Karate is kata, kata is karate

[pdg]

When I say they are all surface-level, I mean there is no Tier-1 application, and within TKD there isn't a push for a Tier 2 or Tier 3 understanding. A lot of it sits at that Tier 1 movement, with no Tier 1 application. Maybe I need to re-work my model, add in Tier 0 as the movement in the form, with Tier 1 as the literal application. That makes more sense.

So applying that to the double-knife-hand, as it is trained in KKW TKD:

• Tier 0: Double-knife hand block, chambered with both hands to one side, executed with the main hand in front and off-hand at your solar-plexus.
• Tier 1: ??
• Tier 2: ??
• Tier 3: ??

Now, we can do the analysis. It can be done as a self-study elective by a TKD student, or as a part of normal training by a Karate student. We can come up with:

• Tier 0: See above
• Tier 1: ??*
• Tier 2: This motion is similar to a wrist lock or a choke escape. It can also be similar to a leg sweep this way or that way. It can also be similar to a block and strike to the ribs.
• Tier 3: This motion teaches the body mechanics of how to move both hands together. It shows putting your off shoulder into the block, which translates will into a strike-and-counter motion. It teaches how to move your shoulders with your hips during turning motions, which is useful for sweeps.

*I put a ?? here, because we did discover in this thread, the Tier 1 application could simply be to teach the concepts in Tier 3, and there isn't actually a direct Tier 1 application. If so, it hasn't really been made clear. The specific details I had a problem with (the orientation of the off-hand, for example) seem to fit this purpose. There may be a better Tier 1 fit, but there isn't a practical one, not that you or I could find.

To be honest, a lot of the Tier 3 stuff wasn't apparent to me until today. The Tier 2 was, but I was still left with that burning ?? at Tier 1. And we can talk more and more about Tier 2, and fill it with paragraphs and paragraphs of information, but there's still that nagging ?? at Tier 1.

Now, maybe I missed it, but I don't think anyone actually took the time to say "there is no direct application for that movement." There wasn't anyone to say "you train that movement this way, because of X." @pdg is the first person to answer that question, in the many threads I've brought it up. As much as I've been arguing with him in this thread, I don't think he realizes just how grateful I am that he made this clear to me, because it's something I have been struggling with for years. There may not be a direct Tier 1 application, but at least there is a Tier 1 purpose of the form that translates to the Tier 3 analysis.

With that in mind, the Tier 2 analysis does not require a Tier 1 application in order to be performed. Your analysis pretty much proves this, because you could do that Tier 2 analysis without the Tier 1 application. All of that Tier 2 analysis serves a great purpose, a good mental exercise, good martial training, and all of that. But my quest is to get rid of that "??" in Tier 1. Pdg has come the closest to doing that of anyone I've asked.

Ok, so a possible tier 1 from that spec for the knife hand block in question...

The lead hand is blocking* a punch or knife hand strike with a knife hand.

The reaction (off) hand is adopting a guarding position of the mid section.



Now that's one reason 'we' call it a knife hand guarding block - close the hands and move the arms 4-6" and you've got a forearm guarding block.

*(I use the term blocking, but redirection is more accurate)

 

[pdg]

So applying that to the double-knife-hand, as it is trained in KKW TKD:

• Tier 0: Double-knife hand block, chambered with both hands to one side, executed with the main hand in front and off-hand at your solar-plexus.
• Tier 1: ??
• Tier 2: ??
• Tier 3: ??

You asked previously how patterns were trained for me - if this quote is an example of what you mean then I can now answer I believe.

I obviously can't speak to the entire ITF(s), but my experience is more like:

"Perform knife hand guarding block, chamber both hands closed over shoulder and swing body into position, opening hands during move. Finish with lead hand extended and reaction hand palm up by solar plexus. This move is to block an attack from the front/side while guarding the solar plexus with the reaction hand, or as a stance providing a medium range guard to the front and short range to the mid section."


Later, it's encouraged to utilise the move in 3, 2 and 1 step "semi free" sparring as described, leading from or into other techniques - from side kick as a landing position in a guard, or leading into a fingertip thrust (spearhand?) with the former reaction hand for example.

Later still and more optionally, see what you can do with it in normal free sparring. The knife hand action is difficult to truly assess due to the gloves, but the target area is different than using a fist or forearm so it does translate somewhat. Grabs, throws etc. aren't allowed under the sparring rules, so...

Then totally optionally (but certainly not discouraged) play around with it in "self defence" which isn't subject to the sparring ruleset. See if it works as a setup to a grab, or a restraint, or whatever.

 

[pdg]

Also, @pdg, this is why I continue to train under my Master even if I don't understand everything. I've spent the last 5 years working on my double-knife-hand in pretty much every form. My body's learned the lesson even if my brain hasn't.

