid out. Find the answers to all of the above, and then you have something to discuss on these forums, or at least, now you have an intelligent question to pose.



Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Sensei Rivers,
I will be in the car for the next 30 minutes... now would be a great time to call...

248-561-5700


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

I love the way you all say one thing and forget what you imply, but I'll let that go. 

Oh, and the Kokuryo dynasty started sometime in the first-second century BC, so the 1500-year figure? Correct. There are indeed records of some form of TSD (early version, if anything) dating back to that time, mostly paintings found in tombs along the Ap Lok river. 

And if you're saying that because the people who brought Okinawan forms to Korea might not have learned the exact applications that they didn't know what they did, then you forget that these guys were still martial artists. I've mentioned already that I _do_ indeed practice form-specific applications of those moves (il soo sik, among others), and my instructors _do_ take the time to explain what each move is doing. 

I have been listening to what you all say, and I have been pondering these things before posting. Might I point out that I'm not exactly a teenager, so there's no need to address me as an intellectual inferior. 

Anyway...off of that subject (unless you insist on recycling it further), back onto the keema hyung. 

I'd always wondered why only keema hyung cho dan had a special beginning motion; interesting. I didn't get a chance yet to download that video, but I'll try to do so sometime tonight (public computer won't play it)

Here's a question to the TSD masters, just out of interest to see your perspectives: In keema hyung sam dan, the third move starts by punching over one's shoulder, ostensibly to an opponent behind. I've only been learning this form for a short while, so I haven't gotten down every last thing right yet; that said, how do you get any good power out of it? I'd assume massive waist twist, but I have a hard time doing that while still keeping my right arm straight in preparation for the cross and block immediately afterward. What's your take on that?


----------



## Makalakumu

JT_the_Ninja said:


> I love the way you all say one thing and forget what you imply, but I'll let that go.


 
There's no need to be so confrontational.  Let's just let it go and be done with it.



> Oh, and the Kokuryo dynasty started sometime in the first-second century BC, so the 1500-year figure? Correct. There are indeed records of some form of TSD (early version, if anything) dating back to that time, mostly paintings found in tombs along the Ap Lok river.


 
If they were practicing martial arts, they were NOT practicing Tang Soo Do.  Here is an article on history that may be of some interest...

http://www.scottshaw.com/history/



> And if you're saying that because the people who brought Okinawan forms to Korea might not have learned the exact applications that they didn't know what they did, then you forget that these guys were still martial artists. I've mentioned already that I _do_ indeed practice form-specific applications of those moves (il soo sik, among others), and my instructors _do_ take the time to explain what each move is doing.


 
If your instructor has made form-specific ill soo shik a requirment, then that is pretty neat.  I can tell you this, THAT is a rarity when it comes to TSD.  If you have a set of standardized Ill Soo Shik that deal with Naihanchi Cho Dan, I'd love to see them.  Or at least read what they look like.



> I have been listening to what you all say, and I have been pondering these things before posting. Might I point out that I'm not exactly a teenager, so there's no need to address me as an intellectual inferior.


 
JT it takes lot of humility to admit that you may have a few misconceptions about things.  And it takes alot of maturity to sit back and listen.  If you can do both of these, your TSD will only get better.  If you can't, then you've bought yourself a one way ticket to stagnation.



> I'd always wondered why only keema hyung cho dan had a special beginning motion; interesting. I didn't get a chance yet to download that video, but I'll try to do so sometime tonight (public computer won't play it)


 
Have you ever wondered what that move was used for?



> Here's a question to the TSD masters, just out of interest to see your perspectives: In keema hyung sam dan, the third move starts by punching over one's shoulder, ostensibly to an opponent behind. I've only been learning this form for a short while, so I haven't gotten down every last thing right yet; that said, how do you get any good power out of it? I'd assume massive waist twist, but I have a hard time doing that while still keeping my right arm straight in preparation for the cross and block immediately afterward. What's your take on that?


 
It all depends on what you want to do with it.  I see that move as a block.

Here's some more food for thought.  These videos are of a couple of Ill Soo Shik that we practice from Naihanchi Cho Dan.  Check them out...


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> Oh, and the Kokuryo dynasty started sometime in the first-second century BC, so the 1500-year figure? Correct. There are indeed records of some form of TSD (early version, if anything) dating back to that time, mostly paintings found in tombs along the Ap Lok river.



Now that you've 

(a) confused the time depth of the Kokuryo dynasty with the age of TSD (rather like me arguing that the Egypt Natioal Airlines has been around for almost five thousand years because the Pharonic Dynasties began approximately 2800 B.C.) and 

(b) repeated the now well-known misinterpretation of the Koguryo tomb murals, again showing that you've done no serious investigation of Korean history (and completely missed my reference to this historical fallacy in the post that you responded to, apparently) 

you might, as I suggested earlier, try to educate yourself on the matter, instead of retailing dojang folklore, by consulting Dakin Burdick's seminal papers `People and events of Taekwondo's Formative Years', the first in the 1997 volume of _JAMA_, and the extended version at http://budosportcopelle.ml/gesch.html, where he notes that 

Of course, most literature on taekwondo describes the art as `thousands of years old', but this is simply not so. Most of the martial arts practiced in Korea before the nineteenth century were merely reflections of Chinese martial arts. The three most common pieces of evidence for the antiquity of taekwondo---the tomb murals of Koguryo Kingdom, the statue of Kumkang-Yuksa, and the Muye dobo tongji (_Illustrated Manual of Martial Arts_)---*actually show that early Korean martial arts were largely derivative of Chinese martial arts*(my emphasis)

noting futher that 

(i) the Koguryo tomb murals, which depict (among other martial activities) groups of men seemingly engaged in empty-hand combat, actually constitute no evidence at all bearing on ancient Korean martial art, because, as he puts it in an earlier study,

none of the Koguryo tomb murals can be definitively identified as the practice of a kicking and striking art. The murals on the ceiling of the Muyong-chong are said to show `two men practicing a sort of Taekwondo'. They actually show two men---both with goatee, moustache and long hair---wearing loin cloths. They are at least four feet apart (their outstretched hands are a foot away from each other). The positions could be stretching, dancing or possibly wrestling Mongolian style, but they certainly do not resemble modern Taekwondo stances or techniques.'


The joke, as it happens, is that, according to Burdick `the martial arts depicted in Koguryo tomb murals closely resemble those in the tomb murals of the Eastern Han, located in what is now eastern China. This suggests that the form of Koguryo era martial arts emerged because of Chinese cultural influence, rather than independent development by the future Koreans'.

(ii) Burdick comments that `the statue of Kumkang-Yuksa at Sokkuram, which is often cited as the figure of an ancient warrior practicing taekwondo, is in fact a Buddhist guardian figure found throughout East Asia, and thus cannot be said to be unique to Korea either.' The Henning article I told you about, but which again you obviously didn't bother reading, echoes this observation, noting that `these guardians are in the style common to contemporary Tang China (618--907), on which they were most assuredly modeled. _ Even some reputable Korean sources refer to these figures as `wrestlers' rather than `boxers', but they are most commonly called `strong men'  (lishi in Chinese or ryuksa in Korean).'_ (p.10; my emphasis). 

(iii) The massive late 18th c. Korean martial arts manual  _Muye dobo tongji_, supposedly an encyclopaedia of native Korean combat techniques, turns out to be `nearly identical to the _Jixiao Xinshu (New Book for Effective Discipline)_... by the Chinese General Qi Jiguang (1528--1587)', written nearly two and a half centuries earlier. (The translation and transliteration task involved, as Burdick notes, would have been well within the capabilities of the  _Muye dobo tongji_'s author, `a scholar famed for his erudition in classical Chinese'. Henning, in the 2000 _JAMA_ paper crucial to this topic (which, as I say, you evidently still haven't read, though you seem to be under the impression that you know something about early Korean MAs) offers a detailed breakdown of the sources of the techniques discussed in the _Muye dobo tongji_, noting the separate weapons and techniques itemized there.

And all this is just the tip of the iceberg. So you see, JT, the problem is that you have strong opinions which are based on recycled bad history (fueled in some instances by Korean national government fables; see Burdick for documentation; I'm getting tired of supplying you with information you can find out on your own), rather than any actual knowledge on your part. And the point is that Sensei Rivers, Master Penfil, Upnorthkyosa and I can see this lack of even basic knowledge of the topic in every one of your posts; that's why you're getting the feedback you're getting. REPEAT: every time you post, JT, you make your lack of technical and historical knowledge obvious. Is none of this feedback getting through to you, so that you finally get the point that maybe it's time to actually _learn_ something before posting your views for everyone to read, and shake their heads at?


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

upnorthkyosa:


> If your instructor has made form-specific ill soo shik a requirment, then that is pretty neat.  I can tell you this, THAT is a rarity when it comes to TSD.  If you have a set of standardized Ill Soo Shik that deal with Naihanchi Cho Dan, I'd love to see them.  Or at least read what they look like.


Well, that I know, we only have pyong ahn il soo sik. The videos you show look really cool, though. I think I get where the first one comes from keema hyung cho dan, but the second one's a mystery to me. Mind enlightening me? I probably won't want to practice them until/unless my sa bom nim shows them to me, but they do put a few parts of the form in somewhat clearer focus as to what they could also do. 



> JT it takes lot of humility to admit that you may have a few misconceptions about things.  And it takes alot of maturity to sit back and listen.  If you can do both of these, your TSD will only get better.  If you can't, then you've bought yourself a one way ticket to stagnation.


Don't I know it (try listening to one of Choong Jae Nim's hour-long lectures). I'm willing to accept that history's a mucky subject, especially back that far. So if you're right, I'm cool with that. Either way, I still hold to my principle that the Okinawan/Chinese originals from which TSD got its forms are only applicable by comparison, historical and methodical. 



> Have you ever wondered what that move was used for?
> 
> It all depends on what you want to do with it.  I see that move as a block.


Often. As far as I know, in TSD it's just the choon bee stance for that form, setting you up to deliver the first move. It's clearly has block applications, though, especially since it leads into another block of the same nature. Certainly an important block too, when you think about what it's protecting 



> Here's some more food for thought.  These videos are of a couple of Ill Soo Shik that we practice from Naihanchi Cho Dan.  Check them out...


As I said before, really cool. Would you mind detailing them out, briefly at least? 

And are there ones based on forms like sip soo and jinte? That'd be cool. Some of the moves in those just beg to be put into il soo sik. 

Lastly, I know people come to the annual National All Martial Arts Tournaments here in Pittsburgh from as far away as Michigan (I think one time we had one or two from Washington State); do you ever come to those? Same question to anyone else here.

exile: my lack of historical knowledge I'll buy. my lack of technical _skill_ I'll buy (flat feet and bad knees aren't fun). Technical knowledge, though? Nah, I pay attention, and I know _how_ techniques/forms should be executed, at least, even if I have trouble executing them in actuality.

