Earl Weiss
Senior Master
There are some on line sources for the 15 Volume encyclopedia. You could have downloaded it much quicker. I downloaded it to my phone so I could reference it in class. I think one site even has it in a "Searchable" format.
The ITF Pattern Moves That Have Changed Over Time (and/or are most contested)
- Thread starter BaehrTKD
- Start date
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Some fundamental terminology is in order. (Note: how General Choi defines certain terms in the text i not always the most common every day usage) If a technique is "Side" that specifies the stance is either Half or Side Facing (Vol III P 220), if it is Front it is full facing and tool is at the Center Line (Vol III P 214 -later editions use the term Solar Plexus line and Not Center Line)
Move #3 in pattern Sam-Il:
"High side block with knife-hand" or Knife-hand high block?<<< This is a text refinement to denote a Half Facing stance by using "Side Block"
Move #8 in pattern Sam-Il:
"Low block and outward forearm side block" or Low block and Back-fist side strike? <<, Both the 1965 Book and Vol XII state both arms are Blocking. Vol XII High Block to D with Right outer forearm and Low Block to C with Left outer forearm - L Stance.<<< Since L stance is always half facing, no exceptions, no need to state "Side Block"
Move #16 in pattern Sam-Il:
"Low sweeping kick" or inward crescent kick at mid or head level?<<<<<< 1965 Text call is a "Tackling Kick" which was re named sweeping kick as it appears in the encyclopedia, so it is done to the ankle joint. 1965 Book has Crescent kick - same as later texts to Block the hand Similar to "Hooking Kick" found in Ju Che and is used to follow with a consecutive kick attack per 1965 Text.
Move #22 in pattern Sam-Il:
"W-shaped block with a stamping motion" or Mountain block with a regular step? 1965 Book and Late use stamping Motion W shape Block. Just as the name "W" follows using the Similar shape to our alphabet "Mountain" followed the shape of the Chines Character used for Mountain so that name is used for this shape block in many systems.
Move #29 in pattern Sam-Il:
Punch with fist at the shoulder in L-stance or 9-shaped punch in sitting stance? <<<< 1965 Text and Encyclopedia are similar . Encyclopedia " Execute Middle Punch to c with Left Fist while maintaining a left L Stance toward c Bringing the right fist over the left Shoulder. Not sure what you mean by "Punch with fist at shoulder" But per Vol !!! P34 L Stance obverse (Rear Hand Punch) the fist is in a line that runs parallel to the other (Lead) foot. So, whether the fist is closer to Shoulder like, Chest line or Center line would be a function of shoulder size and arm length.
Move #30 in pattern Sam-Il:
Forearm inward strike block or circular middle block?<<< Both the 1965 text and Encyclopedia call this a "Front Block" (Not Circular) this is important because as noted at the beginning of the post this tells you it is full facing and to the Center line. The term "Inward" as used n the encyclopedia denotes not just the direction from shoulder line toward center line (Which can apply to a "Front Block" as used in the text) but also denotes the Block is to the Chest Line (As opposed to the Center line)
isshinryuronin
Senior Master
Interesting discussion of issues also found in other styles. We all like to think the way we learned something is the "right" way. We also like consistency and certainty. Having these things challenged can make us feel uneasy and even confused.
As you travel back in time along your lineage one gets closer to the original intent of the technique, not just within a particular style, but in a more macro look as well. Some forms in TKD are based on Japanese forms which are based on Okinawan forms, which in turn were based on Southern Chinese forms. There are bound to be changes in both the macro and micro evolution of forms over time. Some reasons why:
1. The master has changed it as his continued reflection on the art has found a "better" way. So, the form will be passed down differently depending on when the student studied.
2. Faulty transmission of info due to translation or misinterpretation of visual record.
3. Adjustments made to fit the technique's execution or application to match the style's philosophy or basic principles such as hard v soft, long range v close in, or thrusting v snapping.
4. Changes made in the interest of sports competition. Using the example of foot sweep v high inside crescent kick (move 16 in sam-il, per BaehrTKD's post) - Both motions are similar. No points for sweep, but higher score for high kick. Such considerations may affect how a form is taught.
5. Fluidity of combat application allowing multiple interpretations of a technique. Using the example of an outward block v backfist (move 8 in sam-il) - again, both motions are similar. If clear path for a strike, the backfist is used; if a punch is coming, same motion can be easily adjusted to be used as a block.
6. While 2 techniques may appear different, they have the same synonymous application, just expressed in a slightly different way. One form may show the hands one way, another form (within the same or different style) may accomplish the same application (bunkai) with a different, but similar motion.