I'm starting to think that might be the reason for a lot of the stuff in the forms.

I never even suggested that you ditch your current training, just that you seek to supplement it.

You are doing a bit of that here, but refusing to look at a book based on it being targeted at ITF and therefore "outside the scope of your training" is the sticking point for me (I don't mean that particular $200 book, I wouldn't spend that much )

Now, if the training model that you stated and I quoted in my previous post is how you do all your form training, I think it's a shame really.

Maybe it's a class size Vs time constraint issue, maybe it's that your instructor was taught in the same way, maybe it's endemic to KKW teaching - that I don't know.

If you really are lacking those basic explanations for moves in your forms, start a thread and alert me (or link to existing), or send me a pm - I personally think there's a vanishingly small amount in any of the ITF patterns that doesn't have a surface (and usually deeper) application and as I said, I gather the kkw use very similar techniques.

I'm more than happy to share what I've been taught or discovered - I just think it's something that should be a part of the normal training.

 

[pdg]

You do not take them well at all but I am going to give you a suggestion.
A long time ago I learned about the Rule of Five. It takes the average person hearing something five times before they fully comprehend it. It is most effective if they hear the same thing (questions or suggestions for example) in different ways. Everyone perceives differently. Often the way You understand a question, no one else will understand. It is an art in conversation that is most often hard to learn.
So instead of asking a question the way You understand it and then getting frustrated because you did not get the answer You expect, ask the question differently. This is a big, big reason you get ridiculed by others. You are bringing it on yourself. I am not saying this to be offensive, I am simply trying to help you reflect and do a little self examination.

This is quite apt - it's taken an argument (enthusiastic discussion ) for me to understand the questions.

 

[pdg]

But so far @pdg has come the closest to telling me about doing application study, and that was simply that he took two moves in a form and used them in sparring. Not that he explored them further.

I was simplifying because that's what I thought you wanted. I've expanded further above...

But one little bit that I forgot about that I'll add now.

At every stage, each pattern, we'll do a partner drill with it - one person performs the pattern, the other person moves around them with a pad and sometimes a strike stick.

This way, the basic application of every move is demonstrated personally.

 

[pdg]

No, you are wanting people to spoon feed you an answer that You think is correct.

I have to be honest - this is exactly what it's looked like to me too.

Do you want answers that you think are incorrect?

I do.

If you simply think "that's wrong" and dismiss it, then yes it's useless.

But, if you approach it differently you can get a lot from an answer you think is wrong.

Look at why you think it's wrong, discuss it with yourself and others as to the reasons for it's wrongness. Discuss it with the person who said it, tell them why you think their answer is wrong and see how they defend their answer. Use your opinion to challenge theirs and let them do the same to you.


Years ago this was the foremost method of debate - posit disagreement and work to reach a conclusion. Sometimes both parties end up still thinking the other is wrong but it's made them both think about how and why they reached their own viewpoint.

Nowadays of course, with the snowflake revolution, it's a form of bullying to voice a disagreement or tell someone you think they're wrong because you might cause a booboo to their delicate feels - now all you're supposed to do is state your position and leave it.

There is no educational value in that.

 

[skribs]

Ok, so a possible tier 1 from that spec for the knife hand block in question...

The lead hand is blocking* a punch or knife hand strike with a knife hand.

The reaction (off) hand is adopting a guarding position of the mid section.



Now that's one reason 'we' call it a knife hand guarding block - close the hands and move the arms 4-6" and you've got a forearm guarding block.

*(I use the term blocking, but redirection is more accurate)

This was my initial assumption 5 years ago when I first asked the question. However, in analyzing all of the applications I was taught, I had an issue with the palm being up, because we never were taught any applications from that position. A lot of people took exception with me asking questions about that particular detail...

This is quite apt - it's taken an argument (enthusiastic discussion ) for me to understand the questions.

Think about this for a moment. Seriously, think about it from my perspective. This is what I go through trying to get answers, even to questions I didn't ask. When people post something I don't understand, sometimes it's like pulling teeth trying to get the message they wanted me to hear.

I was simplifying because that's what I thought you wanted. I've expanded further above...

But one little bit that I forgot about that I'll add now.

At every stage, each pattern, we'll do a partner drill with it - one person performs the pattern, the other person moves around them with a pad and sometimes a strike stick.

This way, the basic application of every move is demonstrated personally.

I have to wonder how this works with some of the flashier moves in the more advanced forms. Or do you simply not have those flashy moves?

If you simply think "that's wrong" and dismiss it, then yes it's useless.

But, if you approach it differently you can get a lot from an answer you think is wrong.

Look at why you think it's wrong, discuss it with yourself and others as to the reasons for it's wrongness. Discuss it with the person who said it, tell them why you think their answer is wrong and see how they defend their answer. Use your opinion to challenge theirs and let them do the same to you.