*EDIT*
Now that I've seen the "Martial Minute" clip, that was pretty durn cool. My school always does the 45-degree attacks at the end of pyong ahn cho dan, and for much the same reason, I guess. Doesn't really have a lot of application when you're just an orange belt, but when you get to the red belt level (8th gup-2nd pretest), the red belt il soo sik involve a lot of getting to the side so that you have that open attack. We do more gut/face kicks than shin kicks, though. I like the shin-kick, at the same time, especially because it's reminiscent of some of the higher-level ho sin sul moves. Pretty cool stuff. The other big difference I saw was in the cross for the ha dan soo do mahkee. We always wind up more, with the hand that will do the actual block on the opposite shoulder, palm facing neck, and the other hand behind the back, ready to snap into position just in front of the solar plexus. Allows for more momentum and snap, though I'm not going to suggest the one in the video wasn't effective.


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> exile: my lack of historical knowledge I'll buy. my lack of technical _skill_ I'll buy (flat feet and bad knees aren't fun). Technical knowledge, though? Nah, I pay attention, _and I know how techniques/forms should be executed, at least, even if I have trouble executing them in actuality._



Well, JT, I'll say this much for you: you're very cooperative in illustrating my points about your posts. As this little passage indicates, and as your whole post here and previous ones make clear, you think that the important things about forms are the choreographed performance of them`how the forms should be executed', to use your own wordsrather than the information about combat applications of the movements built into the forms. You see a `punching' motion and a hikite retraction, and it never occurs to you that what you're seeing is not a punch/chamber, but a head twist that breaks the assailant's neck. You see a `down block', without ever recognizing that the `chamber' to that block is the forearm component of an arm lock, and the first part of the `block' is actually an elbow strike to the attackers face, with the `block' itself a blow to the carotid artery. _That_ kind of technique, JTthe _combat_ technique encoded in the deliberately deceptive description language that TKD/TSD took over holus-bolus from karate, which got it from Itosu's revision of kata teaching in the 1890s to get it accepted into the Okinawan public schoolsa trick that Itosu himself was perfectly upfront about when confronted by criticism from other karateka. Those disguised applications, the bunkai of these forms, closer to the surface in Okinawan karate training than anywhere else, are what Upnorthkyosa, Master Penfil and Sensei Rivers are trying to tell you about, and you just... don't... get... it.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

...execution involves all of that. Haven't I said that I train with my opponent in mind? What you've just said is no new concept to me, and only further illustrates why I've had to repeat myself several times. I don't want to keep up this debate, since somehow a mutual understanding remains elusive. 

One of the first things my instructor taught me was that TSD is the way of the "defense-strike." Even in defending, you're really attacking. I know that when I'm crossing for a block, I might also be doing ho sin sul escaping a grab or twisting an opponent's arm. 

Anyway, now that's resolved, I hope. So what's your opinion of those naihanji-based il soo sik, exile? Do you do anything like that?


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> ...execution involves all of that. Haven't I said that I train with my opponent in mind? What you've just said is no new concept to me, and only further illustrates why I've had to repeat myself several times. I don't want to keep up this debate, since somehow a mutual understanding remains elusive.
> 
> One of the first things my instructor taught me was that TSD is the way of the "defense-strike." Even in defending, you're really attacking. I know that when I'm crossing for a block, I might also be doing ho sin sul escaping a grab or twisting an opponent's arm.
> 
> Anyway, now that's resolved, I hope. So what's your opinion of those naihanji-based il soo sik, exile? Do you do anything like that?



JT, TKD doesn't have naihanchi. We train applications of Pyung Ahns, Palgwes, and some of the Dan forms, and we train them fairly realistically, in the sense that a small mistake in judgment could easily result in serious or permanent joint damage. If I'm training, say,  Palgwe Sa Jang, for example, I will be facing a partner who throws a hard roundhouse at my head; my application of the `rising/middle' block combination will be an instinctive rising conterstrike on the attacker's arm (rising block), with a simultaneous encircling of the attacking arm with my other arm (middle block), turning my body 90º to the attacker; the `uppercut punch' which follows I interpret as a trapping and thrusting of the attacker's raised arm around the fulcrum of my `middle block' arm, so that a hard pivot away from his body and a sharp drop in my center of gravity forces him onto the ground, and a hard kick or two to his head finishes him. As a rule, we leave out the actual kicks to the head. The initial sequence in Palgwe Ii-Jang is practiced similarly:  high block deflecting a roundhouse punch, turn to the side kicking the attackers groin or knee, causing his upper body to instinctively lower forward; the blocking arm by a muchimi movement seizes the hair or, even better, the ear, and the `punch' with the other arm consists of a grip on the attackers lowered, forward jaw, which I twist counterclockwise while gripping his ear (the `punch') and twisting counterclockwise with my `blocking' hand (the `retraction chamber). That should be sufficient to break his neck, if it seems necessary to do so. The 180º `turn to the other side' is taken to be not a turn but a throw: my pivot pulls his body off balance, and the symmetrical punch on the other side can really be interpreted as a punch, with the `rising block' a hold on his head pulling it back, allowing me a damaging punch to this larynx, crushing his throat if need be.

We don't actually kill our training partners, clearly. But we aren't exactly gentle with each other, either. The point is, we train all hyungs _including the kichos_, in as realistic way as we can without anyone actually winding up in intensive care. This is not standard one-step training; it's much closer to Abernethy's `kata-based' sparring. But I'm confident that it manage to distill a good deal of the combat juice out of the forms we train, which are, so far as I can tell, `mixmastered' combinations of elements from familiar Okinawan/Shotokan katas...

I _have_ studied the Naihanchi set, even though they're not in our curriculum. Unfortunately, the WTF, in its wisdom [??] eliminated many of the old Okinawan kata forms from thei TKD curriculum, even though they were there in the Kwan era and the transition to the early KTA. But I've investigated the Naihanchi and some of the bunkai interpretations for it, and this was why I responded to the original post: Abernethy gives some very convincing, elegant and combat-effective interpretations for the apps in his DVD on Naihanchi/Bessai. Some of the moves have survived as subsequences in the colored belt hyungs we study.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

You know, that's something I've considered doing more than once, actually. The problem's always finding a partner(s) outside of class. I try to incorporate form combinations in sparring as much as I can, but yeah, that's a good idea. 
Ee Dan, especially with the first moves. So I get what you're saying about the double-block; that's one of our pyong ahn il soo sik combinations, pretty much. The only thing I don't understand is what happened to the roundhouse? Didn't you block the kick? Or do you mean a roundhouse punch?

edit: wow, orange belt on this board already! woohoo!

further edit: this is what frustrates me about TSD videos on the internet: 



  >_<


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> You know, that's something I've considered doing more than once, actually. The problem's always finding a partner(s) outside of class. I try to incorporate form combinations in sparring as much as I can, but yeah, that's a good idea.
> Ee Dan, especially with the first moves. So I get what you're saying about the double-block; that's one of our pyong ahn il soo sik combinations, pretty much.
> edit: wow, orange belt on this board already! woohoo!
> 
> further edit: this is what frustrates me about TSD videos on the internet:
> 
> 
> 
> >_<



Last thing first:



> The only thing I don't understand is what happened to the roundhouse? Didn't you block the kick? Or do you mean a roundhouse punch?



It's the roundhouse punch I was talking about. The guy's punching arm is way up there as a result of your overhead `block' and your other arm is curled under the upper part of that arm. You're in a great position now to do that kind of switch with your upper blocking arm so that you establish a  grip his punching arm from above and can jam it down around your `middle blocking' arm going under his shoulder. Now his shoulder is way hyperextended and a sharp powerful rotation of your hips away from him will force him downhe's got no choice, his shoulder is totally compromised, he's got no balance, etc. I've experimented with this application on various partners, at both slow and relatively quite rapid speeds and it works very well, as long as you're able to move your upper blocking hand quickly so that it rests on top of his deflected punching arm. That can be a little tricky, but it's something I try to drillI really think that being able to establish a grip on your oppo quickly, as a preliminary step in setting up a lock which you can then use to set up a finishing strike, is one of the key skills in this family of MAs, and it's one which I don't get the feeling is practiced nearly enough. Which brings up your second point:



JT_the_Ninja said:


> You know, that's something I've considered doing more than once, actually. The problem's always finding a partner(s) outside of class. I try to incorporate form combinations in sparring as much as I can, but yeah, that's a good idea.
> Ee Dan, especially with the first moves. So I get what you're saying about the double-block; that's one of our pyong ahn il soo sik combinations, pretty much.



Great idea, I can't recommend it highly enough! You only can work on so many things in class, but a lot of little details and refinements that are critical in making these techs we do work are really best practiced and studied in small groups of like-minded practitioners. 



JT_the_Ninja said:


> edit: wow, orange belt on this board already! woohoo!



You've been a good sport about all the flak we've been giving you, JTpartly out of frustration: when you've got something you think is good and you don't seem to be able to get someone to at least look at it, it can be very... well, frustrating. But check your rep count...


----------



## Makalakumu

JT_the_Ninja said:


> Well, that I know, we only have pyong ahn il soo sik. The videos you show look really cool, though. I think I get where the first one comes from keema hyung cho dan, but the second one's a mystery to me. Mind enlightening me? I probably won't want to practice them until/unless my sa bom nim shows them to me, but they do put a few parts of the form in somewhat clearer focus as to what they could also do.


 
The first one comes from a pretty obvious section right at the beginning.  It looks a little better when you actually bump uke with the opening counter, because that gets him bending over.  

The second one comes after the cross step, I just decided to take the lock to the ground in the rear mount because I'm more comfortable doing a RNC from that position.



> Often. As far as I know, in TSD it's just the choon bee stance for that form, setting you up to deliver the first move. It's clearly has block applications, though, especially since it leads into another block of the same nature. Certainly an important block too, when you think about what it's protecting


 
The opening move has uke grabbing your wrist same side.  Then, tori turns his hand so that he is looking into his palm.  At the same time, he delivers a heel kick to uke's knee.  Then tori reaches up with his other hand and grasps uke's over the thumb.  Tori, then draws both hands down to apply a wrist lock.



> And are there ones based on forms like sip soo and jinte? That'd be cool. Some of the moves in those just beg to be put into il soo sik.


 
Sure there are.  You just need to know what to look for.  Right now, I'm putting together a set for Chinto.  My ultimate goal is to have a set for every form that I do.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

exile said:


> Last thing first:
> It's the roundhouse punch I was talking about. The guy's punching arm is way up there as a result of your overhead `block' and your other arm is curled under the upper part of that arm. You're in a great position now to do that kind of switch with your upper blocking arm so that you establish a  grip his punching arm from above and can jam it down around your `middle blocking' arm going under his shoulder. Now his shoulder is way hyperextended and a sharp powerful rotation of your hips away from him will force him downhe's got no choice, his shoulder is totally compromised, he's got no balance, etc. I've experimented with this application on various partners, at both slow and relatively quite rapid speeds and it works very well, as long as you're able to move your upper blocking hand quickly so that it rests on top of his deflected punching arm. That can be a little tricky, but it's something I try to drillI really think that being able to establish a grip on your oppo quickly, as a preliminary step in setting up a lock which you can then use to set up a finishing strike, is one of the key skills in this family of MAs, and it's one which I don't get the feeling is practiced nearly enough.


