Different types of Tang Soo Do?
- Thread starter JoeW
- Start date
JT_the_Ninja
Black Belt
Every federation, style, whatever, might do things a bit differently. For example, my federation, the International TSD Federation, does not do the chil sung and yuk ro series of forms, while others do. Also there are going to be some differences in technique teaching, names, etc. I don't know if one style is necessarily better than any of the others (although some are certainly more traditional than others), since that's going to vary by dojang/instructor and by each student's own individual commitment. Martial arts is, at least in part, a GI-GO system (Garbage In - Garbage Out), where no matter how good the teacher, you get out of the training what you put into it.
Others will no doubt have more information on the various federations, so I'll leave that to them.
Others will no doubt have more information on the various federations, so I'll leave that to them.
I would say the main difference between the different federations and organizations is the Grandmaster. There is basically only one art of Tang Soo Do OR Soo Bahk Do, although they all go by different names now. When the grandmasters split off, they did it largely to be able to teach their own material their own way, but almost all of them still say that they are "loyal to Hwang Kee's vision."
Though the US Soo Bahk Do Federation is the only one that can legally claim Hwang Kee's vision and such (through the management of his son, HC Hwang), the others were almost all trained directly by him or very closely indirectly.
You will find many minor differences between them, such as the performance of Chil Sung/Yuk Ro hyung, minor differences in applications, teachings, and even techniques (some emphasize the use of Huri more than others). In general though, all of the orgnanizations are basically the same in the art that they practice.
Something that can be very revealing is the name of the organization. For example, some name the organization after the grandmaster (Cheezic), some name it based on some permutation of the name of the style (International Tang Soo Do Federation), some use Korean to convey the point (Ki Guk Kwan - American school); I personally feel that the name can reavel a lot about that particular organization or style.
Though the US Soo Bahk Do Federation is the only one that can legally claim Hwang Kee's vision and such (through the management of his son, HC Hwang), the others were almost all trained directly by him or very closely indirectly.
You will find many minor differences between them, such as the performance of Chil Sung/Yuk Ro hyung, minor differences in applications, teachings, and even techniques (some emphasize the use of Huri more than others). In general though, all of the orgnanizations are basically the same in the art that they practice.
Something that can be very revealing is the name of the organization. For example, some name the organization after the grandmaster (Cheezic), some name it based on some permutation of the name of the style (International Tang Soo Do Federation), some use Korean to convey the point (Ki Guk Kwan - American school); I personally feel that the name can reavel a lot about that particular organization or style.
The way I see it there are basically two types. There is the newer MDK type with the new forms and the older type with the Traditional forms(WTSDA, CS Kim etc). Even then they are still pretty similar. I have trained and competed with clubs from various backgrounds and apart from small differences in forms and some training methods there is not much difference.
I'm curious what you mean by the "newer MDK type?" Particularly the distinction between what you consider new forms and older type forms?
I would call schools that practice the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro hyung the "newer type" TSD and would consider the Pyung Ahns Bassai etc to be the "older type" forms. The orgs and Gm's that left The MDK when Hwang Kee introduced the new hyung etc I would consider to be old style
I realise that there are many schools that practice both sets of forms and some practice a few from certain sets. In my experience schools that have Moo Duk Kwan in thier title tend to practice at least some of the Chil Sung set and are more likely to have midnight blue belts and trim as opposed to black.
I realise that there are many schools that practice both sets of forms and some practice a few from certain sets. In my experience schools that have Moo Duk Kwan in thier title tend to practice at least some of the Chil Sung set and are more likely to have midnight blue belts and trim as opposed to black.
Aside from the US Soo Bahk Do Federation, what other organizations have the title Moo Duk Kwan in their name? I was under the impression that the Federation was taking legal action against anyone (other than TKD MDK) who used the term Moo Duk Kwan officially as part of their name.
As for the US SBD Fed, we do all of the Chil Sungs, and Yuk Ros, AS WELL AS all of the "traditional" Japanese based hyung (Pyang ahn, bassai, naihanchi, etc). I am aware of a few other federations that also use the Chil Sung Hyungs (Hwa Rang World TSD Federation, United Kingdom TSD Federation), but I don't know of any others who use the Yuk Ro series.
I really don't know if there is any set rule regarding the Midnight Blue vs. Black. Hwang Kee's original intention was that we all wear Midnight Blue, but some of the other federations have switched to black. In fact, in Korea, we wore black, despite being a part of the Korean Soo Bahk Do Association (A member of the World Moo Duk Kwan, with the US SBD fed and the other worldwide SBD orgs).
