The Taeguek Cipher - Book Review

[Mark Lynn]

Hi Mark (Boar man),

The 'hot blooded young male' thing is a good reason, as is the 'school' system, as is perhaps not wanting to divulge the 'essense' with those that oppressed them for so long perhaps (ie. okinawans to japanese)... perhaps even a combination of these.

I concur with all your points... though I would like to know the reference to the 4th one, as from my research, strangly enough, taek Kwon didnt really have much reaching consequences into TKD above and beyond that it was Korean, had a similar name & had lots of kicks in it.. but previous to that, it was one of the few Korean arts pre-karate that got exported to China (in parts).. ie. the Chinese took some of the kicks and infused them into their systems.. perhaps it came full circle!!


Stuart

Stuart

The 4th point I was trying to tie together the concept of karate moving away from self defense to the sparring model. In the interview with Nakayama he states that he brought the roundhouse kick back from china (where he went to study for a while) and then introduced it to what would become the JKA (Shotokan) sometime late 30's early 40's. The Okinawan forms Pinan's, Nahanchi, Passai/Bassai etc. etc. didn't have the roundhouse kick. They had more of the front kick, side kick in them which can be used for self defense more so than the roundhouse. I had also read somewhere else where the roundhouse kick came from China and then to Japanese karate for use in sparring. But Nakayama's interview was the first place I found someone say that they brought it from China and introduced to Japanese karate, so that is why I mentioned it.

But if you look at the higher forms they include the roundhouse kick turn kick which have more of a sparing model to them then a self defense model.

Mark

 

[Mark Lynn]

Hi Mark (Boar man),

The 'hot blooded young male' thing is a good reason, as is the 'school' system, as is perhaps not wanting to divulge the 'essense' with those that oppressed them for so long perhaps (ie. okinawans to japanese)... perhaps even a combination of these.

Stuart

Stuart

Sorry I ran out of time on my last post.

In that book that I referenced on the interviews with the karate masters the phrase "hot blooded" "Young males" or there abouts came up a several times referring to the time period when karate was brought into the unversities and clubs were formed. During this time when sparring was in it's infancy there wasn't much control and people were hurt many times. and the training was pretty brutal. From the interviews in that book I think that the emphasis on sef defense for karate training gave way to developing a militaristic/nationalistic mindset and sparring matches (competition) to test one's self.

But I think that the karate that was practiced in Okinawa for the schools was different. Because it was taught to younger group of students with a different aim. It was probably centered more on kata than the sparring mentality of the 30's-40's time frame of Japanese karate.

Your point about the not wanting to divulge the information to the oppressors I believe is a valid one. Believe it or not the first time I heard a theroy like this was from Joe Lewis at a seminar he did at a Moo Duk Kwan school back in 1985. He said he was told by his instructor in Okinawa that you don't block like we were all taught (imagine a closed fist down block) instead you block with open hand (like you might in sparring). That the Okinawans taught the Japanese wrong because they had oppressed (occupied) their country so they taught them the closed fist down block method. Now I'm saying I believe totally in what Mr. Lewis had said, but I do believe that point of view has some merit, because I have heard this view from others in different arts.

Mark

 

[exile]

My thanks to Stuart and Simon for their clear and detailed answers to my question. (In passing, I want to make it clear to Stuart that when I referred to confronting a new form, I wasn't intending a form that was new to him, but rather a form that he hadn't yet worked out a detailed set of possible applications for.)

I think it's important to get the nationalistic/historical static out the discussion as much as possible. I can't understand why anyone would reject pressure-tested applications of TKD hyungs just because those applications might have been inspired by knowledge of older Okinawan or Chinese interpetations for movements that the TKD patterns were based on. A combat interpretation is effective, or not, because of objective factors: biomechanical reality, robustness under adrenal shock, the typical development sequence of violent street attacks and the mindset of the assailant in such attacks. None of this is affected in the least by whether you call what you're doing karate, tang so do, TKD or anything else. In the end, all there are are motions, in a certain sequence, that are either effective or ineffective in incapacitating the attacker. It's not as though a wristlock/elbow pin/downward weight projection/hammerfist sequence to dispatch an assailant who's grabbed your shirt or wrist is going to work fine as long as you think what you're doing is Shorei-ryu, but is critically ineffective if you're a KMA or CMA practitioner.