Ah. Okay. In TSD we don't really use roundhouse punches; too easily seen and blocked, and too easy to break your hand. Again, it's still very much like pyong ahn ee dan, even to the uppercut (where you pull your opponent into you). Cool stuff. And yeah, I agree that there does need to be more emphasis on making sure your opponent is set up; that's part of the self-defensive nature of TSD - you attack where you make the opening. 


upnorthkyosa: 


> The opening move has uke grabbing your wrist same side. Then, tori turns his hand so that he is looking into his palm. At the same time, he delivers a heel kick to uke's knee. Then tori reaches up with his other hand and grasps uke's over the thumb. Tori, then draws both hands down to apply a wrist lock.


sounds like one of the cho dan ho sin sul I recently learned (just recently because they were just recently added to the stuff we gotta be able to do if asked at a test at cho dan level, or above). Whenever I do a shin kick, I always think of bassai so, though, since I don't usually think of keema hyung with kicks. Then again, I recently saw a video where this one cho dan did sip soo with kicks down the middle with his double outside-inside block/strikes, like in pyong ahn sam dan. 



> Sure there are. You just need to know what to look for. Right now, I'm putting together a set for Chinto. My ultimate goal is to have a set for every form that I do.



Awesome! I'm willing to be that they exist for higher-level black belts at my school, waiting for them to be shown to me. If not, though, someone should get to that! C.S. Kim Karate shouldn't be known for laxness!


----------



## exile

JT_the_Ninja said:


> Ah. Okay. In TSD we don't really use roundhouse punches; too easily seen and blocked, and too easy to break your hand. Again, it's still very much like pyong ahn ee dan, even to the uppercut (where you pull your opponent into you). Cool stuff. And yeah, I agree that there does need to be more emphasis on making sure your opponent is set up; that's part of the self-defensive nature of TSD - you attack where you make the opening.



No, most MAs in general don't use roundhousesas you say, it's too easily signaled (the shoulder movements alone are a `tell'). But we train against roundhouse punches, grabs that the assailant will employ prior to a headbutt or a groin kick, etc., because those are among the most common initial attacks by an untrained attacker. A lot of the really hard-core techs that these forms contain are really for use against a street assailantan untrained but still dangerously violent opponent. The UK combat-MA people call these `habitual acts of violence' (HAOV), a term coined by Patrick McCarthy as a label for the half-dozen or so moves one of which you can be pretty sure an assault will begin with. There are a huge number of good counters to these moves in the forms, so it seems likely that not much has changesthe people who created these forms decades, generations or centuries ago were very likely looking at the same kind of HAOVs from thugs on _their_ streets that we do today, and it was probably a good deal more common back then.

But it's true: once you see how the techs work, you have to drill them, and drill them, and drill them so you have to do virtually do thinking at all when it comes time to apply them. That's one of the best parts about `extracurricular' training with a few buddies who are on the same wavelength; you can just keep working the moves until they get driven into muscle memory and will come out fast, when you need them, adrenaline rush or no adrenaline rush...


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

JT_the_Ninja said:


> Often. As far as I know, in TSD it's just the choon bee stance for that form, setting you up to deliver the first move. It's clearly has block applications, though, especially since it leads into another block of the same nature. Certainly an important block too, when you think about what it's protecting


 
JT,
This is the part that very few understand...

In this hyung, the first technique doesn't come after your hands are placed in front of your groin...

You have to understand the culture that created to hyung to understand the meaning. We, as Americans meet on the street and start our introduction with a hand-shake. Such interpersonal contact didn't exist in the times that these hyung were created. If you were walking along and a stranger approached you, you would both face each other and bow as an act of courtesy.

Keep in mind; these hyung were the training tools of those early martial pioneers to prepare for defense, not compete in a tournament of earn a belt.

The bow "IS" the first technique in the hyung. Any time you begin a hyung with a fancy movement that brings your hands together as in Bassai, Naifhanchi, Shipsoo, and up the line, you are intercepting the aggressors incoming weapon and dealing with it. 

In hyung training; every move, every rotation has specific purpose. In what you call "Keema Hyung Cho Dan", when your hands arrive in front of your groin, you already have your opponent in a locking position. You are not in any way, shape of form protecting your groin. If you WERE protecting your groin with your hands in that position you would get all of your fingers broken...

It is that kind of misinformation passed down by instructors who have noreal clue as to what these hyung are teaching that we are all addressing in this thread.

You have continually stated that your Sa Bom's have taught you what every technique is for and that you know what you are doing... This implication as you state it that you are protecting your groin in this part of the hyung speaks to that misunderstanding of Bunkai that has been passed down for so long by those who THINK that they are masters in this art...

You stated earlier that you were not aware of the terms Bunkai, Henka and Oyo. Without these principles, hyung have no real meaning.

Bunkai = Application of technique
Henka = Variation in application
Oyo = The reverse side of the technique (what is the opponent doing to make you respond...i.e. punch, kick grab, etc.)

Understand these principles and you will see what makes sense and what doesn't.

Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## Makalakumu

Master Penfil

You've said before that we don't need to change the hyung that we practice and I see that.  We certainly can do alot with our hyung.  However, when it comes to almost everything else that Tangsoodoin are doing, it seems that THAT needs an upgrade.  

We can talk about applications for this or that form and maybe even get together with a partner and try to make some of it work, but unless we address all of the other aspects of our training, from kicho, to ill soo shik, to deh ryun, and even kyok pa, there will not be any systemized way of learning this material.  

This, for me, has been one of the most confounding parts of my journey.  I look at Naihanchi Chodan and I ponder over the type of information the student needs to learn and practice in order to really understand this form.  There is a big disconnect in the curriculum.  For example, in SBDMDK, at Red Belt, very little, if any, of the basics are applicable to actually performing the bunkai of this form.  SBD red belts are mostly learning the ariel TKD kicks... 

And it's not just the basics, it's the entire delivery system.  Houston, we've really got a problem now.  Not knowing the bunkai for the forms created a series of systematic disconnects that reverberates through the entire system.  And JT's comment regarding the opening move is just an example of what this causes.  (I'm not picking on you JT, I'm just illustrating a point and I'm glad that you are interested and reading what we have to say.)  How can you understand that technique if you don't break it down and practice all of the basics associated with it?

The bottom line is that I believe that teaching the bunkai reveals deep systematic flaws in the way that TSD was traditionally taught.  Just informing people that these bunkai exist isn't enough, because that is just the tip of the iceberg.  

upnorthkyosa


----------



## exile

upnorthkyosa said:


> Master Penfil
> 
> You've said before that we don't need to change the hyung that we practice and I see that.  We certainly can do alot with our hyung.  However, when it comes to almost everything else that Tangsoodoin are doing, it seems that THAT needs an upgrade.
> 
> We can talk about applications for this or that form and maybe even get together with a partner and try to make some of it work, but unless we address all of the other aspects of our training, from kicho, to ill soo shik, to deh ryun, and even kyok pa, there will not be any systemized way of learning this material.
> 
> This, for me, has been one of the most confounding parts of my journey.  I look at Naihanchi Chodan and I ponder over the type of information the student needs to learn and practice in order to really understand this form.  There is a big disconnect in the curriculum.  For example, in SBDMDK, at Red Belt, very little, if any, of the basics are applicable to actually performing the bunkai of this form.  SBD red belts are mostly learning the ariel TKD kicks...
> 
> And it's not just the basics, it's the entire delivery system.  Houston, we've really got a problem now.  Not knowing the bunkai for the forms created a series of systematic disconnects that reverberates through the entire system.  And JT's comment regarding the opening move is just an example of what this causes.  (I'm not picking on you JT, I'm just illustrating a point and I'm glad that you are interested and reading what we have to say.)  How can you understand that technique if you don't break it down and practice all of the basics associated with it?
> 
> The bottom line is that I believe that teaching the bunkai reveals deep systematic flaws in the way that TSD was traditionally taught.  Just informing people that these bunkai exist isn't enough, because that is just the tip of the iceberg.
> 
> upnorthkyosa



But UpNKy, this is a systemic problem that started when the karate that had originally been kata-based in Okinawa was exported to Japan and taught by masters who themselves were either weak on the bunkai or chose not to impart too much of it to the citizens of the `occupying power'.  Everything you're saying goes back at least a decade or more before the original Kwan founder learned their karate from GF, Toyama Kanken and others. The kihon routines, the use of kata as promotion checkpoints rather than compendia of combat techs to be ferreted out and trained hard... all of that stuff was going on in the first third of 20th c. Japanese karate. So the Korean striking arts constructed on that platform were bound to reflect those limitations... 

...and the problem you're noting with TSD (and of course, even more so maybe with TKD) is still endemic to most _karate_ training. Eventually, one hopes, the current back-to-bunkai and realistic applications movement now underway in the UK and certain other places may lead to a sea-change in karate curriculum, and even KMA curricula (thinking of Anslow's and O'Neil's work in this direction), but it's not going to happen overnight, because, I suspect, for a lot of karateka, let along KMAists, the problem isn't obvious. Not knowing what's underlying the kata, and the way that hidden technical repertoire needs to be trained, a lot of people in the karate-based arts just can't see what the fuss is about, I suspect...


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

John,
I have been telling you now for over a year that we need to get face to face so I can take you where you and everyone else here want to be...

I am already there, when will you join me?

As always, the invitation is open. Your place or mine...

Give me a call and set it up and we can put an end to the questioning; you will then have the answers...


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## crushing

I have some application questions that may vary depending on your organization.

Do you teach the bunkai right away as the student learns the execution of a form, or is the bunkai taught after the student learns the steps of the form?  Are whitebelts learning the ki-chos (or whatever your base forms are) taught the bunkai, or does the bunkai come in later in the training after they have an understanding of the basic techniques?

How much 'freedom' (for lack of a better word) do students have to come up with their own bunkai for a technique or set of techniques?  It seems that if a class has very many students that it may be easy to spend a lot of time discussing the possibilities.

Thank you.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> JT,
> This is the part that very few understand...
> 
> In this hyung, the first technique doesn't come after your hands are placed in front of your groin...
> 
> The bow "IS" the first technique in the hyung. Any time you begin a hyung with a fancy movement that brings your hands together as in Bassai, Naifhanchi, Shipsoo, and up the line, you are intercepting the aggressors incoming weapon and dealing with it.
> 
> In hyung training; every move, every rotation has specific purpose. In what you call "Keema Hyung Cho Dan", when your hands arrive in front of your groin, you already have your opponent in a locking position. You are not in any way, shape of form protecting your groin. If you WERE protecting your groin with your hands in that position you would get all of your fingers broken...


