Well, I think that there may be many things that we have in common and would enjoy discussing. A disagreement on some topics doesn't have to mean disagreement on all topics.
Kong Soo Do
- Thread starter puunui
- Start date
Well, I think that there may be many things that we have in common and would enjoy discussing. A disagreement on some topics doesn't have to mean disagreement on all topics.
Everyone needs a niche. Many people taking a martial arts class aren't necessarily looking for self-defense. Certainly not the children. Many people simply want a hobby. Some just want to get active and do something physical. Some would like to test themselves in competiton and some are looking for a means to defend themselves. None of these reasons are wrong.
And to be clear on the part I put in bold, I think there are many TKD instructors that offer excellent SD programs. I learned from one such instructor. But I also know that there are those that 'think' they teach SD but really don't have a full understanding of SD principles or think sport methodology covers SD.
Dan Anderson
Master of Arts
It is a pretty rare book, almost 50 years old. I would keep the one you have in a safe place.
My main interest in these types of discussions is in discovering the truth and getting accurate facts. From my perspective, you are interested in something else. That makes us philosophically incompatible, as incompatible as those that sent PMs to you. They, like you, are more interested in staying where they are and defending that place. I am most happy when I am constantly moving forward. If I am in the same place as I was yesterday, then that means I have made no progress. My friends are all the same way. It's the birds of a feather thing again.
Originally Posted by Kong Soo Do
Well, I think that there may be many things that we have in common and would enjoy discussing. A disagreement on some topics doesn't have to mean disagreement on all topics.
Well once again you're right as rain. Thanks for thinking about it though
Yes I understand the general public did not know what TKD was back then so Karate was used to get them in the door my premise back then people wanted self defense that was there motivation to come in at least in general some did want to be top sport fighters but SD was a secondary focus for all. My point is now Masters feel a need to once again use a different name related to TKD to once again get the general public to come in for what they percieve as wanting to learn as opposed to what they think is only TKD sport?
Well once again you're right as rain. Thanks for thinking about it though
Last question on the topic of Kong Soo Do: Who promoted GM Dunn to 8th Dan?
ralphmcpherson
Senior Master
I really find it funny how some people become so obsessed with the history and politics of the art. GM kwok gim kim promoted such and such to 7th dan but fell out with some other kwan but GM dim sim went to okinawa with GM ul soon hook where the founders of such and such an art would meet under a tree to dicuss the third move in taugek 3 etc etc. Sometimes I think if people spent more time training and less time analysing each historical detail then tkd would be in better shape than it is currently. I can see why my GM ceased any involvement with all these orgs and politics.
Last edited:
For some people, historicity of the art is their thing. If anything, discussion boards lend themselves very well to such topics.
As they say, different strokes.
Daniel
miguksaram
Master of Arts
It wasn't that I was missing your point, it was your point was being made clear. You talked about Korean history. If you were talking about Korean Martial Art history then that is different and honestly I would agree with you. However, you will find more and more that it is non-Korean instructors who tend to keep the 2000 year old myth alive. Most of the Koreans, at least the ones that I have met, are quite upfront about their roots.
Actually you couldn't be further from the truth. First off I don't take any of this personally unless some brings into the conversation about my personal life. Secondly, I have been one of the major proponents of setting the record straight about Korean Martial Art history. I have called out BS on a lot of Korean and Non-Korean Masters out there.KSD said:
Though your intentions may not be to single out all Koreans, the postings that are done here tend to be generalized and not specific. Just like your comment about Korean history. This is not just aimed at you but others as well that say things like Koreans tend to rewrite their history or Koreans perpetuate the 2000 year old myth. While there may be some that do, they have become few and far between.KSD said:
KSD said:I would be happy to discuss this with you. For starters, if you're interested, you can take a look at my section, 'Reality Check'. This has some information in it that touches on the training.
In short, we train;
That is just a quick sampling for the moment.
- In as many different environments as possible i.e. full light, dim light, asphalt, grass, sand, sloping surfaces, stairs, elevators, between cars, with furniture, inside a vehicle, from standing, from grappling, from the ground, single and multiple opponents, improvised weapons etc.
- We use specific drills that we feel have a high percentage of success.
- We pad up such as RED MAN or Bluers suit (can't remember the name off-hand) and go as full tilt as is safety possible.
- We use specific scenarios that have happened in real life i.e. home invasion, mugging at the ATM etc.
Cool. Your school sounds like a unique one and the it sounds like a nice system you have going, but ask yourself this...how many schools train that way? My overall point about the whole sport aspect is that more schools train in scenarios with non-resistant opponents in an environment where they know what the "attacker" is going to do. People in "sports" train just the opposite. While limited with rules they are still facing non-resistant opponents, they are conditioning their bodies to accept the shock of being hit or thrown and they are preparing their minds to overcome fight/flight reaction. So to me that seems to be a better type of training than the other. While applaud you for taking it to the next level, not all schools are like that and to say sport training has not defensive value is just wrong.