Wherever they came from, those motions are present in the patterns because someone found them effective after repeated trials—effective enough to put in the formal curriculum that the forms are the living textbooks for. Once we know that, we have the most important piece of information of all—that there are effective applications of this sequence of movements, after all (in the same way that knowing that a given verbal problem contains all the information necessary to completely determine the answer is probably the most important information you can have about a given question). And once you know that, you have the luxury of getting down to the business of figuring out just what the most battle-worthy applications of those motions to real fighting are—i.e., of combing the patterns for combat-successful interpretations, in the certain knowledge that they're going to be there. If some of those interpetations were first discovered by Okinawan or Japanese MAists, or someone practicing one of those arts, why is that a valid reason to reject the interpretations in question of the 'cognate' movements in a related MA, as long as they're solid and effective from a strictly martial, 'engineering' point of view?

 

[terryl965]

Youngman I appreciated your PM but I rather answer your question out here in front of people that know me and know my integrity. You ask 45 years and only a fourth Dan, yes that is right only a fourth my insteuctor does not believe in rank all that much and neither do I, but I will explain this one more time here on Martial Talk.

I train for the love of the Art not sport TKD was the right fit for me after recieving my first it took another five years to get to second, then another eight for third, I was in no hurry, then came marriage kids and life. I still workout but had no need for a fourth so no worry about it, back in December of 2004 I was ask by my G.M. Kim to go ahead and test for my fourth since he was getting up in his years so if I needed to get a KKW for any of my students I could, so I did this was after 21 of not testing. So you see rank means nothing to me, just like I say in every post about it. What matter is training and understanding of the poomsae's.

Just on a side note if you believe so much in the Korean way why do you call them forms instead of poomsae's which is the right way.

Youngman I mean no dis-respect toward you or your lineage but I have seen alot of stuff over the years, some good some bad some I reaaly do like and things I cannot ever like. But the one thing I have always done is respect my fellow TKD'ers whichever views they may have and if you feel any dis-respect coming from me I am sorry for that, it is not my intention here. My intention is bring in comments about TKD and my personal views out for people to see. Remember not every single person out there cares about a stripe on a belt, my GM does not and neither do I. I hope we can agree to dis-agree and enjoy each other post here on Martial Talk. It is a forum like this that can tear down mountain and build long lasting friendship though the art of TKD.

 

[YoungMan]

Terry,
No disrespect, only disagreement. Disagreement is perfectly acceptable.

I call them forms rather than poomsae because my Korean-born instructor calls them forms.

 

[IcemanSK]

YoungMan,

At no time have I categorically stated that what I propose is the only possibility as the true, original intention of the poomse composers. I think I make this clear in the book. I am proposing a hypothesis based on conclusions I have drawn from the sources available to me and from personal analysis, observation and experience. This is standard academic practice, and is something that historians do all the time. I happen to believe the hypothesis I propose, and I believe that I have every right to propose it.

The applications presented in the book are indeed my own interpretations - again, shaped by my own research and my experience - and are, I believe, valid as SD methods whether you believe that the founders intended something similar, something nothing like it, or something midway between the two.

Cheers,

Simon

Hi Simon,

Welcome to MT first of all.
I've been out of town this weekend, but read a bit more of your book on the plane home. Your use of the word hypothesis helps me enter into the discussion a bit farther. As an hypothesis & an attempt to "dig deeper" I can appreciate the spirit of your work. I'm sorry if my previous posts were dismissive.

My issue, perhaps like Young Man's, is that I've have been to a few Tae Guek poomsae seminars of Park, Hae Man. There has not been a hint of your work in what he shared in those seminars. Because GM Park (& perhaps others on the Tae Guek design team, I'm unaware) is still very much alive & teaching regularly, it's hard for me to accept another hypothesis of his forms beside the ones he shared with me. If you were talking about Palsek, or another form who's designer is long gone, it would be easier for me to accept.