Well, I agree you'd probably want to extend it into a two-handed low block, but I also see your point. Reminds me of a few things my instructors have told me about various special choon bee stances, keema hyung cho dan included. In that particular case, I do seem to recall hearing that it was related to a ho sin sul technique, vaguely like when you cross to go back into chungul jase. The hand-over-hand, in fact, signals that more than anything else. Either way, that means the move right after that is breaking out before setting up the elbow to the forehead, I guess. I can imagine it in my head, at least.



> Bunkai = Application of technique
> Henka = Variation in application
> Oyo = The reverse side of the technique (what is the opponent doing to make you respond...i.e. punch, kick grab, etc.)
> 
> Understand these principles and you will see what makes sense and what doesn't.



Thanks. Are those Korean terms, or Japanese? I can't tell.


----------



## Makalakumu

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> I have been telling you now for over a year that we need to get face to face so I can take you where you and everyone else here want to be...


 
I would love meet up.  It's just a matter of money and time.  We live just far enough apart where its expensive to drive and flying isn't worth the cost.  In the meantime, I'm still learning by reading why you type and I appreciate that.



Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> ...we can put an end to the questioning; you will then have the answers...


 
One thing that would be helpful is to compare curriculums for our dojangs.  I would love to see what the requirements for a hyung/bunkai centered dojang look like.

Here is what mine look like...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34158


----------



## Miles

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> John,
> I have been telling you now for over a year that we need to get face to face so I can take you where you and everyone else here want to be...
> 
> I am already there, when will you join me?
> 
> As always, the invitation is open. Your place or mine...
> 
> Give me a call and set it up and we can put an end to the questioning; you will then have the answers...
> 
> 
> Yours in Tang Soo Do,
> 
> 
> Master Jay S. Penfil
> 
> 
> TANG SOO!!!



I have had the privelege of working out once with Master Penfil.  It was very educational and he is an exceptional instructional.  If you get the chance to do so, you should.  He is sponsoring Sensei Morris in May and if Master Penfil says this is going to be a great seminar, you can bet it will be.

Miles
(OK, going back to the TKD threads....


----------



## rustyself

man, i sure get jealous thinking about all you guys training together.  i live so far away (mississippi) it would be a miracle to get to goto detroit...

JT, about 2 years ago, i was introduced to TSD, and told of the 2000 year history, etc, etc...  Fact of the matter is, some people make it all the way to BB and never research the real history of the arts.  alot of what has been stated in this thread was hard to come to grips with for me at first, but i had to, because it is the truth.  
that doesnt make TSD any less special to me, indeed, i now know the true lineage of my art, and it makes it even better.

Master Jay, if you took the time to make a dvd series on bunkai, i would be your first customer...


----------



## mjd

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> I am already there, when will you join me?
> 
> we can put an end to the questioning; you will then have the answers...


 
There is a 1000 and more books, video, clips, ect on Bunkai on the web, a lot of it free, here's the real catch, everybody has a different understanding of what a particular move or technique in all of the Hyungs, in TDS yes we really call them Hyungs not Katas, Bunkai is the hottest Marking ploy going these days, google bunkai and you'll see for yourself. Don't get me wrong, I think it is important to understand indepth the hyungs, lets be real the Questions will never and should never end for anyone, no matter what the rank or history.

Bunkai is like the History of TDS, it has many versions.

Here is one link http://www.downloadkarate.com/index.asp?Sec_ID=156


----------



## robertmrivers

Good Stuff!

The only thing to watch for with the different perspectives on bunkai (it IS OK to have different perspectives on bunkai) is if the bunkai is not historically relevant. For example, many people watch a jujutsu technique...a wrist lock for example, and say to themselves...WOW that looks like this movement from this kata. Students and instructors alike need to be extremely careful with this. Karate is not jujutsu. The historical mentality of a person using karate to defend themselves 300 years ago is different than the person who would be using jujutsu. This is why there are internal principles taught through the dissemination of karate. The principles are different than what you see nowadays during jujutsu classes. However, if you notice that a jujutsu technique resembles the movement from the kata, DEFINITLEY make a note of it. Using the principles, it may be able to be "tweeked" a bit to become a more accurate explanation. I will say that the principles are more similar to koryu (old style) jujutsu (pre-meiji restoration) such as daito ryu or hontai yoshin ryu. 

There are a bunch of books out there concerning bunkai and changing perception in general. One is "The way of Kata". This book has a great decision making matrix in it that is a modern development of the internal bunkai principles. The other book to read, if you get the chance...is "My Journey With the Grandmaster" by William R. Hayes. He is a first generation student of Eizo Shimabukuro and really puts into words ways of changing the way you can look at kata. But, as MJD said, there is a lot of marketing involved and everyone now is a bunkai expert with a book. Truth be told...bunkai isn't even the right word...but I am not going to say it or it might be Grandmaster Jim Bob's next best selling book!! 

Anyway, let's keep it going. 

Master Penfil...I got your message a little late. Please let me know the next time you have a minute. Maybe we can touch base...

Rob


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

crushing said:


> I have some application questions that may vary depending on your organization.





crushing said:


> Do you teach the bunkai right away as the student learns the execution of a form, or is the bunkai taught after the student learns the steps of the form? Are whitebelts learning the ki-chos (or whatever your base forms are) taught the bunkai, or does the bunkai come in later in the training after they have an understanding of the basic techniques?
> 
> How much 'freedom' (for lack of a better word) do students have to come up with their own bunkai for a technique or set of techniques? It seems that if a class has very many students that it may be easy to spend a lot of time discussing the possibilities.
> 
> Thank you.


 
Everyone has their own idea as to when to teach Bunkai to a student. This goes along with the question; how much correction should I give a beginning student? Most instructors say that in the beginning you should just let them learn the general movement, and not get to deep into proper structure, as it may be too much for them to handle at one time. I believe that the student should learn about proper structure and foundation building technique right from the beginning. If I teach a student to see what his action is being used for and help him/her to establish the ability to VISUALIZE what they are doing they will become stronger and more proficient right from the start, and there wont be as many things to hone out of them in future training.

It is always easier to learn something right the first time and then repetitiously ingrain it into your muscle memory then to learn it wrong, ingrain it into your muscle memory and then have to change it.

Learning the Bunkai right from the beginning affords the student the ability to Partner Train, to find out if their structure will hold up or collapse under the pressure of the impact. Again, this is something that is far better understood in person then here in writing.




JT_the_Ninja said:


> Well, I agree you'd probably want to extend it into a two-handed low block, but I also see your point. Reminds me of a few things my instructors have told me about various special choon bee stances, keema hyung cho dan included. In that particular case, I do seem to recall hearing that it was related to a ho sin sul technique, vaguely like when you cross to go back into chungul jase. The hand-over-hand, in fact, signals that more than anything else. Either way, that means the move right after that is breaking out before setting up the elbow to the forehead, I guess. I can imagine it in my head, at least.





JT_the_Ninja said:


> Thanks. Are those Korean terms, or Japanese? I can't tell.


[/color]

JT,
You missed the description of the two hands coming down to their place in front of the groin

They are not dropping into a two handed low-block. They are intercepting an incoming attack and performing a joint lock, causing the attacker to find himself on his knees, facing to the right. The next technique (for this particular example) is to drop your weight on his wrist with the cross over step, raise your knee up and through his jaw, step into keema ja sae while stretching his right arm out in order to put his head in the position of you then catching his chin with your right hand and YANKING his head backward into your elbow. The actual contact point on his anatomy with your elbow will be the base of his atlas. This is a fatal blow if contacted correctly.

Bunkai like this one are the reason that Motobu saw this as the only kata that you really needed to learn to be successful in a real confrontation.

These terms are Japanese. These are principles that I learned in Okinawan and Japanese martial arts. I have never been taught these principles in any Korean class. That doesnt mean that they are not taught in any Korean class, just that I was never taught them in any Korean class.




upnorthkyosa said:


> I would love meet up. It's just a matter of money and time. We live just far enough apart where its expensive to drive and flying isn't worth the cost. In the meantime, I'm still learning by reading why you type and I appreciate that.





upnorthkyosa said:


> One thing that would be helpful is to compare curriculums for our dojangs. I would love to see what the requirements for a hyung/bunkai centered dojang look like.
> 
> Here is what mine look like...
> 
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34158


 
Hi John,
Have there been any further talks regarding having a seminar with your instructor or Master Nelson? How is he doing (health-wize)? Please pass along my regards to him.

I am in the process of writing a new Training Manual for my school. I will send you a copy once it is completed.




Miles said:


> I have had the privelege of working out once with Master Penfil. It was very educational and he is an exceptional instructional. If you get the chance to do so, you should. He is sponsoring Sensei Morris in May and if Master Penfil says this is going to be a great seminar, you can bet it will be.





Miles said:


> Miles
> (OK, going back to the TKD threads....


 

Hi Peter,
Thank you for your kind words here. I also enjoyed our session together and I am looking forward to having you in again when ever you have time.

How is the move coming along to the new location? I think that you have made a wise choice




rustyself said:


> man, i sure get jealous thinking about all you guys training together. i live so far away (mississippi) it would be a miracle to get to goto detroit...





rustyself said:


> JT, about 2 years ago, i was introduced to TSD, and told of the 2000 year history, etc, etc... Fact of the matter is, some people make it all the way to BB and never research the real history of the arts. alot of what has been stated in this thread was hard to come to grips with for me at first, but i had to, because it is the truth.
> that doesnt make TSD any less special to me, indeed, i now know the true lineage of my art, and it makes it even better.
> 
> Master Jay, if you took the time to make a dvd series on bunkai, i would be your first customer...


 
Hi Rusty,
We will at some point in the future put out a DVD series, and it will go into depth on all levels.
I have a good friend in Mississippi, Mr. Michael Pope. Do you know him? He is with the Tang Soo Do Mi Guk Kwan, and trains with Master Kevin Hemphill. 

Who are you training under?
What association are you with?

Introduce me to your instructor. Maybe we can set up a training session at your dojang




mjd said:


> There is a 1000 and more books, video, clips, ect on Bunkai on the web, a lot of it free, here's the real catch, everybody has a different understanding of what a particular move or technique in all of the Hyungs, in TDS yes we really call them Hyungs not Katas, Bunkai is the hottest Marking ploy going these days, google bunkai and you'll see for yourself. Don't get me wrong, I think it is important to understand indepth the hyungs, lets be real the Questions will never and should never end for anyone, no matter what the rank or history.





mjd said:


> Bunkai is like the History of TDS, it has many versions.
> 
> Here is one link http://www.downloadkarate.com/index.asp?Sec_ID=156


 
MJD,
You are absolutely correct here

There are thousands of practitioners out there who CLAIM to have deep rooted understanding of these principles

Many of them are legitimate, and can teach you a great deal though their taps, disks and books, if you have a solid foundation by which to work from. However, If you dont have a solid foundation already in place you will be lost in the process of searching out the truth from the fiction. You will also in many cases be open to injury for yourself, and or your training partners. 

