That's a lot of forms

[WaterGal]

I have to admit I'm surprised they are that standardized. I'd have assumed the depth of stance would vary by instructor, rather than by form set.

It's not so much that they vary by form set, as that they vary by era.

Kukkiwon/WTF has specific international standards. The current standard is for stances to be more high and narrow, like what he's describing for the Taegeuk forms, which are the current forms of the organization.

The old way of doing stances were deeper, wider, more karate-like stances. That's how I originally learned the Taegeuk forms, and I guess how the Palgwe forms were taught (I've never learned them). From what I understand, which could be wrong, the Palgwe forms were discontinued by KKW before they made the switch to higher stances, so when the Palgwe forms are still taught it's with the old stances.

 

[dvcochran]

The important part being "at that level". We have some techniques that don't show up until the blue and red belt forms, which are techniques we teach at white and yellow belt. These are "new" as far as the forms are concerned, but something we've been training for ages already. Which means the form is not retaining the part of the curriculum associated with the form.

One thing that I've had to keep in mind, when I'm struggling to understand a form, is that a lot of what goes into a form (in Taekwondo) is aesthetics. There are choices in some of the movements and positions that are not made for practical application, but because they look good. Performance is a big part of Taekwondo.

I am having a really hard time NOT clicking disagree on this one. Please read @Kung Fu Wang 's posts directly below. Could not have been said better.

 

[skribs]

Back leg slides up to join the front leg, front knee comes up, back foot pivots, front leg whips out to do the roundhouse kick.

That's a little bit different than what I'm talking about. It's also one I hadn't considered that I need to add to my list.

 

[skribs]

That's a little bit different than what I'm talking about. It's also one I hadn't considered that I need to add to my list.

Since I already read and responded to that post, I'll only assume you're here to tell me you disagree without following through and clicking "disagree."

 

[skribs]

It's not so much that they vary by form set, as that they vary by era.

Kukkiwon/WTF has specific international standards. The current standard is for stances to be more high and narrow, like what he's describing for the Taegeuk forms, which are the current forms of the organization.

The old way of doing stances were deeper, wider, more karate-like stances. That's how I originally learned the Taegeuk forms, and I guess how the Palgwe forms were taught (I've never learned them). From what I understand, which could be wrong, the Palgwe forms were discontinued by KKW before they made the switch to higher stances, so when the Palgwe forms are still taught it's with the old stances.

I've never seen the older version of the Taegeuks. I do hear they change periodically. Is it possible that they were originally with higher stances, but the masters that first taught them taught them with the stances they had trained with for years?

 

[dvcochran]

There might be subtle variations, but they are that standardized. What I've found is that there's less variation in the definition of the stance from master to master, and more of a variation in when they pay attention to your stances.

At my old school, you learned the stance 100% from day 1. You learned the proper angle of your knees, width and length of your step, and where your toes, hips, shoulders, and eyes pointed. At my current school, you learn the very rough definition, and it gets refined as time goes on, to the point where a black belt should know all of the above.

So while at the old school, the stance of most of the orange belts looks different than those at my new school, it's because of a difference in teaching style than a difference in the material.

There might be subtle variations, but they are that standardized. What I've found is that there's less variation in the definition of the stance from master to master, and more of a variation in when they pay attention to your stances.

This is incorrect. Can you speak for the whole of TKD? Of course not. There is a great deal of variation, in stances among many other things. The greater the Okinawan influence the wider but shorter the stances will be. The greater the Chinese influence the longer the stances will be. Is this a constant? Of course not. A good example is the addition of walking stances in the Taegueks forms. They are both narrow and short. I have read in more than a couple books that this was an attempt for Korea to put their own stamp on something within the form set.

 

[dvcochran]

What's the value of having both sets of forms? Personally, when I was working on forms to add to NGA, I started with the idea of two per belt, but cut it back to one per belt. It just seemed people were spending too much time on the forms, and not enough learning to use the movements for something.

It is a legitimate concern. A person is required to learn only 1 form per progression until the later gups where 2 are required. Some of the more active students may learn 16-18 forms by 1st Dan. The remainder of our forms come through the BB levels. I see them as an advantage to reduce the risk of burnout as a person waits years for the next Dan testing. Others have mentioned that there is overlap, multiple forms having the same or similar techniques. A value for the repetition of learning.

 

[skribs]

It is a legitimate concern. A person is required to learn only 1 form per progression until the later gups where 2 are required. Some of the more active students may learn 16-18 forms by 1st Dan. The remainder of our forms come through the BB levels. I see them as an advantage to reduce the risk of burnout as a person waits years for the next Dan testing. Others have mentioned that there is overlap, multiple forms having the same or similar techniques. A value for the repetition of learning.

Can you speak for the whole of TKD? Don't ask me that and then spout off this nonsense.

At my old school, each colored belt had around 4-5 forms, and each test had 1-2 forms. At my current school, there are 2 forms in almost every test, and if you consider belt color then it jumps to about 6. Your progression is not the same as everyone else's.

