Is Taekwondo progression all just memorization?

[BaehrTKD]

It's very simple - they teach what they know. Until his death Han Cha Kyo TK-D / ITF Pioneer only taught the first 20 patterns. (With a Chung Do Kwan Flavor) I asked Nam Tae Hi about this and he said "That is what was in his head." Now like many Koreans GM Han formally Separated from General Choi around 1980 or so. I think he was married to General Choi's niece so I expect they may still have been in communication.

Agreed.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Nope. There's nothing hidden. It's all right there in plain sight. Assuming you understand the movements and the principles, at any rate.

As martial artists we should probably stop saying hidden and refer to things based on levels of understanding. Movements may have multiple applications and some moves just don't make sense until someone sees the application of it.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I don't understand the issue. Every martial art I have ever trained in required memorization, I don't see how TKD is different. In bjj I was taught techniques and line drills (they were forms, I don't care what any bjj bro says, they were bjj forms) and I had to drill them relentlessly until I had them memorized and could use the concepts I learned from them while rolling. Same in TKD, I learned techniques and forms and had to memorize them, then demonstrate I could use the concepts in various types of sparring and active resistance partner drills.

I suspect that skribs is referring specifically to rank testing which is primarily based on demonstrating a specific list of techniques, combinations, and forms on command. There are relatively few BJJ schools which utilize that sort of testing.

I'd also personally distinguish between learning techniques and memorization of specific choreographed sequences. I might teach a combo in class to show how one technique can set up another or I might give the class a warm-up drill with several movements chained together, but I would never demand that students reproduce those specific combos or sequences for a test.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I suspect that skribs is referring specifically to rank testing which is primarily based on demonstrating a specific list of techniques, combinations, and forms on command. There are relatively few BJJ schools which utilize that sort of testing.

I'd also personally distinguish between learning techniques and memorization of specific choreographed sequences. I might teach a combo in class to show how one technique can set up another or I might give the class a warm-up drill with several movements chained together, but I would never demand that students reproduce those specific combos or sequences for a test.

If I had to create testing. Forms would be one. Sparring and application would be another, and video analysis of sparring would be another.
Tech application would be done in sparring they would need to be able to apply at least 4 techniques or variatof the techniques from the form. They would need to spar against some below their level and against an nstructor who lowers the intensity to the level of the student. This will give the instructor a front row seat to access the students understanding. The instructor should present openings for the student to take advantage of. Sparring would be light.

Sparring would be twice a week. One session would be advertised as training cardio. The second session would be application. People are afraid of sparring so I need a way to slowly dip them into that environment.

Sparring in testing would be about understanding application and set up and not about winning. It's more important to see the mental process in action than to see if they can win with basic kicking and punching.

I think this alone will greatly reduce the percentage value that form memorization would play. They would still need to know the form but they would need to know beyond that.

Someone who is good in application in bad in for could still pass but they would be required to continue to train that form as part of their new rank training. They just couldn't butcher the form.

 

[JowGaWolf]

If I had to create testing. Forms would be one. Sparring and application would be another, and video analysis of sparring would be another.
Tech application would be done in sparring they would need to be able to apply at least 4 techniques or variatof the techniques from the form. They would need to spar against some below their level and against an nstructor who lowers the intensity to the level of the student. This will give the instructor a front row seat to access the students understanding. The instructor should present openings for the student to take advantage of. Sparring would be light.

Sparring would be twice a week. One session would be advertised as training cardio. The second session would be application. People are afraid of sparring so I need a way to slowly dip them into that environment.

Sparring in testing would be about understanding application and set up and not about winning. It's more important to see the mental process in action than to see if they can win with basic kicking and punching.

I think this alone will greatly reduce the percentage value that form memorization would play. They would still need to know the form but they would need to know beyond that.

Someone who is good in application in bad in for could still pass but they would be required to continue to train that form as part of their new rank training. They just couldn't butcher the form.

In social settings, the firm is still a very good way to represent a system without giving away all your secrets and strategies to the world. It also doesn't require a partner.

 

[Dirty Dog]

If I had to create testing. Forms would be one. Sparring and application would be another,

That's pretty much how most of us do it. We also do breaking, as a way to demonstrate the ability to generate and deliver power. And because it's fun.

and video analysis of sparring would be another.

We don't do this, but it's not a bad idea. I've long used the Coaches Eye app on my iPhone to provide feedback in class.