These applications are on all levels from easy to extremely complex. It isnt just a matter of memorizing the general movements. It is also a matter of understanding anatomy, physiology and kinesiology as they pertain to martial application; understanding the ramification of action, etc.

Before you simply order/buy some material and try it be sure of what you are doing.




robertmrivers said:


> Good Stuff!





robertmrivers said:


> The only thing to watch for with the different perspectives on bunkai (it IS OK to have different perspectives on bunkai) is if the bunkai is not historically relevant. For example, many people watch a jujutsu technique...a wrist lock for example, and say to themselves...WOW that looks like this movement from this kata. Students and instructors alike need to be extremely careful with this. Karate is not jujutsu. The historical mentality of a person using karate to defend themselves 300 years ago is different than the person who would be using jujutsu. This is why there are internal principles taught through the dissemination of karate. The principles are different than what you see nowadays during jujutsu classes. However, if you notice that a jujutsu technique resembles the movement from the kata, DEFINITLEY make a note of it. Using the principles, it may be able to be "tweeked" a bit to become a more accurate explanation. I will say that the principles are more similar to koryu (old style) jujutsu (pre-meiji restoration) such as daito ryu or hontai yoshin ryu.
> 
> There are a bunch of books out there concerning bunkai and changing perception in general. One is "The way of Kata". This book has a great decision making matrix in it that is a modern development of the internal bunkai principles. The other book to read, if you get the chance...is "My Journey With the Grandmaster" by William R. Hayes. He is a first generation student of Eizo Shimabukuro and really puts into words ways of changing the way you can look at kata. But, as MJD said, there is a lot of marketing involved and everyone now is a bunkai expert with a book. Truth be told...bunkai isn't even the right word...but I am not going to say it or it might be Grandmaster Jim Bob's next best selling book!!
> 
> Anyway, let's keep it going.
> 
> Master Penfil...I got your message a little late. Please let me know the next time you have a minute. Maybe we can touch base...
> 
> Rob


 

Sensei Rivers,
As always, good stuff

The cell is on 24/7. Call at your convenience


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## Makalakumu

robertmrivers said:


> Karate is not jujutsu. The historical mentality of a person using karate to defend themselves 300 years ago is different than the person who would be using jujutsu. This is why there are internal principles taught through the dissemination of karate. The principles are different than what you see nowadays during jujutsu classes. However, if you notice that a jujutsu technique resembles the movement from the kata, DEFINITLEY make a note of it. Using the principles, it may be able to be "tweeked" a bit to become a more accurate explanation. I will say that the principles are more similar to koryu (old style) jujutsu (pre-meiji restoration) such as daito ryu or hontai yoshin ryu.


 
I've had the opportunity to train in both judo and jujutsu in the past and my teacher has spent alot of time training in ryukyu kempo and Takeda Ryu aikijutsu.  My teacher's knowledge of bunkai came from his studies with Sensei Jack and Bev Gustafson, from which I've benefitted.  

With that being said, we've still had to puzzle out alot of this on our own.  When you look at my requirement sheet, "interpreting" or "figuring" out the form is what is intended by the entire structure.  The bottom line is that we just don't have the lineage to go back to the source.  Thus, we are left with the best we can do.

I'm just not at the point where I can start to analyze the mindset between the different arts.  I can only try and find some meaning in these patterns that we practice.  So, in the terms of this discussion, it would really help if you would compare and contrast the two mindsets.  I know that you are worried that some uber-soke is going to step out of the closet and start reusing your words to market their bullshido, but all I can say is that their are a great many more practioners out there, like me, who are sincere and honest regarding their arts and we would really appreciate your perspective.  

The cost to benefit ratio is, by far, in our favor, IMHO...

upnorthkyosa


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> JT,
> You missed the description of the two hands coming down to their place in front of the groin
> 
> They are not dropping into a two handed low-block. They are intercepting an incoming attack and performing a joint lock, causing the attacker to find himself on his knees, facing to the right. The next technique (for this particular example) is to drop your weight on his wrist with the cross over step, raise your knee up and through his jaw, step into keema ja sae while stretching his right arm out in order to put his head in the position of you then catching his chin with your right hand and YANKING his head backward into your elbow. The actual contact point on his anatomy with your elbow will be the base of his atlas. This is a fatal blow if contacted correctly.




I'm aware of the form (though the knee part is new to me), though your insight is still useful to me. So you're catching the attack between your arms and then twisting, I take it? I think I see that. 

Also, I'm not an anatomy major; what's the "atlas?"


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Hi JT,


JT_the_Ninja said:


> I'm aware of the form (though the knee part is new to me), though your insight is still useful to me. So you're catching the attack between your arms and then twisting, I take it? I think I see that.
> 
> Also, I'm not an anatomy major; what's the "atlas?"


 
No
After your normal Chu Bee Ja Sae you then assume Naifhanchi Chun Bee by raising your hands (open like Soo Do position), bring them together and the lower them to the point where the rest in front of the groin in a completed Naifhanchi Chun Bee Ja Sae. That whole action of raising the hands in the open fashion depicts catching and locking the incoming punch and the lowering movement is (via the lock) taking the attacker to his knees.

The next step is the cross-over step. As you perform this step, you bend your knees and drop your center. This action causes the attackers wrist to either be broken, or causes him to be directed in the direction that you want him to go in (to the right). Either way, he will wind up where you want him through Pain Compliance. 

Your next action is to raise your right knee and step into Keema Ja Sae and throw your right hand out to an extended position. This action is your knee executing Moo Roop Cha Gi to his jaw, and stretching him out in order to give you access to his chin with your right hand. You grab his chin and, as I stated, you YANK him back to you as you strike his ATLAS with your left elbow.

Again, you must understand the concept of Hikite (the retracting hand). Tang Soo Do practitioners will usually ignore (in their conscious thought) the right hand and put all of the focus on the elbow. You must retract the right hand, holding him by his chin (jaw) with as much intensity as the elbow that is executing the attack.

This creates balance in your movement and brings him back to your center as opposed to you reaching with your elbow to contact the target.

The Atlas is the point at the base of the skull that attaches the cervical spine to the head. When one is struck at the Atlas with sufficient force, the C-1 vertebra can be severed from the skull and the nerve trunk can be so severely damaged that it will cause death, or in some cases total paralysis.

This is obviously NOT a target to strike if the attack against you is not intended to cause you serious harm. This is the kind of defensive strike that you would use in the case of a life or death situation with NO other options

There is a book that I have my students purchase from BORDERs that is always on their BARGAN table for $7.99+tax called ATLAS OF ANATOMY. I have used GREYS AMATOMY for 20+ year in order to understand the human body on a much deeper level, but this book is much easier to make sense of for the non-medical practitioner. It has awesome illustrations that are easy to pick apart in order to better understand what you are striking and how it can and will effect the receiver of your technique.

I suggest that everyone pick up a copy. It is a great teaching tool, and for only $7.99 its steel

P.S. JT, if money is tight and you want to discuss these things on the phone, send me your phone number in a PM or an email and I will call you so you don't incure the cost...


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## robertmrivers

Upnorth

Kudos to you for doing what you have done. I actually wasn't referring to your research...I was responding to the comment about looking at the mass media concerning bunkai that is available. You should keep doing exactly what you are doing.

Penfil San

I haven't quite figured out how to get something already on DVD format into a mpg or avi format, but, when I do I will post a 10 second clip of Oyata Sensei performing the beginning "saluation" of Naihanchi. I totally forgot about that video (produced in the '80s.) I took my old tape and digitized it so I could watch it on DVD. Anyway, when I show my students this...video of an Okinawan Grandmaster doing precisely what we are talking about here, they realize that I am not making this stuff up!! Sometimes we need to show material like that so that the black belts coming up through the ranks can trust that we are telling them the truth.


If you don't have the video, I will see if I can make a copy. If anyone else wants the video, do a search. It is an old B and W video of Taika Seiyu Oyata doing the Naihanchi kata, Pinan, Passai, and others. I'll see if I can find it somewhere and post the link. If you already have it, then you know what  I am talking about!!! This should be required material for the library of anyone looking at taking bunkai seriously.

Regards

Rob


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Master Jay: Ah. Okay, I see. So from the point where you have it locked (completed keema hyung cho dan choon bee), you've got them where you want, then. Cool. I also like the knee to the face while stepping into a stance. I will definitely have to remember that. Good incentive for picking up your feet.

Say you don't maneuver them so that their head faces away from you, though; would an elbow to the nose or in choong also be as effective? That's usually how I visualize it, especially because of pyong ahn sa dan. And I agree that's still only for life and death, since we're talking about il kyock pil sal techniques.


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

Sensei Rivers,
Thank you for the offer of sending a copy of Oyata Sensei. I have that tape already. I received a copy of it back in 1991-2 (???).

Watching him perform the applications is unique, as he actually practiced on living ukies, these techniques to their fullest extent without care or concern for their welfare. I am not familiar with any other practitioner that took his training in our lifetime to the limits that he did.

JT,
Whenever you have a lock on your opponent that is placed correctly, you can guide them anywhere that you want them to go, and face in any direction that you choose.

Prior to the time that I met with Kaiden-Shihan Garner Train in 1997, like most Tang Soo Do, and for that matter other Karate system practitioners, I thought that I knew what a joint lock was. When I met and began training in Hakko-Ryu Ju Jutsu with Kaiden-Shihan Train He introduced me to what I have come to understand is correct joint locking technique. 

I am certain that Sensei Rivers can elaborate here, as I am only a Shodan in this system while he is a Sandan under the same instructor

I have to get on the floor to start my 4:30 class


Have a great day, and have fun playing with this application with a training partner. Just apply the locking techniques with control, as not to cause unnecessary injuries. Joints break real easily if you go too hard.


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## exile

mjd said:


> There is a 1000 and more books, video, clips, ect on Bunkai on the web, a lot of it free, here's the real catch, everybody has a different understanding of what a particular move or technique in all of the Hyungs, in TDS yes we really call them Hyungs not Katas, Bunkai is the hottest Marking ploy going these days, google bunkai and you'll see for yourself. Don't get me wrong, I think it is important to understand indepth the hyungs, lets be real the Questions will never and should never end for anyone, no matter what the rank or history.
> 
> Bunkai is like the History of TDS, it has many versions.
> 
> Here is one link http://www.downloadkarate.com/index.asp?Sec_ID=156



It's true that there's a big market for bunkai analysesbut the reason isn't an artificial need created by some cynical motivational researcher working for a big ad agency. It's the result of a correct perception by a substantial minority of karateka that there is very important technical content in the kata they've learned which they aren't privy to, and which they realize is important to master.  To the extent that alternative bunkai for a given kata have real combat-application consequences, there is bound to be disagreement about which are better than others. But that doesn't mean there aren't somewhat objective, measurable guideliness for evaluating them. 

