Krav maga as applications for poomse?

[dancingalone]

No, I would say they resemble (quite closely...) straight to the point Tae Kwon Do techniques. That would be because they ARE Tae Kwon Do techniques. That would be why they're in the Tae Kwon Do forms... The connection you're attempting to make is backwards. The Krav stuff you're talking about resembles Tae Kwon Do. Not the other way around.



If that link is missing, the lack lies in the student or the instructor. Because in case you missed it, those techniques ARE Tae Kwon Do.

To muddy things up, Krav Maga has a link to hapkido. The founder of KM supposedly participated in HKD training offered in the middle east by a company headed by a Korean hapkidoist.

And there definitely has been some cross-pollination between HKD and TKD with some TKD styles having a stronger connection than others. It's not surprising to see that a TKD practitioner might find some commonality between his art and Krav. But I agree it's circuitous to go through Krav for better understanding of poomsae applications. If the people who actually created those forms say that they were not meant to have practical applications, why fight an uphill battle? Just my own opinion - I know others feel differently.

 

[Dirty Dog]

If the people who actually created those forms say that they were not meant to have practical applications, why fight an uphill battle? Just my own opinion - I know others feel differently.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that the developers of the TKD forms ever said they were not meant to have practical applications. They are absolutely intended to have practical applications.
What they are not meant to be is choreographed fights.

 

[dancingalone]

I'm not sure where you get the idea that the developers of the TKD forms ever said they were not meant to have practical applications. They are absolutely intended to have practical applications.
What they are not meant to be is choreographed fights.

It's been discussed here time and again. I also confirmed in person with two high level KKW Korean instructors. The poomsae were NOT designed to have what karate people like to call bunkai, oyo or otherwise. Now if that is something a practitioner is interested in, these gentlemen saw no harm in it. But designed into the forms, from the beginning as an intentional facet by the committee members? No. Far from it.

The KKW forms were a way of stringing basics together to teach fluid movement, among other things. Not practical combat.

 

[Dirty Dog]

It's been discussed here time and again. I also confirmed in person with two high level KKW Korean instructors. The poomsae were NOT designed to have what karate people like to call bunkai, oyo or otherwise. Now if that is something a practitioner is interested in, these gentlemen saw no harm in it. But designed into the forms, from the beginning as an intentional facet by the committee members? No. Far from it.

The KKW forms were a way of stringing basics together to teach fluid movement, among other things. Not practical combat.

There is a vast difference between "no bunkai" (which is sort of true - bunkai were not "planned" in the poomsae, but considering non-obvious applications of the movements in poomsae is very useful, and can be considered bunkai for lack of a better descriptive term) and "no practical applications" I think. "No practical applications" would indicate that the techniques taught via poomsae cannot be used effectively. And that's just silly.

 

[dancingalone]

There is a vast difference between "no bunkai" (which is sort of true - bunkai were not "planned" in the poomsae, but considering non-obvious applications of the movements in poomsae is very useful, and can be considered bunkai for lack of a better descriptive term) and "no practical applications" I think. "No practical applications" would indicate that the techniques taught via poomsae cannot be used effectively. And that's just silly.

Depends on your perspective, I guess. I myself don't think the gross movements found in say Taeguk Il Jang are meaningful in of themselves for fighting without a whole lot of other instructional theory passed through other means as part of the system (and they are not - I can confidently say this as a KKW ranked school owner with lots of recent exposure to graduates of the instructor qualification course).

That's the difference from my vantage point. In contrast, in Okinawan karate, the pedagogy assumes as such from the very beginning if one has good instruction. The form itself is not meaningful (in fact, it's perhaps the least important thing) without the underlying information... which IS passed as part of the lessons over time.

Silly to me is assuming the forms are something they are not. I guess if you teach the forms and then add a whole lot of Devil Dog fighting style information while you're doing it...<shrugs> Well, no question, we're probably talking about two different things about the transmission of knowledge through kata, but that's not surprising either.

 

[punisher73]

Charles Goodin, a very respected karate instructor wrote an article talking about "bunkai" and karate katas. It is a very interesting read and actually touches on the original question of applications and TKD poomsae. ( The Why of Bunkai: A Guide For Beginners )

He mentions that if you want to see the applications of the katas, look at the self-defense techniques of kenpo/kempo. The original hawaiian kenpo was application based and didn't use the forms/katas. I agree with his observation, if you look at an application based system like kenpo or krav maga, you will see many movements that are the same or similar to the movements in your forms. It is a great starting point to finding applications that are workable without reinventing the wheel.