Someone who is good in application in bad in for could still pass but they would be required to continue to train that form as part of their new rank training. They just couldn't butcher the form.

We require all students to continue to train the forms they've already been tested on.

 

[skribs]

I don't understand the issue. Every martial art I have ever trained in required memorization, I don't see how TKD is different. In bjj I was taught techniques and line drills (they were forms, I don't care what any bjj bro says, they were bjj forms) and I had to drill them relentlessly until I had them memorized and could use the concepts I learned from them while rolling. Same in TKD, I learned techniques and forms and had to memorize them, then demonstrate I could use the concepts in various types of sparring and active resistance partner drills.

My BJJ school is very much move-of-the-week and has been moving more into what's called "esoteric training" (or something like that). Typical class at my school is:

1. Warm up with a game. This game may be one player has to prevent the other from standing up, or one player starts with a locked-in submission that the other has to work their way out of.
2. Drill technique. This technique isn't really memorized, as we will do a different variation or a different technique from the same position in the next class. We'll usually do 2-3 techniques per class. We need to "memorize" them for the duration of the drill, but not as a rote memorization that we're going to come back to every day.
3. Pass/sweep from the position-of-the-week.
4. Live roll from the position-of-the-week.
5. Live roll from the feet.

We don't have memorized warmups at all anymore.

 

[skribs]

I suspect that skribs is referring specifically to rank testing which is primarily based on demonstrating a specific list of techniques, combinations, and forms on command. There are relatively few BJJ schools which utilize that sort of testing.

I would be surprised if there are any that do it in the way that TKD does it.

The ones I've seen on Youtube are something like, "Demonstrate 3 sweeps from closed guard", in which the student could pick the sweeps. Or even "demonstrate a scissor sweep."

How it would be if you were to take BJJ and turn it into a TKD thing would be, "Show me Closed Guard Technique #1", and then you would start in closed guard, do a scissor sweep, land in half guard, pass with a knee cut, transition to knee-on-belly, then mount, then submit with an Americana. If you...

• Land in side control, you did it wrong
• Pass with a tripod pass, you did it wrong
• Submit the "wrong" arm, you did it wrong
• Grab the collar first instead of the arm (because you were taught to grab the arm first and then the collar), you did it wrong

From what I've seen in BJJ test videos, if what you did works, it's good enough for the test. And often that is the test, whether you were able to make the techniques work or apply the most important points correctly. Not whether you did the exact same sequence of movements as your Professor did when he taught you. Or that your Professor thinks is the "correct" version today, even if it's not the version he taught you.

 

[skribs]

You also dodged my reply earlier when you were talking about me to another user.

I've put you on Ignore because I completely distrust and disagree with you on pretty much everything you say.

So yes, I am dodging you. I'm going to go back to doing so.

 

[skribs]

That's pretty much how most of us do it. We also do breaking, as a way to demonstrate the ability to generate and deliver power. And because it's fun.

One thing I've done (actually based on a comment you made a few years ago) is to try and make sure there isn't a whole lot in my curriculum that's going to be boring to test.

For example, instead of having white belts test on a form that's 90% "step forward and punch" and then test on blocks, just have the white belt form include all of the blocks.

 

[JowGaWolf]

One thing I've done (actually based on a comment you made a few years ago) is to try and make sure there isn't a whole lot in my curriculum that's going to be boring to test.

For example, instead of having white belts test on a form that's 90% "step forward and punch" and then test on blocks, just have the white belt form include all of the blocks.

What makes testing difficult? Remembering the names?

 

[Dirty Dog]

One thing I've done (actually based on a comment you made a few years ago)

I said something useful? I apologize. In future, I'll try to do better. Or worse. You know what I mean...

is to try and make sure there isn't a whole lot in my curriculum that's going to be boring to test.

I practice 6 kicho, 8 Palgwae, 8 Taegeuk, 9 Yudanja, and 24 Chang Hon forms. Plus a few weapons forms I've picked up over the years. None of them are boring.
If the test material has gotten boring, it's possible they should have tested sooner, I think.

For example, instead of having white belts test on a form that's 90% "step forward and punch" and then test on blocks, just have the white belt form include all of the blocks.