Ah. So you really are doing Korean karate., not taekwondo.
No arguements with any of that; I was just curious as to where you sourced your material.
Very nice. I generally like to clarify where people are coming from when they say 'self defense.' I have seen it said many times, including on this board, that 'sparring is self defense,' when really it isn't. It simply allows you to try out techniques in a freeform setting.
None of that in my classes, mainly because I am not qualified to instruct anyone in fireamrs.
Well, not entirely true; I can go through the gun catalogue with you and "instruct" you which firearm looks the coolest. I prefer large caliber chromed out pistols; I find that they enhance one's appearance and give you that slick, video game look.
I will have to read through your site; haven't had time to as of yet, but you did answer all of my questions.
Thank you,
Daniel
miguksaram
Master of Arts
This makes no sense. How could people not know what TKD is but yet would join a Korean Karate class because of an interest in the sport aspect. Martial art tournaments were very few and far between to generate any real interest in the sport aspect. In fact during the mid 60's and early 70's you would see TKD people entering into the big karate tournaments such as Long Beach Internationals or AKA Grand Nationals, and one more ran by a Korean GM who still has it today, but I cannot think of it off hand. Regardless, the point is that "sport" was not common and "sport" TKD even less.
Mst. Dan said:
Which masters are doing this? How many schools in your area are TKD schools but calling it a different name? Any masters changing their art's name because of preconceived notions of what the public thinks are either frauds in their own right or have no confidence in their TKD abilities to begin with.
Any TKD masters that are good teach TKD, not some eclectic name with a TKD curriculum.
Oh and before anyone goes off and says I'm calling KSD a fraud or crappy teacher you can just stop there. From what I gather in his posts about what he teaches, it is not TKD. It is more of a modern fighting system which stemmed from his TKD background. However, his curriculum does not strike me as TKD. If he wants to give it some ancient name so be it.
On that note...you still didn't answer my question about the history research you were going to do to help prove the point about claims that Korean governmental positions were handed out by who could fight better.
miguksaram
Master of Arts
Before I forget, let me just clear something up once and for all. If anyone of you knew my wife you would know that my defense of what some people write about Koreans has nothing to do with her nationality. While she still maintains a Korean culture type of mind she is the first to stand up against other Koreans that spew out BS about their history or culture.KSD said:
Between people trying use this to discredit anything I say or use the fact that I am involved in karate so how can I know about TKD, need to just STFU and stick to the facts of whatever debate we may be having because honestly it is just f'n annoying. Those who try to use these two excuses really have no clue about me or my background in the martial arts.
I disagree. The general public is fairly ignorant of the sport of taekwondo and of martial arts in general. Taekwondo has no problem getting the general public in the door. If anything, taekwondo on your shingle these days will bring in way more of the general public than anything else, including karate. About the only add on naming that I see done is to get somone who can grapple and then claim MMA as an additional program, and that is not overly common from what I have seen.
I think that school owners who use names distinct from taekwondo do so because they do not feel that their curriculum is best described by that name or are trying to reach a niche market. The poster, Kong Soo Do, has basically described a karate program: he uses pinan forms coupled with an eclectic SD system and a sparring rule set that is different from that of WTF taekwondo. Historical reasons behind the choice of name aside, it makes sense for him to use a different term, and Kong Soo Do is a fitting moniker.
In other words, they didn't change the name to get people in the door, but in order to not bait and switch. Honesty in advertising.
Daniel
When I was a guep or even low dan holder, I wasn't interested in history all that much. I would scan the obligatory blurbs in books and magazine articles, but that is about it. I wasn't all that focused on kwans, dates, etc. because it didn't interest me at the time and I was focused on training and learning. Back then, there was an extreme shortage of information, unlike today, so you had to really work hard to get anywhere above mediocre. The hard part was getting the information.
When I was in college, I used to play cards with my friends Peter, whose father was Ka of Kajukenbo, and Kevin, whose father was one of the first Kajukenbo black belts. Kevin's father later switched to Shotokan after Kanazawa Sensei came. Kevin's father was my Shotokan teacher, which is how I met Kevin, who introduced me to Peter, who was his high school classmate.
Anyway, we were playing cards one day and we talked about Kajukenbo history. They both laughed and said that the standard history had serious factual errors and they started naming them off. I later met Peter's father, as well as some of the other Kajukenbo co-founders, and they painted a very different picture.
It got me thinking about Korean Martial Arts history, so I re-read more closely the magazine articles and books that I had, with the understanding that it may be completely off base. I also realized that water from as near to the source as possible was the cleanest.