For example, Bill Burgar, in his book _Five Years, One Kata_ on bunkai for the Gojushiho kata, argues that it is possible to, as he puts it, `reverse engineer' katahis characterization of bunkai analysisin an optimal way by appealing to certain benchmark criteria that could, in principle, be given operational definitions. A bunkai for a given kata subsequence will be higher-valued, from Burgar's perspective, to the extent that it meets the following simplicity criteria maximally:

(i) it is simple to perform under stress;
(ii) it is simple to learn;
(iii) it is simple to maintain;
(iv) it is simple to execute under a wide variety of external conditions.

In addition, bunkai should identify applications which

(1) are proactive (as vs. reactive);
(2) forcibly keep the initiative with the defender;
(3) maximize safety;
(4) maximize redundancy (robust even if initial application is unsuccessful);
(5) works under the influence of a massive adrenaline such;
(6) piggybacks on instinctive behaviors;
(7) takes maximal advantage of the attacker's predictable responses;
(8) unbalances the opponent;
(9) leads, rather than follows, the mental responses of the attacker;
(10) makes maximal use of movement which require little or no practice to stay functional;
(11)  operate at realistic fighting ranges;
(12) avoid complex movements;
(13) makes significant use of transferable skills.

Burgar uses this checklist repeatedly in his book in explaining why certain technical interpretations of kata movements, i.e., certain bunkai, are to be preferred over others. There's no mystification involved; the way he presents bunkai analysis, it's basically an engineering problem. There may be different advantages to the relatively small number of bunkai that score high on Burgar's checklist, but the key point is that there are rational bases for rejecting certain kata apps while retaining others.

And all that is indendent of actual _experimentation_, with practice partners, of alternative bunkai. It's not like we simply have to listen to experts debate the advantages of doing it this way or that way or the other way. Will that block/deflection readily allows a muchimi transition to a controlling lock? _Try it out_, with a progressively less compliant uke, and see whether you can _impose_ compliance on him/her via the technique. If you can, then it's robust an deserves to be advocated as a high-value bunkai of that part of the kata. 

You see what I'm getting at? We don't _have_ to confine ourselves to bemoaning the proliferation of bunkai analyses; we have everything we need at our disposal to check out those analyses or any others we like and come to some plausible conclusions about whether they're really up to snuff... 



			
				robertmrivers said:
			
		

> There are a bunch of books out there concerning bunkai and changing perception in general. One is "The way of Kata". This book has a great decision making matrix in it that is a modern development of the internal bunkai principles. The other book to read, if you get the chance...is "My Journey With the Grandmaster" by William R. Hayes. He is a first generation student of Eizo Shimabukuro and really puts into words ways of changing the way you can look at kata.



For my money, the granddaddy of all the current active research on realistic kata bunkai is Iain Abernethy's _Bunkai-Jutsu: the Practical Application of Karate Kata_ (Neth Publishing, 2002). It was very obviously the inspirational touchstone for Kane and Wilder's _The Way of Kata_, which does, as you say, offer (like Burgar) a set of criteria for evaluating the combat utility of various alternative bunkai for a given kata subsequence. I believe that every book on bunkai of the past half decade is seriously indebted to IA's work. And let's not overlook the tremendous contribution of Rick Clark, whose book _Seventy-five Down Blocks_ is a real tour de force, showing the incredible combat versatility built into kata moves based on the simple, `basic down block' movement. 



			
				robertmrivers said:
			
		

> Truth be told...bunkai isn't even the right word...but I am not going to say it or it might be Grandmaster Jim Bob's next best selling book!!



Awww, c'mon, RMR. That's like telling a joke but refusing to pass along the punch line! What word are you thinking of??


----------



## robertmrivers

#@$% IT EXILE!!

Not only are you making sense but you are calling me out on my super top secret terminology!!!

Just kidding. I can't disagree with anything you said. Spot on. The material I was referring to is, every day I get a link to some youtube video of someone else teaching the "never before seen" secrets of kata from friends, students, and colleagues and it gets a little old. As with the other print material we have discussed, the books you mentioned should also be standard fare in everyone's library. A GREAT point you brought up is...having a technical base to "reverse engineer" kata is almost like cheating. I would recommend everyone get involved with a jujutsu study group to help with their training. I have several jujutsu books that I actually use as reference sources for my karate training. At least attend a seminar somewhere. Upnorth's work should be an inspiration to all KMA's. I think Master Penfil has something in the works...nudge nudge wink wink...

As for the word...it isn't a secret... most of you have probably heard of it or you can find it on any google search. But, the term "tichiki" translates as "what the hands are doing". It is a way of being more specific about the higher level details of the kata. Bunkai works fine...but there are a couple of other words you can use during class to sound like a real kata snob 

Just posted another installment on the web-site if you are interested. Makiwara is the topic...sorry ahead of time for the size of it. I couldn't do a session on drills in 2 minutes. I promise...they will be under 3 minutes in the future. www.martialminute.com

Regards

Rob


----------



## exile

robertmrivers said:


> #@$% IT EXILE!!
> 
> Not only are you making sense but you are calling me out on my super top secret terminology!!!
> 
> Just kidding. I can't disagree with anything you said. Spot on. The material I was referring to is, every day I get a link to some youtube video of someone else teaching the "never before seen" secrets of kata from friends, students, and colleagues and it gets a little old. As with the other print material we have discussed, the books you mentioned should also be standard fare in everyone's library. A GREAT point you brought up is...having a technical base to "reverse engineer" kata is almost like cheating. I would recommend everyone get involved with a jujutsu study group to help with their training. I have several jujutsu books that I actually use as reference sources for my karate training. At least attend a seminar somewhere. Upnorth's work should be an inspiration to all KMA's. I think Master Penfil has something in the works...nudge nudge wink wink...



Very sound advice, RMR! In a way, the jj stuff, from what I've seen, makes very explicit certain things that are left implicit in the kata (certain moves establish locks, others lead on to sweeps, etc.). 



robertmrivers said:


> As for the word...it isn't a secret... most of you have probably heard of it or you can find it on any google search. But, the term "tichiki" translates as "what the hands are doing". It is a way of being more specific about the higher level details of the kata. Bunkai works fine...but there are a couple of other words you can use during class to sound like a real kata snob



This is good to know, RMR, thanks much for the pointer. It's true, `bunkai' has a kind of very general meaning, as I understand it`analysis', is how I've usually seen it translated, but of course that is far from specific enough to really pin down just what you're doing when you do bunkai on a kata.



robertmrivers said:


> Just posted another installment on the web-site if you are interested. Makiwara is the topic...sorry ahead of time for the size of it. I couldn't do a session on drills in 2 minutes. I promise...they will be under 3 minutes in the future. www.martialminute.com
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rob



This is great stuff, Robthanks again!


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

robertmrivers said:


> As for the word...it isn't a secret... most of you have probably heard of it or you can find it on any google search. But, the term "tichiki" translates as "what the hands are doing". It is a way of being more specific about the higher level details of the kata. Bunkai works fine...but there are a couple of other words you can use during class to sound like a real kata snob



Man, that just makes me wonder all the more what the appropriate Korean term would be...

Another really cool Martial Minute, Robert. I usually spend most of the time before class starts pounding away at the bags, since (not being an Okinawan martial art) we don't have a makiwara. We do have a rough canvas bag with very little padding left mounted on the wall at punching height, though; I should practice on that more than I do. 

I find it interesting (and I'll probably make a separate thread to this effect) that you punch straight on, with the thumb upward. We always train with the twist at the end, so that even though we only punch with the first two knuckles, there's always that twist to get slightly more torque power behind it and to pull/tear the skin as we punch. 

I also find it strange that you only practice with one arm for most of that; my school has pounded into my head moving both arms together, to make sure to get a lot of waist twist into an attack. I guess that's not so crucial if it's just conditioning, though...either way, very intriguing stuff.


----------



## Makalakumu

robertmrivers said:


> A GREAT point you brought up is...having a technical base to "reverse engineer" kata is almost like cheating. I would recommend everyone get involved with a jujutsu study group to help with their training. I have several jujutsu books that I actually use as reference sources for my karate training.  At least attend a seminar somewhere.


 
I couldn't agree more.  There is so much cross over that, once you know what to look for, you'll easily be able to see the analogues.  However, and I know this from experience, seeing them and doing them are two very different things.  A teacher really helps.  The good thing is that judo and jujutsu are becoming fairly ubiquitous.



> Upnorth's work should be an inspiration to all KMA's.


 
Thanks, I can only hope that some of my work can live up to this praise.  I kinda see myself as a small fish swimming in the wakes of giants.



> I think Master Penfil has something in the works...nudge nudge wink wink...


 
Sigh.  I'm really hoping I can make it out there in April...



> As for the word...it isn't a secret... most of you have probably heard of it or you can find it on any google search. But, the term "tichiki" translates as "what the hands are doing". It is a way of being more specific about the higher level details of the kata. Bunkai works fine...but there are a couple of other words you can use during class to sound like a real kata snob


 
Is there a japanese word for "what the feet are doing?"



> Just posted another installment on the web-site if you are interested. Makiwara is the topic...sorry ahead of time for the size of it. I couldn't do a session on drills in 2 minutes. I promise...they will be under 3 minutes in the future. www.martialminute.com


 
This was a pretty cool video.  When I did shotokan, my sensei showed us how to work the makiwara, but since I was a kid, I didn't really get to do it much.  I must have a different style then the one you are using.  It's strapped up in my basement, so I'll have to get a picture when I can.  I'd love to see how you made yours.  Or if you bought it, where?


----------



## robertmrivers

JT

Thanks for the comments. I was punching with one hand because the camera was on that side! Your learning is correct. I was always taught 100 with the right, 200 with the left. But, once the coordination is there, keeping it 50/50 is correct. As for bringing the hand back to the hip...that is a whole different can of worms. Remember, you bring the hand back to the hip because there is something in it! You don't really punch someone like that in a self defense situation. Watch it again...watch my belt...there is plenty of hip. Again, the surface of kata is deceitful. Also, having both hands in front puts MORE power into the punch than bringing one side to the hip. I don't have time to explain it. Practice , practice, practice...maybe I'll do a Martial Minute on that...

My fist is not vertical...it is a 3/4 punch, about 45 degrees from being horizontal. As I said, there are many ways to hit the maki. This is my preferred way as it is also a typical way of hitting in Okinawa. Motobu Sensei taught me his (and his father's) method as well which is actually a little different. There are so many ways to do it.

The purpose of hitting the maki with the 3/4 punch is that when you actually make contact with the target, you're fist is not completely twisted. If it is, as in a typical TSD punch (or any punch from kata) then you are snapping your technique on the surface of the target. You should make contact at the 1/2 to 3/4 mark and the remaining twist is your follow through...you need penetrating power...not snapping power. You don't actually see the remaining twist on the maki because the board is pressing back on your arm and it just won't twist. You need to punch differently (and with less power) if you want to roll the hand over. If you hit the maki enough, it teaches you how to punch correctly. Making contact at that 3/4 mark (at the distance I was at, anyway...the fist is at a different position depending on the range) gives me the maximum musculo-skeletal strength to support my strongest punch (hitting with my whole body). 