I look forward to much more healthy discussion on this.

 

[SJON]

Hello Iceman.

No problem. I have no personal issue with anything you’ve said, and I consider them valid observations, whether I agree with them or not.

I understand your position. You have been in contact with one of the poomse composers, and he has maintained the K/B/P approach. Given that I believe that this was not the original intention, I have to assume that he just didn’t want to teach the type of application I am suggesting for whatever reason, probably one of the ones mentioned on this thread.

I would like to ask a few questions:

1. In his poomse seminars, did GM Park at any time demonstrate the sequences with a partner who attacked with anything other than formal lunge punches, front kicks or perhaps an “overhead descending stick attack”?
2. When blocking, did he use any part of the arms other than the conventional blocking surface to parry the incoming blow?
3. Did he modify the distances or directions shown in the poomse in order to place himself at a suitable range?
4. Did anyone question the K/B/P practicality of any of the sequences, such as the ones I mentioned in a previous post?

Best regards,

Simon

 

[StuartA]

My issue, perhaps like Young Man's, is that I've have been to a few Tae Guek poomsae seminars of Park, Hae Man. There has not been a hint of your work in what he shared in those seminars. Because GM Park (& perhaps others on the Tae Guek design team, I'm unaware) is still very much alive & teaching regularly, it's hard for me to accept another hypothesis of his forms beside the ones he shared with me.

IcemanSK,

I hope you dont mind me jumping in here, but Id like to put the same questions to you, that I put to Youngman, who has, like you, attended these seminars. These were:

Out of interest... were these [applications] more than the block/punch/kick variety?
Any photos/video of his seminars?

Unfortunatly for me, the fact that you say there was not a hint of similar stuff to Simons work, only adds weight to my thoughts (see previous posts of mine regarding Gen Choi & the Ch'ang Hon set) that the patterns were strung togethor in what was considered the 'model' at the time ie. they simply copied the kata models of p/k/b and made them similar but with their own take on them, but they still retained the p/k/b mentality. As I said in a previous post, there is nothing wrong with that, it was a sign of the times... however, because they follow that model and because its already been shown that kata that followed that p/k/b model did indeed have more depth once... why not the Taegueks!

This doesnt mean Park, Hae Man doesnt have extrodinary martial knowledge or anything, just that perhaps it wasnt infused in the patterns (more so as I understand they were put togethor pretty quickly).

I believe both Simon & myself agree that the patterns can be and possibly at one point probibly were, more than the sum of their parts and so they should be in the future, the only things we differ on is whether thought & knowledge on applications above & beyond p/k/b were actually part of the intentions - Simons history section on the Taeguek creators adds weight to the theory they might have been, my research (on Gen Choi) says not... your post here seem to indicate the same... hence my questions.

Either way, as I probibly have repeated too much... 1) its not a slight on the pattern creators at all 2) It doesnt matter, as its the future and evolution of the art that counts

Stuart

Ps. thanks Boarman for filling in those details
Cheers,

Stuart

 

[IcemanSK]

Simon,

The poomsae seminar that I went to was over Koryo thru Pyong Won, rather than the Tae Gueks. My answers are based on those poomsae.



1. In his poomse seminars, did GM Park at any time demonstrate the sequences with a partner who attacked with anything other than formal lunge punches, front kicks or perhaps an “overhead descending stick attack”? I do remember a few instances of other attacks, but I cannot recall on which response techniques they were used.
2. When blocking, did he use any part of the arms other than the conventional blocking surface to parry the incoming blow? Not that I recall.
3. Did he modify the distances or directions shown in the poomse in order to place himself at a suitable range? I was honestly learning Keumgang-Pyong Won for the first time. I was quite nervous & trying not to trip over my own feet.
4. Did anyone question the K/B/P practicality of any of the sequences, such as the ones I mentioned in a previous post? As there was not a translator (in addition to the GM-student relationship issue) questions were limited to over what he showed us (rather than what he did not/was not showing us.)