For me, the study of history is a vehicle in which to meet pioneers and study with them. A lot of the time it may not involve actual technical instruction, but rather the steps they took during their journey as well as their developing philosophy. I find that history discussions is a good door opener for me. I notice that if you show an existing accurate knowledge base on history, correctly pronouncing names, etc., then the pioneers open up tremendously, in much the same way that Hattori Hanzo opened up to Uma Thurman when he realized she knew a lot.
Personally, it has been my experience that the pioneers all have a strikingly similar view of history. They all same the same thing about people, events, etc. They also experienced success in the same fashion, by cooperating with each other. Of course certain ones took the lead on certain areas, according to their interest and ability, but they all worked together to get the ball moving so to speak. For them, Taekwondo was and is a team sport and the ones who thought that it was an individual sport, were eventually shut out and excluded from the process.
There is a book out there called The Law of Success by Napoleon Hill. He was commissioned by Andrew Carnegie to research the principles of success by speaking with the movers and shakers of the day, which were his friends. Mr. Hill spoke to people such as John Rockefeller, Henry Ford, King Gillette, Theodore Roosevelt, etc. and other pioneers of the day over a twenty year period. He distilled from those discussions 15 general principles of success, which was published privately.
I tried, unknowingly, to do the same thing by meeting the pioneers. Their story is quite remarkable when you think about it, children really of a war torn country who banded together and created the beautiful thing that is Taekwondo.
But that is why I study history, not for history itself, but to gain accurate information about what exactly was involved in making the Korean Martial Arts the success that it is today, so that perhaps in the future I can or could do something to help continue that success, for at least one more generation.
I had a moment to check out your board. I read the story at the top that you had written about sport and self defense. The spirit of the article I agree with, though there were some particulars were I would differ with you.
Daniel
I'm sure there are many around the world outside of Korea that 'enhance' TKD/TSD (or any other) for commercial gain. My mind went to the the two Dojangs in my area (one TSD and the other TKD) that were Korean owned and did the 2000 year old thing. But your certainly correct that others have followed in the foot steps of a few.
Very good then. My perception had been otherwise but you've cleared it up and I consider it a non-issue now
I can only speak for my area, but in general I'd say very few. In our area we have a Uechi Ryu Dojo that I've heard good things about, Fred Crevello's Jujutsu that is top notch and an Aikido school that has been around for as long as I can remember that good things are spoken of about them. I'm sure there has to be others??? But there are McDojos/McDojangs as far as the eye can see as well unfortunately. And to be fair, there are not limited to just the TKD schools. There is another Uechi Ryu school that has obtained a very bad reputation all the way back to Okinawa (literally).
On this point I will have to respectfully disagree with you for the reasons I've mentioned in this thread (and I think a few others). Are sports competitors very conditioned? Yes, well...many of them. Can they perhaps take a punch? Sure, no disagreement there. Are they as prepared against an aggresive, determined attacker that does not abide by their rules or code of conduct? I would strongly say 'no'.
You mentioned in a previous post about 'doing a few push ups' etc. And I would agree with you on this point. My personal view is that one needs to be well conditioned in general and not just becuase of a defensive situation that may occur.
Karl Gotch (catch-as-catch-can submission wrestling) use to teach in our area. Prior to him even teaching a student the first thing, they would have to be able to perform 500 hindu squats and 250 hindu push ups. I personally like that philosophy from a 'being well conditioned' stand point.
To that end, before I issue a BB anymore, the student needs to be able to perform a 1-20-1 pyramid with at least 4 of 8 different exercises. Personally, I do squats/plea squats/lunge/calf raise/push up (various types such as hindu,dive bomber,sphinx,military etc)/pull up and/or chin up/dip and hanging crunch. Although I will allow substitution exercises due to injury or physical limitation I don't age discriminate. (Karl Gotch set the world record of 9001 hindu squats in 4 1/2 hours when in his 60's).
Just wanted to touch on the physical side for a moement.
And I would be happy to discuss them with you if you like.
CMA's were actually my beginning, followed by OMA's and then KMA's.
Agreed.
Most were fairly minor niggles. Only two really stood out;
- never seen jutsu translated as method; skill, art, or science. Not sure of the Japanese reading of the hanja, but in KMA method is beop, while skill/art/science is sul, which uses the Korean reading of the hanja/kanji used for jutsu.
- There is no grading in olympic taekwondo. If she was a second dan, it would have been in Kukkiwon Taekwondo, which does include a great number of hand techniques. The girl in your article would have spared under WTF rules, which do allow punches, though only straight punches to the torso if I am correct. I believe that backfists were scored at one pont as well (if they still are, someone please correct me). Unless all those trophies were from forms competition, she would have had to have used her hands at some point.
Daniel