You need to blast the heck out of that bag JT! Its there, put it to work! When it is all said and done, conditioning is conditioning. Anything is better than nothing. A heavy bag is actually the next best thing so hit it! I can show you how to make a makiwara. You may not be able to put it up at the dojo, but you can have one at your home...and you don't have to do Okinawan Karate to have one. If you want it, build it. I think you'd like it.

The purpose of the maki...and why we don't only hit a heavy bag, is the maki hits you back...if your arm is out of position, punching with the wrong knuckles, too much wrist twist, not enough hip, sloppy stance, etc the maki will "bite" you back. The oak plank is really stiff and offers a ton of resistance as soon as you make contact. It is truly one of the best teachers in the dojo...better than some of my black belts!! (just kidding). 

Anyway, hope you all get something out of it. Sorry again for the size...

Rob


----------



## robertmrivers

Upnorth

TICHIKI implies the feet as well (good question by the way). Remember, before karate was called karate, it was called TI (Di). Although it means hand, it has a deeper implication. Such is the confusion that is the Hogen dialect.

I had this particular maki made...the base anyway. Any welding shop should be able to put one together for about $20. I like the platform instead of mounting permanently because I can move it around...

Rob


----------



## tsdmgk1336

I haven't had a chance to set down and read the whole disscussion yet but I will. but I have one thing to say. Its because of people like Penfil Sbn that have opened my eyes to Bunkai,Oyo,and Hankai. And i'm becoming a more surious student than I have ever been before.


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

robertmrivers said:


> JT
> As for bringing the hand back to the hip...that is a whole different can of worms. Remember, you bring the hand back to the hip because there is something in it!



Something in it? Maybe explain that more, especially because my instructors yell at me if I only pull back to my hip, not the ribs. 



> You need to blast the heck out of that bag JT! Its there, put it to work!


I know, I know...



> The purpose of the maki...and why we don't only hit a heavy bag, is the maki hits you back...if your arm is out of position, punching with the wrong knuckles, too much wrist twist, not enough hip, sloppy stance, etc the maki will "bite" you back. The oak plank is really stiff and offers a ton of resistance as soon as you make contact. It is truly one of the best teachers in the dojo...better than some of my black belts!! (just kidding).



We have a really heavy bag, suspended from a metal frame, on one wall of our dojang, and let me tell you, it hits back and hits back _hard_. Punching it, and especially if you're kicking it, you gotta make sure you're hitting dead on and correctly.


----------



## robertmrivers

Pulling the hand back to the hip (or the ribs...or the center of the chest; depending on what style you are coming from) is done in kata. My particular style does all three depending on the kata. It is done in kata because you are grabbing something and pulling it to you. At the kihon level you may have blocked, grabbed the wrist of the punching hand and as you pull that wrist to your hip, off-balancing them, you punch them with the other hand. Chuden, Okuden, Naiden (Oyo...techniques progressively becoming more advanced) techniques are going to involve applying a specific technique which "looks" like the hand being pulled to the hip but may be a wrist lock, elbow, shoulder throw or any number of variations of them. 

You do not (not to sound imperialist...but you truly do not) pull the hand to the hip to "get ready" to punch with it. Again this is done in kata because there is something else in mind.

When you punch the maki or are doing any conditioning, you are not practicing kata. If you are conditioning a punch, you punch like you would in a fight...with you hands up. You don't see boxers pulling their hands back their hip. What you "see" in kata is not real. The kata is not the fight. It is a part of the fight. It is the part of the fight that happens after you have gotten out of the way, blocked, and distracted (usually). 

Like I said, there are many makiwara training methods. One way is visualizing the grab, pulling the guy close to you as you hit him...er...the maki. When I punch, there are lots of things I can visualize and every punch I do can be slightly different depending on what I am thinking. 

Another reason you are pulling to the ribs is to actually condition the body. But you can't simply pull the hand to the ribs. You have to be thinking about the isometric tension in the technique and where to focus on the body. For example, when you pull the hand to the ribs, think about your armpit. The Heart 1 tsubo point is there. If you get hit there, it could be detrimental to your happiness. So, pulling the fist to the ribs, pulling down with your lats, pushing out with your chest, and pushing the fist against your body actually strengthens the weak parts of your body that we know a trained practitioner is going to attempt to strike. This is one of the major functions of the kata Sanchin... to strengthen the numerous areas where vital areas are present so that when you do get hit there, your "armor" is protecting you. (I don't know why I bothered trying to write that...sounds like a martial minute topic to me...plug, plug)

Anyway, JT you seem to really be thinking a lot of this through...keep it up. If all we do is spark a little interest than we are doing our job. Hope this helps

Rob


----------



## robertmrivers

Oh 

As for the heavy bag, I know everything "hits" back (at least that's what Newton says) but the maki actually "springs" back, like a catapault. Having this action available will add a little to the training. For example, if you put your feet together, then hit a heavy bag, sometimes the bag moves enough to where you are still standing there. But, if you hit a wall you will bounce off of the wall. The wall's stance is stronger than yours. When you hit the maki, you actually launch off of the board due to the spring action. 

Its just something to add to your repertoire if you can find one.

Rob


----------



## exile

robertmrivers said:


> Oh
> 
> As for the heavy bag, I know everything "hits" back (at least that's what Newton says) but the maki actually "springs" back, like a catapault. Having this action available will add a little to the training. For example, if you put your feet together, then hit a heavy bag, sometimes the bag moves enough to where you are still standing there. But, if you hit a wall you will bounce off of the wall. The wall's stance is stronger than yours. When you hit the maki, you actually launch off of the board due to the spring action.
> 
> Its just something to add to your repertoire if you can find one.
> 
> Rob



The good thing about the heavy bag is that it punishes errors severely, so you better be accurate. A few times a week I go and do sets of kicks against a hanging 100lb bag, mostly rear-leg side kicks and roundhouse kicks. If you do a rear-leg side kick and your impact point isn't your heel, but is instead midfoot, you can really hurt your foot, beause all that force applied at that point into the unforgiving surface of the back winds up `jamming' your tendons at the top of your foot just where the foot and the lower leg meet. And the next day, you can have a hard time walking. As you might have guessed, I speak from bitter experience here...

Still, it's very good to have a major incentive not to make careless errors, eh?


----------



## Chizikunbo

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> *Josh,*
> I went on line to look for Hanshi Gordon Garlands book, entitled
> *The Art of The Jo, Cane and Te no Euchi*.
> I could not find it anywhere.
> 
> Please post the ISBN number and where you purchased it.
> 
> If you are able to pick up a copy and send it to me I will send you payment for what ever it costs. Thank you
> 
> 
> *Sensei Rivers,*
> Thank you for your input here on this subject
> 
> If you could post the ISBN number for *Watashi no Karate Jutsu* I would appreciate it. I have trained in Motobu-Ha S h i t o-Ryu here in Michigan under Shihan Garner Train since 1997. Shihan Train is an excellent instructor, and trained directly under Soke Shogo Kuniba in his home in Virginia for 15 years. Much of what I teach with regard to Bunkai, Henka and Oyo came from this lineage.
> 
> I would enjoy anything written by the Motobu family.
> 
> Also, please contact me directly when you have a moment to talk. I would like to get to know you and if possible, get together for some good training
> 
> 248-561-5700
> 
> 
> Yours in Tang Soo Do,
> 
> 
> Master Jay S. Penfil
> 
> 
> *TANG SOO!!!*


 
Hello Master Penfil,
Actually Garland Hanshi is a personal friend of mine, and he gave me a copy of his book, which was self published, and is no longer in production.
However I will email you on the subject.
If you are able to make it out to Michels wedding in may we should meet in the center sometime, as I would love to share some of these things with you...
--Josh


----------



## Chizikunbo

JT_the_Ninja said:


> Master Jay:
> 
> 1) None. I'm a Tang Soo Do student, there's not enough time or physical energy to train in another style, at least not for me. I practice one art as hard as I can push my body, so what I can do I can do better than if I spread myself around.
> 
> 2) None. I don't consider that to be a requisite. I train under Sa Bom Nim Robert Venturino at the Oakmont C.S. Kim Karate school, International TSD Federation.
> 
> 3) Although I almost exclusively train at my home school in Oakmont (I don't have a car or the money to be driving everywhere), I have trained at the main dojang in Monroeville, under C.S. Kim personally. That is also where I take my recertification tests. Through those, I've come into contact with other kyo sa nim and sa bom nim around the area. I also go to the National All-Martial Arts Tournament sponsored by Master Kim every year, held in Pittsburgh (again, I don't have a car or money, so I go to tournaments when I can and where I can), so that I can meet and compete against practicioners from other schools, not just TSD. If you want to "enlighten" me, I'll be there this May.
> 
> 4) I learn what I learn in class, from my sa bom nims. What I say is what I've learned in class and as I practice the forms myself. Note that I have identified myself several times as an e-dan; I'm nowhere near a master.
> 
> What all of you don't seem to realize is that while I entirely respect other martial arts and their forms, especially ones from which TSD got its forms (btw, Hwang Kee didn't bring TSD to Korea --- TSD has been studied for centuries, as historical evidence shows), I do recognize that I train under TSD, so whatever similarities the forms I have learned will have with those of other styles, they are still separate forms, with potentially very different moves and different applications. I do not judge any form based on its moves, nor do I care if some people do some techniques differently due to style differences. All I ask is that nobody tell me that TSD is really _only_ a debased or copied version of another martial art. The people who created and shaped TSD through the years got their ideas from all over the place: the Tang in Tang Soo Do is a reference to the Tang dynasty in China, and even on my dobok there are Chinese characters (according to the Korean mode). I fully accept that not all of the moves and forms of my style were created out of the blue by the original TSD masters.
> 
> I also fully believe, however, that the forms as they exist in TSD today are just as valid, and to learn them is to do them and to learn them well is to study what each move does. That does not implicitly require me going back previous to the creation of TSD to learn how to do do what has been handed down, in one form or another, over the 1500-year history of Tang Soo Do.
> 
> 
> robertmrivers: I realize my post to you was a bit incensed, but I've put up with people downplaying the validity of TSD for a while now. Sorry for whatever undue offense you took from that. You will admit, though, that it sounds a bit odd for someone who doesn't study TSD to be lecturing those who do. You might also note that I didn't hinge my respect of the keema hyung completely on them being useful when you're against a wall; I like them more because they focus on movement control, timing, and proper technique. For being among the shortest of hyung, they pack a punch.


