dont buy the official taekwondo training manual

[IcemanSK]

As a Chung Do Kwan student, we do Basai & Yum Bee (that book calls it "Yun Be"). I've got an email into GM Sell asking which other early hyungs he did in his early training. (Curiosity has gotten the best of me). I'll let you know what I find out.

 

[Laurentkd]

Lauren—take a look at Tang Soo Do: the Ultimate Guide to the Korean Martial Art by Kang Uk Lee (1999, Unique Publications). It has all five of the Pyung Ahns, very well illustrated, with a sequence of photo displaying the moves followed by a chart showing correct foot positions for each of the moves—an unusual pairing of graphic aids that makes the intended motions as transparent as possible.

There are a number of other Okinawan kata forms in there, though the Rohai we do is a bit more elaborate than what Lee's book gives.

I like this book myself. http://www.amazon.com/Tae-Kwon-Clas...2827138?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179516641&sr=8-2

It's a book of the classic Chung Do Kwan forms up to the dan levels. It has the usual Japanese set of forms like Bassai, Rohai performed with the Korean flavor to then (more back stances than cat stances, and side kicks are present in the Pinan/Pyong An forms). The book is charmingly illustrated with drawings rather than photos and this can actually make it easier to understand. The book also has several Kuk Mu sets which is a bonus. I think these forms were taught only in the Chung Do Kwan and Oh Do Kwan lines.

Thanks to you both! I'll have to check them out.

 

[Laurentkd]

Were Pyung Ahns taught in all kwans originally or only some?

 

[exile]

Were Pyung Ahns taught in all kwans originally or only some?

I wish I knew, Lauren. That kind of question is the sort of thing we don't have very good information about—critical information about dojang practice in the founding era of the modern Korean MAs, and we still aren't sure about who was doing what, and training how.

That said, there is a superb thread from a couple of years ago on this. Check out

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-27597.html

and you will find out more than you want to know about the Pinan/Heian/Pyung Ahn forms, who was doing what when, and how the O/J/K versions are related—as well as a lot more than you want to know about the degree of boorishness that some people can bring to what should be an amiable, mutually informative discussion. But read to the end and you'll also be enouraged, I believe, as I was, to see that even a persistently nasty tone can be marginalized and damped down if the rest of the posters on the thread implicitly decide amongst themselves that that they're going to force the conversation to adhere to some kind of basic civility. So there really is a huge amount of information about both technical content and constructive discourse in this thread!

 

[Callandor]

http://www.amazon.com/Official-Taek...3445702?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179198129&sr=8-1

Bad stances, the authors demo high punches and kicks when the text often calls for middle kicks, and even the wrong foot forward once, get richard chun for good taekwondo, i cant believe the wtf stamped its approval on this....seriously a middle punch is not above the nose =\ nor is a middle front kick above the head

I just got my copy last week after ordering it two months ago and sad to say, all the comments as quoted above are so so true. Talk about wrong timing. This thread is posted two months late.:waah:

 

[Laurentkd]

I wish I knew, Lauren. That kind of question is the sort of thing we don't have very good information about—critical information about dojang practice in the founding era of the modern Korean MAs, and we still aren't sure about who was doing what, and training how.

That said, there is a superb thread from a couple of years ago on this. Check out

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-27597.html

and you will find out more than you want to know about the Pinan/Heian/Pyung Ahn forms, who was doing what when, and how the O/J/K versions are related—as well as a lot more than you want to know about the degree of boorishness that some people can bring to what should be an amiable, mutually informative discussion. But read to the end and you'll also be enouraged, I believe, as I was, to see that even a persistently nasty tone can be marginalized and damped down if the rest of the posters on the thread implicitly decide amongst themselves that that they're going to force the conversation to adhere to some kind of basic civility. So there really is a huge amount of information about both technical content and constructive discourse in this thread!

Thanks! I'll check it out in the morning. I need to rep people more often so that I can rep you when I want too!

 

[exile]

Thanks! I'll check it out in the morning. I need to rep people more often so that I can rep you when I want too!

Lauren, it's really the thought that counts—it's a cliché, I know, but things get to be clichés only when they're mostly true, eh? So thank you!

I'm constantly amazed at what a tremendous wealth of information there is on MT... it's like an interactive encyclopædia with articles written by your friends. Those back threads stuffed away in the archives have some outstanding content in them.