As for the US SBD Fed, we do all of the Chil Sungs, and Yuk Ros, AS WELL AS all of the "traditional" Japanese based hyung (Pyang ahn, bassai, naihanchi, etc). I am aware of a few other federations that also use the Chil Sung Hyungs (Hwa Rang World TSD Federation, United Kingdom TSD Federation), but I don't know of any others who use the Yuk Ro series.
I really don't know if there is any set rule regarding the Midnight Blue vs. Black. Hwang Kee's original intention was that we all wear Midnight Blue, but some of the other federations have switched to black. In fact, in Korea, we wore black, despite being a part of the Korean Soo Bahk Do Association (A member of the World Moo Duk Kwan, with the US SBD fed and the other worldwide SBD orgs).
Aside from the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro hyung, I really see no major difference between the styles. There was for a while, some legal issues regarding the organizations other than the US SBD Fed using the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro hyung. The final court ruling though, was that hyung are combinations of movements and fall under the same rules as a dance and therefore cannot be copyrighted. The Federation can try to prevent other people from making money on them though, as they are still the intellectual property of the Hwang family.....but that's a whole other discussion!
I have heard that too, there are at least two in the Uk that still have Moo Duk Kwan in their title. The UKTSDF and the EMTF still do, perhaps there has only been legal action in the US so far.
I was under the impression that it was black originaly and midnight blue was adopted later.
I stand corrected, I had heard that the UKTSDF still used the MDK. I have HEARD, unsubstantiated, that they were allowed to based on Master Lee's standing. Being that he is (as far as I know) the highest ranking, living TSD/SBD practitioner in the world, he may be exempt.
I don't know much about the EMTF. I did a quick search and it doesn't seem that they are affiliated with another org and I can't find who their master is. I don't know much about that one.
That could very well be true, I'm not sure when the change happened or if it was always that way. I know that GM Hwang Kee has worn midnight blue for a long time and that his reasons were largely philosophical - the whoel black representing an ending thing.
Yossarian stated that he recognized two types: the older MDK type and the newer MDK type. This is where I make the distinction between Tang Soo Do (TSD) and Soo Bahk Do (SBD).
For instance, many seniors (Moo Duk Kwan Dan Bon less than 2000) consider TSD as the base style and SBD sprouted from it. The seniors would mention that Soo Bahk Do is utilizes Chil Sung and Yuk Ro Hyungs. Some Tang Soo Do organizations do not utilize the Chil Sungs, and the ones that do utilize the Chil Sung Hyungs usually only go up to Chil Sung Sam Ro Hyung. An example that utilizes a limited amount of Chil Sung Hyungs would be Grandmaster Kang Uk Lee's organization (UKTSDF) in the United Kingdom. Also, keep in mind that some of these Grandmasters teach a limited amount of Chil Sung Hyungs because that was all they had learned prior to leaving the US Tang Soo Do Federation and/or Grandmaster Hwang Kee.
With regard to the flavors of TSD, one must keep in mind that the some of the Grandmasters that left the US Tang Soo Do Federation were sued or threatened to be sued by that organization and as a result these Grandmasters were forced to modify the forms in one way or another. Two great examples of this are the World Tang Soo Do Association and the International Tang Soo Do Federation. If you watch their members do their forms, the techniques are similar but the forms are a bit different from the way it was originally taught at the Moo Duk Kwan. In some cases the techniques themselves were changed as well.
I cannot speak to the litany of smaller organizations (most of which are in the US) that have splintered from the main organizations.
It is true that as soon as Grandmaster Hwang Kee passed away, someone decided that the US Soo Bahk Do Federation would go after anyone that utilized the Moo Duk Kwan name/symbol in the United States. I suspect that the reason they have not gone after Grandmaster Kang Uk Lee has more to do with International Law and copyrights versus his low dan bon. Afterall, the US Soo Bahk Do Federation had no issue going after Grandmaster Jae Joon Kim (dan bon 38). Then again Grandmaster Jae Joon Kim lived in the USA.
I hope this helps.
For instance, many seniors (Moo Duk Kwan Dan Bon less than 2000) consider TSD as the base style and SBD sprouted from it. The seniors would mention that Soo Bahk Do is utilizes Chil Sung and Yuk Ro Hyungs. Some Tang Soo Do organizations do not utilize the Chil Sungs, and the ones that do utilize the Chil Sung Hyungs usually only go up to Chil Sung Sam Ro Hyung. An example that utilizes a limited amount of Chil Sung Hyungs would be Grandmaster Kang Uk Lee's organization (UKTSDF) in the United Kingdom. Also, keep in mind that some of these Grandmasters teach a limited amount of Chil Sung Hyungs because that was all they had learned prior to leaving the US Tang Soo Do Federation and/or Grandmaster Hwang Kee.