I have a photo with GM Park & myself from that day. Others took photos of the seminar. I'm not sure if video was taken at THIS seminar. Our own Miles hosted GM Park at his own dojang this weekend. I'm sure he'll has many details of his experience.

 

[exile]

One useful 'test environment' for the general idea that many components of previously existing forms were adjusted in TKD to fit the simple p/b/k model is the set of unquestionably Okinawan kata that were taken over whole into TKD—often with the Okinawan or Japanese name intact, apart from small pronunciation modification—but changed in ways that show how much pressure the p/b/k model imposed on Korean thinking about the movements in these forms. I've written about this before, but the opportunity to revisit it with Stuart and Simon in on the discussion is way too good to pass up!

The test case I have in mind is the old Okinawan kata Wansu, renamed Empi in Japanese, which has become the hyung Eunbi and is one of the advanced elements in our Song Moo Kwan curriculum at my dojang. I've seen vids of other TKD practitioners performing Eunbi and it's always the same as the way I was taught it: the kicks are high front snap kicks. I was therefore very interested to encounter what looks to me like a very hard-***, streetwise bunkai interpretation for Empi, performed and explained by Paul James here, which shows that the front snap kicks were, in the unquestioned source form for Eunbi, actually knee strikes. And given the close-in interpretation of the preceding and following movements as grab-and-strike attack on the throat and groin, the role of the knee strike makes perfect sense and is totally compatible with the fighting range involved. When Empi was translated into TKD as Eunbi, however, it appears that the leg techs involved were automatically translated as high front kicks, whose effectiveness depends on a much greater (and probably fairly unrealistic) amount of room; then the question is, what work are the preceding and following hand movements supposed to be doing? Given the fighting range implied (or imposed) by the high front kick, any followup grip/strike attack on the assailant's groin, along the lines illustrated in James' bunkai demo, is going to be pretty impractical. So what can be the point of that movement into a half-kneeling stance with crossed-over fists that we do immediately after each of those nouveau high kicks??

To my mind, this is a perfect illustration of how a stylistic priority—leg techs must be kicks, period—winds up thoroughly compromising the fighting content of a pattern, imported from a source art, where the original combat application of the pattern in that source is just not understood. When this happens, the effect of that translation is something that leaves you shaking your head, wondering what the surrounding motions are now good for. And it looks to me as if a lot of stuff in the Palgwes, for example, which we know are heavily indebted to the Pinan katas for their content, has been affected the same way—I can't think of a single knee strike in the whole Palgwe set. It looks to me as if every leg tech was treated the same, with knee attacks, the actual business end of those techs—at least in many cases—being reinterpreted as nothing more than the chambering phase of the high front kick that replaces the original knee attack designed for close-range delivery. I wonder how many other times motions intended to be elbow strikes were translated similarly in TKD, with the strike itself reinterpreted as a chambering motion for a block or something... all this is the kind of thing that results from taking the p/b/k model as a fixed template that hyung motions have to be fitted into, regardless of the combat thinking that went into the katas which the hyung designers drew from when they devised the KMA versions of those katas...

 

[terryl965]

Iceman this is what I mean when I say the Korean keep stuff from us, see there was an interpitor but question regarding other possilibilities where not allow only on what he was showing. Why is this, why can we never ask about other possibilities? I know you are a great person but sometines we have to ask ourself is there more than meet the eye. Everytime I have attended one of these we never get to ask or when we do it is said please keep to this, that is what is so fruastating to a longtime practitioner of TKD. I hope with open minds and eyes one day we can share info. without be blinded.

 

[Kwanjang]

Great discussion everyone. First of all, haven't read the book. But after reading all the posts (carefully) I think I can say, with a great deal of certainty, each of you love poomse, as do I. I think we are all on the same page as far as the "textbook definition" of poomse and kata: Pattern movement AKA known as form. Defense against an imaginary attackers.