 
Jt,
I am really lost and again perplexed and confused as to your logic herein, I would suggest you open GM Hwang Kee's "Soo Bahk Do Tang Soo Do Vol 1" and read from the Preface, from which I quote "...Korean proverb: The Monk was not interested in the (religious) Service, but was only interested in taking the food after the Service"...
This has profound relevence here, you can go to your dojang everyday, every week every month, for years on end, perform the hyung, perform the hyung, but this will not get you to the heart of the art. Performing a sequence of movements means nothing without a true effort to seek out the real contents of them. It would appear as though you are enjoy TSD (or you would not be here), and yet you do not want to reach into the unknown waters of what is really there. If you think of hyung as being static exercises of blocks, kicks, and strikes, you will never achieve success. Master Penfil and others have put alot of time and effort into trying to open your eyes to the rest of the world, and yet you refuse to acknowledge the truth only seeing to your door, not what awaits outside of it. The level of knowledge of some of the instructors on this forum is often unmatched, take advantage to the full! You are not going to betray your style, or instructor(s) by looking beyond as it is the only way the we can progress as human beings, by putting ourselves out there to learn and understand. I suggest you take some serious time to do your research into the REAL history of this art, and then the pieces fall together in harmony, but you have to take the step. Confucious once said 'The journy of a lifetime begins with a single step' put on your shoes and go, because the world awaits. Just because TSD came from other styles does not make it a lesser system or DO, but refusing to understand the undiscovered true knowledge of the art we all practice and hold dear is doing the art no service...
On a final note, "In order to drink from the river, you must first empty your own cup"...strive to cultivate an open and vast mind called "Kong Shim" in Korean...best wishes on your journey!
Tang Soo!
--Josh


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Chizikunbo: You should read all of the posts after that (though it might take a couple hours) before commenting on something I posted several pages ago. 

If you'd read that, you'd know that I've stated over and over again that I most certainly do _not_ see hyung as either (1)static or (2)just series of techniques. They are not static because humans change, and ideas change. They are not just series of techniques because each of those techniques has to be doing something, and there are combat applications behind each of the hyung. I do actually look into this quite intently while trying to better my form. It's easy to learn to put your body into certain positions, but that's just performing. Hyung are a lot more than that.


----------



## Chizikunbo

Many apologies JT, I realize that last night after I posted that, but alas cannot figure out how to delete it, In any case good luck with your study.
--josh


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil

robertmrivers said:


> JT





robertmrivers said:


> Thanks for the comments. I was punching with one hand because the camera was on that side! Your
> My fist is not vertical...it is a 3/4 punch, about 45 degrees from being horizontal. As I said, there are many ways to hit the maki. This is my preferred way as it is also a typical way of hitting in Okinawa. Motobu Sensei taught me his (and his father's) method as well which is actually a little different. There are so many ways to do it.
> 
> The purpose of hitting the maki with the 3/4 punch is that when you actually make contact with the target, you're fist is not completely twisted. If it is, as in a typical TSD punch (or any punch from kata) then you are snapping your technique on the surface of the target. You should make contact at the 1/2 to 3/4 mark and the remaining twist is your follow through...you need penetrating power...not snapping power. You don't actually see the remaining twist on the maki because the board is pressing back on your arm and it just won't twist. You need to punch differently (and with less power) if you want to roll the hand over. If you hit the maki enough, it teaches you how to punch correctly. Making contact at that 3/4 mark (at the distance I was at, anyway...the fist is at a different position depending on the range) gives me the maximum musculo-skeletal strength to support my strongest punch (hitting with my whole body).
> 
> *You need to blast the heck out of that bag JT!* Its there, put it to work! When it is all said and done, conditioning is conditioning. Anything is better than nothing. A heavy bag is actually the next best thing so hit it! I can show you how to make a makiwara. You may not be able to put it up at the dojo, but you can have one at your home...and you don't have to do Okinawan Karate to have one. If you want it, build it. I think you'd like it.
> 
> The purpose of the maki...and why we don't only hit a heavy bag, is the maki hits you back...if your arm is out of position, punching with the wrong knuckles, too much wrist twist, not enough hip, sloppy stance, etc the maki will "bite" you back. The oak plank is really stiff and offers a ton of resistance as soon as you make contact. It is truly one of the best teachers in the dojo...better than some of my black belts!! (just kidding).
> 
> Rob


 
Sensei Rivers,
I have to disagree with this post (in only some areas). We as westerners have, in the process of striving to be the strongest, toughest, most powerful of all martial practitioners have taken our training to such extremes that we have in many cases involved ourselves in SELF-DAMAGING training.

It is extremely important to incorporate impact training such as heavy bag and makiwara in order to develop focus, power, timing and depth perception. It is more important to keep in mind where the energy is going to wind up at the end of each repetition, and the long-term effects of such training.

I have seen in past years, many of my instructors from Korean, Japanese and Okinawan systems go through hip and knee replacements do to such over-training. The energy will, without exception, always return to your body and take its toll on your joints and spine.

Rather than pressing on the thought that one should; blast the heck out of that bag, it would be better to discuss correct structural alignment and use of power to develop the highest level of ability, without a state of over-kill.

*The second paragraph of this post is on the money, but I will add to the thought process here*

In most Japanese and Korean systems, as well as some Okinawan systems practitioners are taught to rotate the fist to a position that has all of the knuckles on the same level (side to side). The problem with this is that such rotation causes the ulna and radial bones to pull on the humorous, causing the humorous to rotate out of the shoulder socket. This causes the connection to the Latissimous Dorsi and the Teres Major to be stretched out and left unable to hold the shoulder in tact at the point of contact.
(See illustration from Greys Anatomy at this web address: http://www.bartleby.com/107/illus412.html)

This rotation will also cause the Trapezius to become engaged, causing possible damage to the cervical spine. This is do to the manor in which the Trapezius connects from the shoulder to the spinal column. When Martial arts practitioners are taught to keep their shoulders squared to the front (the opponent) this issue is worsened. 
(See illustration from Greys Anatomy at this web address: http://www.bartleby.com/107/111.html#i385)

When I discuss correct verses incorrect alignment as taught by many associations I am in almost all cases referring to what is safe for he practitioners own structure during the execution of the technique, as well as the practitioners ability to successfully execute the technique, without having his/her body collapse on impact due to incorrect alignment.

I have studies skeletal structure, muscle expansion and contraction, along with breathing techniques for different kinds of movement for 35 years. It is a necessity for anyone learning martial arts to establish a serious understanding of the human body and how it works (and can be damaged), in order to develop fully.

With regard to the impacting point and the rotation of the fist during punching:
I teach my students that they should not start to rotate their fist at all prior to making impact. They should train themselves to make contact at the point that the elbow is at a 135 degree angle. If they rotate the fist prior to contact, they have already spent their power. If they make contact prior to reaching the 135 degree angle and meet serious resistance, they will be jammed, and the punch will be wasted and useless. If they make contact after the 135 degree angle is achieved, they will not have enough penetration left to cause the needed trauma to drop the aggressor. If they make contact at the 135 degree angle (with proper body position) and can than drive through their target with full force, and the rotating of the fist will increase the torque behind the punch.

It is important to understand proper hip rotation at this point as well. To simply blast the striking apparatus without all connection points working together is a waste of time. 

*Remember:*
Mass repetitions of incorrect technique will NEVER teach the practitioner how to improve themselves. It will only make them stronger in the wrong fashion. 

Correct execution is what builds us in a positive fashion


Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil


TANG SOO!!!


----------



## robertmrivers

Amen Jay san

Oh, the "blast the heck" statement was more of a "stop letting the bag collect dust in the corner" statement. I agree with you one hundred percent. You can hit too hard and it is not good for you. A lot of people try to get the heaviest bag or I have even seen people triple up on the boards on the makiwara. Whatever you hit has to flex as to not jar the body in a detrimental way. In chinese medicine, the lung, heart, small intestine and large intestine run through the wrist. It is taught that if you are punching too hard or are hitting a target that does not give enough that the wrist joint is being jarred in turn jarring these meridian points which can hurt your well-being. I also  know people who have serious health issues form repeatedly breaking bricks, and ice. 

Great physiological references by the way. I am going to add those to my library immediately. Thanks.

Rob


----------



## exile

Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> In most Japanese and Korean systems, as well as some Okinawan systems practitioners are taught to rotate the fist to a position that has all of the knuckles on the same level (side to side)...
> 
> With regard to the impacting point and the rotation of the fist during punching: teach my students that they should not start to rotate their fist at all prior to making impact. They should train themselves to make contact at the point that the elbow is at a 135 degree angle. If they rotate the fist prior to contact, they have already spent their power. If they make contact prior to reaching the 135 degree angle and meet serious resistance, they will be jammed, and the punch will be wasted and useless. If they make contact after the 135 degree angle is achieved, they will not have enough penetration left to cause the needed trauma to drop the aggressor. If they make contact at the 135 degree angle (with proper body position) and can than drive through their target with full force, and the rotating of the fist will increase the torque behind the punch.



This makes excellent sense to me; I've seen somewhere an anatomical comparison of a full-twist punch and a 3/4 and it's very clear that in the former, the radius and ulna cross over each other, which is a distinctly weaker skeletal platform for delivering force than the corresponding bone configuraiton in the 3/4 punch, in which both bones are aligned straight, so that they wind up parallel to each other. A full-twist punch into a heavy bag, from my own experiments, puts much greater stress on your forearm as a result. It feels insecure and weak, as vs. the 3/4 punch, which feels, by comparison, like a steel battering ram. Way better wrist supportit's not even close!




Master Jay S. Penfil said:


> It is important to understand proper hip rotation at this point as well. To simply blast the striking apparatus without all connection points working together is a waste of time.



Also true. The correct application of hip torque yields tremendous power in every punch, even the front-hand jab. It just takes lots and lots of practice...


----------



## JT_the_Ninja

Good points all, Master Jay. When thinking about how I'd punch, it's clear to me that I'd never be making contact at the point where my fist is level anyway. The twist around is, as I said before, to add a twist into the punch, so that you pull the skin, making it hurt quite a bit even if you don't whale on the person full blast (believe me, my instructor's done that to me more than a few times). 

I also agree about the point when you start twisting. I'm taught to keep my fist palm-side up until my elbow has just passed my body, leaving the snap for the very end, so that the moment of impact still has all that power behind it. 

That philosophy shows up all over the place, in fact. Looking at keema hyung cho dan, with the two-fisted blocks/strikes to either side (or, if you want to see it probably a better  and more accurate way, the shoulder grab and throw to the ground) the snap comes at the very end. So when you bring your left fist against your neck, pick up your left foot and stomp, the left hand stays palm-inward until the end, so all the snap comes with all the power; same goes for the other side (that second snap is going to help if you think of it as a throw too, I'd think). It's one of the things I'm always having to pound into the heads of my juniors when I'm tasked with teaching/working with them on (for example) a hyung.


----------



## Makalakumu

We have about 4 different discussions going in this thread that deserve their own thread.  Please check out some of the new threads that I'm going to start on these topics and please feel free to share information that was shared here in those threads.  

There is alot of golden stuff buried deep in this thread and it needs to be unlocked...


----------



## exile

upnorthkyosa said:


> We have about 4 different discussions going in this thread that deserve their own thread.  Please check out some of the new threads that I'm going to start on these topics and please feel free to share information that was shared here in those threads.
> 
> There is alot of golden stuff buried deep in this thread and it needs to be unlocked...



Sounds great, UpNKybring it on!!


----------

