Scott,
I do train in kwan-era TKD, always have, and always will. I am simply comforted by the cliché, “the more things change, the more they stay the same”. What is correct or improved? I do not think anyone knows the answer to that. I make no claims to be “right”, and since you have no knowledge of these “changes” then I hope you could just take me for my “opinion” on them. I am not trying to convince you of anything, just stating a fact. What my kwan-era teacher showed me is close to what they want. My teacher still calls it karate and he is a 72 year old Korean.
Deep stances do not a traditional martial art make. (Yoda pun) If you would do some research you would find many pictures of Funakoshi himself in what taekwondo calls a walking stance. Also look at his take on the forward stance. The absurdly deep front stance (not true if one is involved in CMA) is a modern invention, not a window to the past designed to give you super powers.
All of the top poomsae people have very powerful techniques; power is one of the top criteria for scoring. The stances, while not Power Ranger deep, have been given a particular limit or standard. They are really not as different as the rumors have lead many to believe.
This international standard is not necessarily for the Dojang. Never, has the WTF/Kukkiwon said you have to do it. This is America and we can laser print our rank certificates, induct ourselves into the hall of fame and start our own style – we do not need anyone’s permission. This is another avenue to express our dedication and skill in a world area.
Thank you for your response, Mr. Southwick.
If Terry speaks well of your ability, then I am satisfied with that endorsement.
And I AGREE that absurdly long stances are NOT "a window to the past designed to give you super powers," nor are a deep stance the be-all end end-all of traditional martial arts.
But I what I AM seeing is very little difference between a walking stance and a front stance; blocks powered only with arm motions instead of generated at the hips; and back stances that are simply a walking stance with the rear foot pointed perpendicular to the front foot and being told these are now the "official" stances and techniques — and all without any explanation on why these modifications would be any better than the way I was taught by my instructors.
Just to identify who that might be, my 2nd dan comes from the Ed Sell's U.S. Chung Do Kwan. His instructor's instructor, GM Uhm, Woon Kyu, had a hand in making the Taegueks!
GM Lee, Won Kuk, was at my first dan test and also instructed during the Moo Sul Kwan seminar held that weekend. Even at his advanced age at the time, I could tell HIS front stance was deeper than what I am seeing from "forms champions" or "official videos."
Who ARE these guys? And what is their justification for changing the forms? What is their background, who were their instructors? I guess that is the information I am seeking.
I've said this before and I will repeat myself here: if these changes ARE endorsed by people like Uhm, then it will only make my decision to retire from taekwondo to pursue hapkido permanent, and it looks like if I ever DO come out of retirement to teach kicking-punching, I'll have to call it something else besides taekwondo. What that might be, I at this point just don't know.
If this is all contrary to your experience, perhaps I am simply confused and not seeing the same official changes that you are defending.
A front stance (different from a walking stance), as I understand it, should be twice shoulder width long, and shoulder width wide, for example. What I am seeing and hearing about in these new, official taekwondo forms is both too narrow and too short by the above description.
Are you seeing the same things I am?