 

[paitingman]

I don't like having too many forms.

I don't really hold the Taeguk forms in very high regard, but I can't say too much about it because I wasn't in the gym when they were being put together. A lot of the movements seem misinterpreted to me.

I still train a few Palgwe and BB forms. Many of those movements and combos are direct copies from Tang Soo Do and Karate forms I learned, but with a unique flavor.

But I only train and teach the forms I see the most value in. The time saved just gets used to focus on other things.

However, some parents and students want structure, curriculum, CONTENT for their time and money. It's just not my style.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is a legitimate concern. A person is required to learn only 1 form per progression until the later gups where 2 are required. Some of the more active students may learn 16-18 forms by 1st Dan. The remainder of our forms come through the BB levels. I see them as an advantage to reduce the risk of burnout as a person waits years for the next Dan testing. Others have mentioned that there is overlap, multiple forms having the same or similar techniques. A value for the repetition of learning.

An interesting take. We're talking about most of the same issues, but you see it from the other side as a positive. Maybe it's just a personal preference thing.

 

[Flying Crane]

Well hey, what do you know? There IS variety within TKD. Who wudda guessed it?

 

[paitingman]

It is a legitimate concern. A person is required to learn only 1 form per progression until the later gups where 2 are required. Some of the more active students may learn 16-18 forms by 1st Dan. The remainder of our forms come through the BB levels. I see them as an advantage to reduce the risk of burnout as a person waits years for the next Dan testing. Others have mentioned that there is overlap, multiple forms having the same or similar techniques. A value for the repetition of learning.

My school also had a lot of forms taught during black belt, such as Palgwe and Pyung An.
I think it can help for there to be more content like forms after black belt to help students physically see that there is much more to be learned and it gives them something to focus on. Something more to do.
A lot of people quit at black belt because they feel there is nothing left to learn and don't want to keep repeating the same things.
More content can help keep them interested.
It's all more good training of technique and great physical exercise when done earnestly and having a good time.

 

[WaterGal]

I've never seen the older version of the Taegeuks. I do hear they change periodically. Is it possible that they were originally with higher stances, but the masters that first taught them taught them with the stances they had trained with for years?

That's possible. I really don't know. I originally learned the Taegeuks with deeper front & back stances, and some minor variations on some of the techniques that I can't recall off the top of my head. I don't know if that was an actual older version of the forms, or if it was, like you suggest, older teachers teaching them through the lens of the TKD they did before.

I did quickly look in a TKD book I have from 30 years ago, and the front stance they show does look wider/bigger than the current one, but the back stance doesn't. More interestingly, to me, the middle block they show has the hand end basically at the opposite shoulder, and the low block has the hand end in front of the belt knot.

 

[paitingman]

That's possible. I really don't know. I originally learned the Taegeuks with deeper front & back stances, and some minor variations on some of the techniques that I can't recall off the top of my head. I don't know if that was an actual older version of the forms, or if it was, like you suggest, older teachers teaching them through the lens of the TKD they did before.

I did quickly look in a TKD book I have from 30 years ago, and the front stance they show does look wider/bigger than the current one, but the back stance doesn't. More interestingly, to me, the middle block they show has the hand end basically at the opposite shoulder, and the low block has the hand end in front of the belt knot.

I have an older Kukkiwon textbook somewhere above my dad's garage. They did show and describe the stances with a deeper spacing. As well as very cool descriptions of various hand techniques and knuckle punch type strikes.
I'll try and find it and post images.

PM me if anyone is interested in seeing the book

 

[dvcochran]

That's possible. I really don't know. I originally learned the Taegeuks with deeper front & back stances, and some minor variations on some of the techniques that I can't recall off the top of my head. I don't know if that was an actual older version of the forms, or if it was, like you suggest, older teachers teaching them through the lens of the TKD they did before.

I did quickly look in a TKD book I have from 30 years ago, and the front stance they show does look wider/bigger than the current one, but the back stance doesn't. More interestingly, to me, the middle block they show has the hand end basically at the opposite shoulder, and the low block has the hand end in front of the belt knot.

Hopefully someone else will chime in, being the newest of TKD forms, I am not aware of newer/older versions. Only one version. We do some slight modifications where we spin instead of just walk from transition to transition. Roundhouse turn around roundhouse, instead of roundhouse walk roundhouse.

Can you speak for the whole of TKD? Don't ask me that and then spout off this nonsense.

At my old school, each colored belt had around 4-5 forms, and each test had 1-2 forms. At my current school, there are 2 forms in almost every test, and if you consider belt color then it jumps to about 6. Your progression is not the same as everyone else's.

Never claimed it was.
As I said, OUR forms, OUR school. I certainly did not claim to speak for anyone but myself. And your math makes no sense; each belt has 6 forms but only 2 at testing? This supports @gpseymour 's assertion of too many forms causing confusion for the student.