Years ago this was the foremost method of debate - posit disagreement and work to reach a conclusion. Sometimes both parties end up still thinking the other is wrong but it's made them both think about how and why they reached their own viewpoint.

I believe this is what I am doing. I provide my evidence, experience, and logic for the reasons I have my conclusions, and I ask others to do the same. I try and provide different reasoning if what I provided at first was not sufficient to explain my position or convince the other person of my position. When people give me their evidence, experience, and logic, I listen to it and respond to it. It's just a lot of people give me a talking-down-to in place of that evidence.

 

[pdg]

I have to wonder how this works with some of the flashier moves in the more advanced forms. Or do you simply not have those flashy moves?

Which flashy moves?

Obviously it doesn't work well with slow motion stuff (but for purpose those can be done 'normal' speed) and there are moves that are superficially intended as more of an intermediary step than a direct application thing, but there's not much I've seen that can't be applied with this.

 

[skribs]

Which flashy moves?

Obviously it doesn't work well with slow motion stuff (but for purpose those can be done 'normal' speed) and there are moves that are superficially intended as more of an intermediary step than a direct application thing, but there's not much I've seen that can't be applied with this.

In the KKW forms, there are a lot of flashy techniques that look cool, but I couldn't see being used in a fight in the way they're presented in the forms. The best 3 forms I can think of as an example for this are:

• Taegeuk Chil Jang (#7)
• Taegeuk Pal Jang (#8)
• Keumgang

In Taegeuk 7, there are scissor blocks - down block with one hand, outside block with the other. Now, I can find plenty of those Tier 2 applications for this criss-cross motion (such as setting up a Z-lock or pulling down the guard and doing a backfist), but the only Tier 1 application I can think of (direct application of the movement as a block) is that you are blocking a low strike on one side and a mid-level strike on the other. And also, I've yet to find videos or demonstrations of KKW practitioners doing this Tier 2 or Tier 3 analysis...although that book hasn't arrived yet.

In Taegeuk 8, there is a similar motion - a down block with one hand, and high block with the other. As with the above, there are numerous Tier 2 and Tier 3 applications I can draw, including a stretching lock or a throw. I can also see it similar to a sword guard position we recently learned in our sword forms. But the most direct application of the block that I can see, is I have someone in front of me that is kicking me, and someone behind me or to my side that is striking my head, and i am blocking both techniques. This Tier 1 application looks cool in demonstrations, but is much less practical than simply using footwork to keep both opponents in front of me so I can actually see them.

Kaumgang has a lot of these blocks. The low/high block combo in crane stance (which makes it even more wonky), double outside-block (very easy grappling implications, but appears to be blocking attacks from both sides in the Tier 1 application), and a double low block to either side (which, I'll be honest, I haven't looked at as much and don't have much being the Tier 0 movement on this one).

This is why my search for answers has led me to "there's no Tier 1 application."
And why, at least in my opinion based on my research into these forms, the KKW curriculum does not account for the Tier 2 or Tier 3 applications, either.

Maybe I should at least make the distinction that it's a KKW problem, and not a TKD problem. But my research does lead me to believe that this is a problem endemic to KKW, and not just a local issue.

 

[pdg]

This was my initial assumption 5 years ago when I first asked the question. However, in analyzing all of the applications I was taught, I had an issue with the palm being up, because we never were taught any applications from that position. A lot of people took exception with me asking questions about that particular detail...

As I said, I see it as a simple mechanical placement issue when the guarding block is taken as a sole entity - it's just the best position to end up in given the route taken to get there rather than a directly applicable 'hand' in itself.

Think about this for a moment. Seriously, think about it from my perspective. This is what I go through trying to get answers, even to questions I didn't ask. When people post something I don't understand, sometimes it's like pulling teeth trying to get the message they wanted me to hear.

Part of this is down to the way you've asked questions, and part is down to the tone of the initial responses you give.

Then another part (as brilliantly demonstrated by me) is that the other person just doesn't understand your context...

I believe this is what I am doing. I provide my evidence, experience, and logic for the reasons I have my conclusions, and I ask others to do the same. I try and provide different reasoning if what I provided at first was not sufficient to explain my position or convince the other person of my position. When people give me their evidence, experience, and logic, I listen to it and respond to it. It's just a lot of people give me a talking-down-to in place of that evidence

Sometimes the talking down to you is because, given your rank, it's something that you 'should' know or 'should' be able to figure out yourself without asking.

And again, the implied tone of your responses - this is something difficult to convey in this format - face to face you'd be far less likely to come up against these issues (same for above too, face to face it's easier to ask a question and discuss an answer).

Of course, some of the talking down will be a shield based on a person not actually knowing why they believe what they believe - they formed (or got told) an opinion and take offence when it gets challenged. Unfortunately, there's no fix for that...