With regard to the flavors of TSD, one must keep in mind that the some of the Grandmasters that left the US Tang Soo Do Federation were sued or threatened to be sued by that organization and as a result these Grandmasters were forced to modify the forms in one way or another. Two great examples of this are the World Tang Soo Do Association and the International Tang Soo Do Federation. If you watch their members do their forms, the techniques are similar but the forms are a bit different from the way it was originally taught at the Moo Duk Kwan. In some cases the techniques themselves were changed as well.
I cannot speak to the litany of smaller organizations (most of which are in the US) that have splintered from the main organizations.
It is true that as soon as Grandmaster Hwang Kee passed away, someone decided that the US Soo Bahk Do Federation would go after anyone that utilized the Moo Duk Kwan name/symbol in the United States. I suspect that the reason they have not gone after Grandmaster Kang Uk Lee has more to do with International Law and copyrights versus his low dan bon. Afterall, the US Soo Bahk Do Federation had no issue going after Grandmaster Jae Joon Kim (dan bon 38). Then again Grandmaster Jae Joon Kim lived in the USA.
I hope this helps.
It is true that Soo Bahk Do utilizes the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro Hyung, but they ALSO use the entire Pyang ahn series, as well as the rest of the traditional Japanese hyung. I have had the opportunity to train in four different organizations in both Korea and the US and honestly, the use of the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro forms is the only major difference that I have seen. Granted, there are many minor differences to how the hyung are performed (e.g. in Korea, we did Pyang Ahn Oh Dan with a Soo Do, then choong dan kong kyuk, in the US SBDF, there is no soo do and the knee is lifted prior to the punch), but generally very minor. Some other differences would be how much the use of hip is exagerated, placement of the hands in Hugul jaseh soo do techniques, some of the intermediary movements (e.g. palm up vs palm down), etc. But none of these change the basic philosophy or application of the art. For these reasons, I really see TSD and SBD as still being a single art, with multiple interpretations.
My Korean instructor only knew 3 of the Chil Sung hyung and 1 Yuk Ro....but he also knew all 10 Ship Dan Kuhm, which none of the Americans know. Does this change the style? No, simply changes some of the hyung that are performed.
Basically I don't believe that whether an organization does or does not do certain hyung is enough to make it "new" or "old" or "traditional," etc. Aside from the use of those hyung, the base art remains.
That is a good point. I am honestly not sure what made the distinction as to who was allowed to continue using the names/symbols and who was not. What I had heard about Lee, Kang Uk was only rumor. I do know that in Korea, Kwan Jang Nim HC Hwang personally approached many of the older Dans who were still using the name, but were no longer associated with the Korean SBD Association or World MDK, and asked them to stop. Some responded by simply going to TSD, some did nothing, some did nothing more than changing the Hanja on their patches from "Soo Moo Bahk" to "Tang Soo Do" or "Tang Moo Soo" or some other permutation. I've seen quite a few combinations of hanja on the bottom of the "Fist" logo. In Korea, the copyrights are not enforceable, I do not know how the international law works in Great Britain though. We do have some members on the board here from England, so I will definately approach them and ask them to comment.
Hi chaps. I freely admit that I know next to nothing about Tang Soo Do but many moons ago I did train in contract law as part of my accountancy qualification. That's as close as I can get to copyright law for you, I'm sorry to say.
Is the question whether copyright exists in the symbols of Moo Duk Kwan? It would depend on a few things.
Firstly, if this is just a phrase in Korean, then it cannot be copyrighted - private individuals cannot claim ownership of specific words. You can copyright a book because that is an artistic creation made using words but you cannot copyright the words themselves.
However, if it is a copyrighted symbol of an organisation (e.g. words and images as a logo or words written in a specific style and design) then copyright does exist through international agreements. This assumes that the copyrighting body is recognised in this country.
That being said, when the copyright was registered, it would be for a specific period and if that has expired then anyone is free to use the 'object' as they wish.
Also, if the design is changed by a certain legally agreed amount (colours, shape etc) then copyright is not infringed.
Further, an individual or organisation can be given permission to use a copyrighted object - so if that was done by the copyright holder, without time restriction, then, regardless of the wishes of subsequent holders, copyright is not breached.