If you really mean all the blocks, then I think that's an awful lot for a white belt. I suspect you'll see new students becoming frustrated, which leads to quitting. Or you'll have to let them be pretty sloppy and improve those techniques later. You'll also have to introduce multiple stances in the white belt form. While they can certainly be used from a Front Stance, I think you will find that initial learning of things like a Diamond Middle Block or a Double Mountain Block from Front Stance is less than ideal.

Our Kicho 1 form teaches Ready Stance, Front Stance, Low block, Middle Punch, Kiap, and turning both 90 and 180 degrees.

The other Kicho forms (there are 6) are paired with a Palgwe, so from 9th geup on, students are learning 2 forms.

Kicho 2 adds High Blocks and High Punches. Palgwae 1 teaches Back Stance, Double Knifehand Middle Block, Outside Middle Block, Inside Middle Block, and Palm Up Knifehand Strike.

Each form (or form pair) reenforces the things learned in earlier forms as well as introducing the student to a few new movements.

I suspect you will find that trying to introduce more than 1-2 (each) new stances, blocks, and strikes in a single form may be problematic.

 

[Dirty Dog]

What makes testing difficult? Remembering the names?

I don't think testing should be difficult. All "testing" really is, as I see it, is a chance to show off for your family and friends. If there's any doubt about the students ability to perform the test material at an acceptable level, they shouldn't be testing.

 

[skribs]

If you really mean all the blocks, then I think that's an awful lot for a white belt.

I mean all the white belt blocks.

Actually 83.33% of them.

I don't think testing should be difficult. All "testing" really is, as I see it, is a chance to show off for your family and friends. If there's any doubt about the students ability to perform the test material at an acceptable level, they shouldn't be testing.

I think this is almost verbatim what you said a couple years ago.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I mean all the white belt blocks.

That makes more sense. There's certainly no reason not to include all the movements/techniques for a given rank in the form(s) they're learning. I don't think that doing so is necessarily a better or more efficient way than those currently in use, but it's not necessarily worse, either. That would be an extremely subjective judgement, in most cases.

I think this is almost verbatim what you said a couple years ago.

Probably. I've said it on more than one occasion. It's something I've nearly always believed, and something most of my own instructors have believed.

 

[skribs]

That makes more sense. There's certainly no reason not to include all the movements/techniques for a given rank in the form(s) they're learning. I don't think that doing so is necessarily a better or more efficient way than those currently in use, but it's not necessarily worse, either. That would be an extremely subjective judgement, in most cases.

It's not something I've done throughout all of them. Just Form 1. Although there are sometimes hints of other things (for example, Form 3 includes elbows and a spinning strike at the belt where I have elbows and spinning strikes).

 

[HighKick]

@HighKick Huh? I didn't make any mention of Han Cha Kyo.
I agree with Earl Weiss. @Earl Weiss

My inference was about teaching what you don't know, or what you don't know well enough to teach.
I suspect GM Han had different motivations.

 

[Gwai Lo Dan]

It is interesting that your instructor (who I have never heard of) named his form set Ki-Bon since 'kibon' means basic. Go figure.

I've seen this pattern at a school I attended, (not the school in the video), and the KJN (a Korean) called it "kibon poomsae - basic pattern", as in the video. But that was the only "Kibon" poomsae at that school.

 

[drop bear]

I would be surprised if there are any that do it in the way that TKD does it.

The ones I've seen on Youtube are something like, "Demonstrate 3 sweeps from closed guard", in which the student could pick the sweeps. Or even "demonstrate a scissor sweep."

How it would be if you were to take BJJ and turn it into a TKD thing would be, "Show me Closed Guard Technique #1", and then you would start in closed guard, do a scissor sweep, land in half guard, pass with a knee cut, transition to knee-on-belly, then mount, then submit with an Americana. If you...

• Land in side control, you did it wrong
• Pass with a tripod pass, you did it wrong
• Submit the "wrong" arm, you did it wrong
• Grab the collar first instead of the arm (because you were taught to grab the arm first and then the collar), you did it wrong

From what I've seen in BJJ test videos, if what you did works, it's good enough for the test. And often that is the test, whether you were able to make the techniques work or apply the most important points correctly. Not whether you did the exact same sequence of movements as your Professor did when he taught you. Or that your Professor thinks is the "correct" version today, even if it's not the version he taught you.

In stage fighting. The guy taking the fall is doing all the work.

 

[skribs]

In stage fighting. The guy taking the fall is doing all the work.

True, but I don't see what it has to do with what I said.