There are a lot of variables that have influenced the way a particular form is done. Which expression is "right" or "wrong" depends on the exact context being considered. When considered in an organizational context, consistency is usually good. But in a wider context, many differences in forms are simply variations of the same theme. The only big sin is when a change in form renders the intended application ineffective. "Mother, mama, mum, mommy, okaasan, madre, mere - they all sound different, but effectively carry the same message.
As you travel back in time along your lineage one gets closer to the original intent of the technique, not just within a particular style, but in a more macro look as well. Some forms in TKD are based on Japanese forms which are based on Okinawan forms, which in turn were based on Southern Chinese forms. There are bound to be changes in both the macro and micro evolution of forms over time. Some reasons why:
1. The master has changed it as his continued reflection on the art has found a "better" way. So, the form will be passed down differently depending on when the student studied.
2. Faulty transmission of info due to translation or misinterpretation of visual record.
3. Adjustments made to fit the technique's execution or application to match the style's philosophy or basic principles such as hard v soft, long range v close in, or thrusting v snapping.
4. Changes made in the interest of sports competition. Using the example of foot sweep v high inside crescent kick (move 16 in sam-il, per BaehrTKD's post) - Both motions are similar. No points for sweep, but higher score for high kick. Such considerations may affect how a form is taught.
5. Fluidity of combat application allowing multiple interpretations of a technique. Using the example of an outward block v backfist (move 8 in sam-il) - again, both motions are similar. If clear path for a strike, the backfist is used; if a punch is coming, same motion can be easily adjusted to be used as a block.
6. While 2 techniques may appear different, they have the same synonymous application, just expressed in a slightly different way. One form may show the hands one way, another form (within the same or different style) may accomplish the same application (bunkai) with a different, but similar motion.
There are a lot of variables that have influenced the way a particular form is done. Which expression is "right" or "wrong" depends on the exact context being considered. When considered in an organizational context, consistency is usually good. But in a wider context, many differences in forms are simply variations of the same theme. The only big sin is when a change in form renders the intended application ineffective. "Mother, mama, mum, mommy, okaasan, madre, mere - they all sound different, but effectively carry the same message.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
The perspective I have on Pattern techniques.
OP
OP
BaehrTKD
Green Belt
I looked at both (how Chung Oh was doing it and what the book was calling for) and decided to do it the book way in this instance, because there is no reason to do a knife-hand high block with the other hand supporting underneath it when the student can just do an X-knife-hand rising block. There is however a good reason to do a high knife-hand side block with the other hand helping to reinforce it.
Do you have PDFs of the 1965 book? I would love to go back in time as far as I can to see how that looked as well.
Chung Oh teaches it as low block and back-fist side strike in L-stance. However, since that move already appears in pattern Toi-Gye and again in pattern Choong-Moo, at my school I teach it as low block and middle block in sitting stance, so I keep it as a block (as the text suggests), but I make it work. The existing technique (as described in the book) does not work in my opinion. The arm doesn't bend the way the book is calling for. As soon as you switch to sitting stance and use middle block, it works beautifully.
I'd love to see that version!
At Chung Oh's, mountain block is when you move both arms up at the same time. It's a different block, but the finish looks the same as W-shaped block. We also do it without a stamping motion. It's a regular step or step + slide step.
They do a punch in L-stance with the other hand positioned at the shoulder. We do something called a 9-shaped punch. I have yet to see any Legacy guide that mentions 9-shaped punch, but it must exist somewhere.
I do it the book way, doing the forearm inward block. It's such a rarely used block in patterns that I didn't want to omit it.
MadMartigan
Blue Belt
I have the hard copy of the 1965 book, but do not have it in PDF. Guess that will be my next project to preserve that text as well.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Tried to attach but it said File too large. PM Me e-mail and I will send.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Sir, not sure what you refer to = the crescent Kick, Ju Che Kicks, 9 shape block, of the several things mentioned above this comment.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Sir, to my knowledge there is no technique called a 9 shape Punch in General Choi's system. There is a Nine Shape Block.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
OP
OP
BaehrTKD
Green Belt
The 9-shape punch looks like a 9-shape block turned on its side.
Closest thing I have found to it is called "crescent punch with twin fist" on page 62 of volume 3 in the most recent Legacy guide. The difference is that they don't offset the height of the fists.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Therein you have the concept alluded to in the article attached above. While pattern moves have specific Technical parameters, they provide a "Starting Point" from which to morph movement as needed (Crescent Punch with twin fist - Alter level of one hand and it becomes what you call the 9 Shape punch) limited only by practical considerations.