I'm just firing off general principles here but I might be able to dig up a more specific answer if you chaps can give me more to work on?
Is the question whether copyright exists in the symbols of Moo Duk Kwan? It would depend on a few things.
Firstly, if this is just a phrase in Korean, then it cannot be copyrighted - private individuals cannot claim ownership of specific words. You can copyright a book because that is an artistic creation made using words but you cannot copyright the words themselves.
However, if it is a copyrighted symbol of an organisation (e.g. words and images as a logo or words written in a specific style and design) then copyright does exist through international agreements. This assumes that the copyrighting body is recognised in this country.
That being said, when the copyright was registered, it would be for a specific period and if that has expired then anyone is free to use the 'object' as they wish.
Also, if the design is changed by a certain legally agreed amount (colours, shape etc) then copyright is not infringed.
Further, an individual or organisation can be given permission to use a copyrighted object - so if that was done by the copyright holder, without time restriction, then, regardless of the wishes of subsequent holders, copyright is not breached.
I'm just firing off general principles here but I might be able to dig up a more specific answer if you chaps can give me more to work on?
I don't personally think that any one is better than any other, or more legitimate. Many people will say that the US SBD Fed is the most legitimate organization, since they are the "direct descendent" or Hwang Kee....but every other organization has grandmasters who were trained either directly by GM Hwang Kee or by those close to him. It seems to me that every organization does their best to produce quality students, they just have different organizational structures.
I have definately heard of ATA TKD, I can say that what I have heard is not positive, but so much of it is based on the individual instructor that it is hard to make an organization-wide generalization. I dont' think that within the TSD/SBD world there are any organizations that are known for being belt factories. I haven't heard anything bad about ANY of them.
I have definately heard of ATA TKD, I can say that what I have heard is not positive, but so much of it is based on the individual instructor that it is hard to make an organization-wide generalization. I dont' think that within the TSD/SBD world there are any organizations that are known for being belt factories. I haven't heard anything bad about ANY of them.
cdunn
2nd Black Belt
Copyright isn't quite the right part of the law to be running through, though it's in the right ball park: "Soo Bahk Do", "Moo Duk Kwan" and a couple of other permutations are Registered Trademarks, in conjunction with training in the martial arts, while 'Sports games and physical fitness exercises' are not subject to copyright law. http://www.uspto.gov has the pertinent info, if you do the searches, while http://www.copyright.gov/register/performing.html has a popup labled 'pantomime and choreographic works' with the information about sports / exercise. While, in theory, the Chil Sung / Yuk Ro hyung could have been patented at one point, the term of expiration on any filable patent is far past; these form names are not trademarked, and probably cannot be realistically trademarked.
If I understand correctly, this means that no organization can lay legal intellectual claim to any of the components of the Soo Bahk Do system, however, no one except the organization to which the Soo Bahk Do and Moo Duk Kwan names are registered are able to brand themselves Soo Bahk Do or Moo Duk Kwan. This is where lawsuits can come in to play.
Any "extra legitimacy" of the US SBD Fed comes from KJN Hwang Kee and KJN Hwang JC, not from anything on file with the US government.
IMHO,the philosophy of Tang Soo Do has morphed into something else which is described as Soo Bahk Do. It is interesting to me to see a certain person in the USSBDMDK Federation strip away the respect that the late Grandmaster Hwang Kee had for his early students, without whom Tang Soo Do Moo Duk Kwan would not have spread world wide as it did. I am not saying that this person is not correct in doing so by enforcing the Moo Duk Kwan name/symbol, but clearly a philosophical shift has occurred. Also, the promotion of the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro hyungs over the TSD Hyungs is very obvious. If you examine the Geup and Dan requirements for the USSBDMDK Federation, you will see it as well. The name chang that occurred in the mid to early 1990s also signifies this philosophy change as well.
I really do believe they are different styles with different action philosophies. On the surface they appear to be the same, but when you dig into them you will see the differences. The differences are in the techniques, forms, and philosophies. For me, this is enough to separate them as different styles. For you, it may not be. I don't think there is a right or wrong here. It just comes down to do you lump things together or splint things apart.
Respectfully,
Master K
I really do believe they are different styles with different action philosophies. On the surface they appear to be the same, but when you dig into them you will see the differences. The differences are in the techniques, forms, and philosophies. For me, this is enough to separate them as different styles. For you, it may not be. I don't think there is a right or wrong here. It just comes down to do you lump things together or splint things apart.
Respectfully,
Master K