 

[WaterGal]

More from my book from 1989.... It instructs you to literally yell "ki hop!" at the end of the forms. I've met people who did this, and always wondered why they did that, but apparently this was actually what they wanted at some point??

Taegeuk 4, the bird form neck strike (open hand high block with knifehand neck strike at the same time).... the knifehand strike wasn't neck level, it's over the guy's head, with the hands almost touching. The one in Taegeuk 3 was like ear level, too. Taegeuk 5, there was no backfist with the side kick on the middle line. Just high block, side kick, elbow strike. In Taegeuk 8, the double jump front kick near the beginning was just a single jump front kick.

Most of it's still the same as today, though, which surprised me a little. None of the actual old stuff is what I learned as the "old way", other then the wider front stance.

Also, this book includes some self-defense techniques, which are all kind of like... the attacker is this guy with this like Freddy Mercury mustache and a bandana and these really over the top dramatic facial expressions, which is cracking me up. Apparently if a guy tries to stab you downwards with a knife, you should grab his arm and continue the circle until he stabs himself in the groin and goes .

Then there's a code of conduct for Taekwondoists, which is mostly fine and kind of normal stuff like speak respectfully in the dojang and bow when getting on the mat, but does have some... odd things, like that if you're travelling in the car with your instructor you should always open the car door for them, you should not talk during meals, and you should avoid visiting people on holidays or during bad weather.

 

[dvcochran]

More from my book from 1989.... It instructs you to literally yell "ki hop!" at the end of the forms. I've met people who did this, and always wondered why they did that, but apparently this was actually what they wanted at some point??

Taegeuk 4, the bird form neck strike (open hand high block with knifehand neck strike at the same time).... the knifehand strike wasn't neck level, it's over the guy's head, with the hands almost touching. The one in Taegeuk 3 was like ear level, too. Taegeuk 5, there was no backfist with the side kick on the middle line. Just high block, side kick, elbow strike. In Taegeuk 8, the double jump front kick near the beginning was just a single jump front kick.

Most of it's still the same as today, though, which surprised me a little. None of the actual old stuff is what I learned as the "old way", other then the wider front stance.

Also, this book includes some self-defense techniques, which are all kind of like... the attacker is this guy with this like Freddy Mercury mustache and a bandana and these really over the top dramatic facial expressions, which is cracking me up. Apparently if a guy tries to stab you downwards with a knife, you should grab his arm and continue the circle until he stabs himself in the groin and goes .

Then there's a code of conduct for Taekwondoists, which is mostly fine and kind of normal stuff like speak respectfully in the dojang and bow when getting on the mat, but does have some... odd things, like that if you're travelling in the car with your instructor you should always open the car door for them, you should not talk during meals, and you should avoid visiting people on holidays or during bad weather.

One "old school" directive I still practice; walk behind you GM and do not even walk in their shadow. Just feels right.

 

[skribs]

More from my book from 1989.... It instructs you to literally yell "ki hop!" at the end of the forms. I've met people who did this, and always wondered why they did that, but apparently this was actually what they wanted at some point??

Taegeuk 4, the bird form neck strike (open hand high block with knifehand neck strike at the same time).... the knifehand strike wasn't neck level, it's over the guy's head, with the hands almost touching. The one in Taegeuk 3 was like ear level, too. Taegeuk 5, there was no backfist with the side kick on the middle line. Just high block, side kick, elbow strike. In Taegeuk 8, the double jump front kick near the beginning was just a single jump front kick.

Most of it's still the same as today, though, which surprised me a little. None of the actual old stuff is what I learned as the "old way", other then the wider front stance.

Also, this book includes some self-defense techniques, which are all kind of like... the attacker is this guy with this like Freddy Mercury mustache and a bandana and these really over the top dramatic facial expressions, which is cracking me up. Apparently if a guy tries to stab you downwards with a knife, you should grab his arm and continue the circle until he stabs himself in the groin and goes .

Then there's a code of conduct for Taekwondoists, which is mostly fine and kind of normal stuff like speak respectfully in the dojang and bow when getting on the mat, but does have some... odd things, like that if you're travelling in the car with your instructor you should always open the car door for them, you should not talk during meals, and you should avoid visiting people on holidays or during bad weather.

It makes sense to yell "ki hop." It's a good kihap.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It makes sense to yell "ki hop." It's a good kihap.

I've seen Karate instructors teach "kiai" for use as a kiai, as well. I've always preferred "ha" (and "roy" for softer kiai, where there's no hard start or stop - more a practice technique than for common use).

 

[dvcochran]

I never learned it as a specific word or pronunciation. That was never its intended purpose. To help people learn how to use it I will tell them it literally means "expulsion of air". I know this isn't correct per the definition but it is for the purpose. I use the comparison of the sound we make when lifting something really heavy off the ground. More in the category of a grunt. It is using the deep, alveoli air from the lungs.