OP
OP
BaehrTKD
Green Belt
I was hoping one of the earlier TKD guides would have it listed as move #29 in Sam-Il, or have it identified among the hand techniques, whether by that name or another name. It remains a mystery where that move came from (and where it went if it existed once long ago).
You're right that it's just a slight technical modification to twin-fist crescent punch. There is also precedent for some moves being practiced differently in foundations versus how they appear in patterns. (Fingertip middle straight thrust for example.)
In pattern Choong-Jang there is a twin-fist crescent punch at head level, and that's a "nearby" pattern in the ITF set. We often see similar moves appearing in nearby patterns.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Exactly my motivation. In the early 1970's we did not know the 1965 Book Existed and different Seniors made us nuts telling us to do things differently. Also there was an Aura around the Senior Koreans to not ask questions. I have doubts whether their language skill allowed them to always comprehend the question, or express an answer properly, or if they even knew many of the answers.
Teaching was often "Like this" I know a guy who has 2 pictures on the wall of the Gym. One is captioned "Like This" and One Captioned "Not Like This" and the photos are identical.
I was fortunate to have my first full time instructor who was a High School Teacher. Not only was he open to questions but when we got the 1972 Text, circa 1974 and we would ask "Sir, the text says this and we do that" his response was that unless there seemed to be a clear error in the text we would follow what the book said.
1975 went to college and found a school teaching the Chang Hon Patterns, and Korean Instructor, KKW and WT Flags on the wall, and the General's book on the desk I was able to fit right in.
My first Instructor retired in 1988 and since I was teaching General Choi's system I figured I would do so as accurately as possible, and in order to do that went to my first course with him in 1990. Now this is not to say I agreed with every idea he had, but it allowed me to teach the International standard so that my students could go anywhere in the world and step into an ITF gym and fit right in and Vica Versa. If I have issues with certain things in the system I may express those as will depending on ranks in attendance and the situation,
At this point, when it comes to teaching "The Right way" for General Choi's system, if anyone questions the accuracy of my knowledge, they better be on their A game.
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Sir, I don't grasp the point here. Can you elaborate and / or provide an example?
OP
OP
BaehrTKD
Green Belt
Sure. When we practice fingertip middle thrust during foundation movements, we retract the non-striking hand. In the patterns we perform it with the non-striking hand under the elbow.
isshinryuronin
Senior Master
I don't think this is a matter of one or the other. Whether the finger thrust strike is done with the other hand coming to the hip, or placed under the thrusting arm's elbow is a matter of what that non-thrusting hand is doing. These are just not poses but have two different combat functions.
Coming back to the hip is a representation of nukite, or pulling hand, discussed at great length in another thread, where you're pulling the opponent into the strike (also helpful in developing proper power body mechanics). When placed under the thrusting hand as you describe, it represents a downward parry (basically 1/2 of a downward block) with the thrust going over the attacker's deflected arm.
Both these techniques are found in Okinawan forms. I know a couple of the Japanese heian forms (adopted by some TKD assoc's.) have a finger thrust with the other arm below it, showing the parry. In practice drills I think it's good to practice both applications as each has its place in combat/sparring. I'll leave it to someone more knowledgeable, like Mr. Weiss, to address this further from a more formal TKD viewpoint.
Last edited:
OP
OP
BaehrTKD
Green Belt
If anyone is interested, I have obtained a PDF file of the 1959 Taekwondo Teaching Manual.
From what I've heard, it is considered to be the oldest book on Taekwondo.
The only issue is that it's in Korean, and the quality is rough. Apparently not many of these books survived.
From what I've heard, it is considered to be the oldest book on Taekwondo.
The only issue is that it's in Korean, and the quality is rough. Apparently not many of these books survived.
Attachments
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
Well, FWIW Vol III (Hand Techniques Volume) Straight Fingertip thrust states in part "..... be sure to block the opponent's attacking tool with the palm while executing the thrust and shows non striking hand under the elbow. "
Vol VII Do San #8 shows this. 1965 Text does not explain or show for the hand techniques but the pattern has a photo for #7 still showing the palm under the elbow. 1972 Text page 299 Phot Caption " Bring the other backhand under the elbow of the attacking arm executing a downward block with the palm fist."
So, while the hand could be retracted the Fundamental movements as set forth across the texts appears to be consistent with the execution in the pattern - or did I misunderstand you?
Earl Weiss
Senior Master
While I think the text is consistent with how it shows / explains this movement, there are most definitely more ways to execute fundamental motions than those used in the patterns. We would need probably 10times the number of pattern moves if they covered all the variations set forth in the texts.