 

[pdg]

In the KKW forms, there are a lot of flashy techniques that look cool, but I couldn't see being used in a fight in the way they're presented in the forms. The best 3 forms I can think of as an example for this are:

• Taegeuk Chil Jang (#7)
• Taegeuk Pal Jang (#8)
• Keumgang

In Taegeuk 7, there are scissor blocks - down block with one hand, outside block with the other. Now, I can find plenty of those Tier 2 applications for this criss-cross motion (such as setting up a Z-lock or pulling down the guard and doing a backfist), but the only Tier 1 application I can think of (direct application of the movement as a block) is that you are blocking a low strike on one side and a mid-level strike on the other. And also, I've yet to find videos or demonstrations of KKW practitioners doing this Tier 2 or Tier 3 analysis...although that book hasn't arrived yet.

In Taegeuk 8, there is a similar motion - a down block with one hand, and high block with the other. As with the above, there are numerous Tier 2 and Tier 3 applications I can draw, including a stretching lock or a throw. I can also see it similar to a sword guard position we recently learned in our sword forms. But the most direct application of the block that I can see, is I have someone in front of me that is kicking me, and someone behind me or to my side that is striking my head, and i am blocking both techniques. This Tier 1 application looks cool in demonstrations, but is much less practical than simply using footwork to keep both opponents in front of me so I can actually see them.

Kaumgang has a lot of these blocks. The low/high block combo in crane stance (which makes it even more wonky), double outside-block (very easy grappling implications, but appears to be blocking attacks from both sides in the Tier 1 application), and a double low block to either side (which, I'll be honest, I haven't looked at as much and don't have much being the Tier 0 movement on this one).

This is why my search for answers has led me to "there's no Tier 1 application."
And why, at least in my opinion based on my research into these forms, the KKW curriculum does not account for the Tier 2 or Tier 3 applications, either.

Maybe I should at least make the distinction that it's a KKW problem, and not a TKD problem. But my research does lead me to believe that this is a problem endemic to KKW, and not just a local issue.

I'll have to look at those if I can find video and if I can draw a parallel I'll get back to you at some point.

 

[pdg]

In Taegeuk 7, there are scissor blocks - down block with one hand, outside block with the other. Now, I can find plenty of those Tier 2 applications for this criss-cross motion (such as setting up a Z-lock or pulling down the guard and doing a backfist), but the only Tier 1 application I can think of (direct application of the movement as a block) is that you are blocking a low strike on one side and a mid-level strike on the other.

Moves 13-16(ish)?

 

[skribs]

Moves 13-16(ish)?

Yeah, the last part that's going forward.

(Luckily, the Taegeuks and Yudanja are standardized enough that if you find a video of it, you found the video of it).

 

[pdg]

In Taegeuk 8, there is a similar motion - a down block with one hand, and high block with the other.

Moves 8+10(ish)?

 

[skribs]

Part of this is down to the way you've asked questions, and part is down to the tone of the initial responses you give.

Then another part (as brilliantly demonstrated by me) is that the other person just doesn't understand your context...

Then my tone may be being misinterpreted. Maybe I need a color chart or something.

What you said is interesting and I would like to know more about your thoughts on the subject.
What you said is interesting and it differs from my experience. Let's compare notes.
What you said is interesting, but not pertinent to what I asked.
I don't think I agree with what you said. Let me make sure I understand you before we argue.
In my experience, you're simply wrong. Please provide evidence to back up your point.

 

[skribs]

Moves 8+10(ish)?

Yeah.

 

[skribs]

@pdg and for Keumgang, it's basically the whole darn form.

 

[pdg]

The following are based on similar moves in patterns I have done...

'Scissor' blocks in chil jang - ostensibly a trap or break to an incoming punch or side kick (or possibly against a stick thrust. They are one block, not two.

The moves in pal jang - those carry the description of a rearward backfist combined with a front low block. These are one of the 'two opponent' scenarios...

 

[pdg]

@pdg and for Keumgang, it's basically the whole darn form.

That one would need more time

If the mood strikes me I may put something basic together and pm it to you...

 

[skribs]

The following are based on similar moves in patterns I have done...

'Scissor' blocks in chil jang - ostensibly a trap or break to an incoming punch or side kick (or possibly against a stick thrust. They are one block, not two.

The moves in pal jang - those carry the description of a rearward backfist combined with a front low block. These are one of the 'two opponent' scenarios...

In this case, I'd consider the scissor block application you provided a Tier 2 application. Then again, it's kind of hard to tell because it's never been explained beyond the basic mechanics.

This is a motion I learned in a different set of forms (Palgwes) where we describe it there as two blocks. In either case, maybe the problem isn't that a Tier 1 application doesn't exist, but the problem is that the Tier 1 application is woefully inefficient compared to other simpler options.