I, also having attended several seminars on Poomse by GM Park Hae Man. I distinctly remembering him demonstrating on me, the SD applications on several of the TG poomse, as well as the BB poomse. I don't recall him holding back any "secret" applications, as a matter of fact, he demonstrated some of the movements and suggested there are other plausible applications.

I am in agreement with most every post (if that matters) on this thread, and, I applaud anyone who researches and writes an informative book. True, there is a "concept" for each poomse. Poomse is the essence of the Art. Interpretation is, indeed, interpretation.

The Name of the Book, uses the word "cipher" in the title. No disrespect to the author, I would have used a different word. For one of the definitions of the word "cipher" means:
4.
something of no value or importance.


How about, Maybe, My Take on the Tae Gueks?

Now in the Title, I know what denotation the author is referring to. Does any one see my point here?

I truly believe Poomse is like a multi-vitamin for your art. it has all the essentials you need for a growing TKD'ist. Like Terry, I am open to others opinions- and take, on things. This is how we learn.

I will continue to use GM Park Hae Mans interpretation(s) until he says otherwise and I applaud those who take the time and research to write such a book

Finally, I don't know how many of you have had to use your SD skills for real. Unfortunatley, I have. Simplicity, and responding to the "situation at hand" is a far cry from movement number "whatever" of any form.

 

[terryl965]

Kwng Jang excellent post, by the way I have every intention to give respect to Pak Hae Man he is a great pactitional of TKD. Now with that being said why when ask about other possibilities he is not interested in exploring them for the betterment of our Art. I lo love TKD history as well as what it will be in thirty forty fifty year. Ifor one will never evr close my mind to possibiliies withen any said poomsae. I can agree with seeing people views and how they interpeded the poomsae but I cannot agree with close minded people that say it is my way or the highway.

 

[Kwanjang]

Kwng Jang excellent post, by the way I have every intention to give respect to Pak Hae Man he is a great pactitional of TKD. Now with that being said why when ask about other possibilities he is not interested in exploring them for the betterment of our Art. I lo love TKD history as well as what it will be in thirty forty fifty year. Ifor one will never evr close my mind to possibiliies withen any said poomsae. I can agree with seeing people views and how they interpeded the poomsae but I cannot agree with close minded people that say it is my way or the highway.

Thank you Sir! I did say he mentioned "other" possibilities regaurding the application of certain movements. I agree with you completely on "close minded people" They stagnate the the growth of others.

 

[StuartA]

this is what I mean when I say the Korean keep stuff from us, see there was an interpitor but question regarding other possilibilities where not allow only on what he was showing. Why is this, why can we never ask about other possibilities?

I have another view of this Terry, its not that stuffs being kept, its a way of saving face (and Im not refering to any masters in particular here).. no master whether Asian or Western likes the possibility of having to admit, that after 40/50 years of training and being the grade they are, that perhaps there is more to some of this stuff than once envisaged!!!

At least Gen Choi used the "if it works, then its good" in regards to alternative applications, whilst still following the line of non-questioning students at seminars. Others mentioned in this thread have hinted the same, say "other possibilities" exsist, whilst not comfirming what these are.. but at least they are half way there!

I have experience of this 1st hand. A guy I know has been to numerous patterns courses under an ITF master. In a email he sent me, he told me how all the courses had been similar... moves of patterns, do them like this, this blocks a punch, this blocks a kick etc etc... until the course following the release of my book where the master started showing alternatives, beyond the p/b/k variety.. applications lifted directly from my book, but with no acknowledgment to me. I actually found it funny, as despite the lack of acknowledgment, it did show my thoughts had gained a foothold and is causing a change and it also made me understand the bit i previously mentioned about saving face, so again, at least this master was part of the way there, ingerity of the matter not withstanding!

Stuart

 

[terryl965]

I have another view of this Terry, its not that stuffs being kept, its a way of saving face (and Im not refering to any masters in particular here).. no master whether Asian or Western likes the possibility of having to admit, that after 40/50 years of training and being the grade they are, that perhaps there is more to some of this stuff than once envisaged!!!

At least Gen Choi used the "if it works, then its good" in regards to alternative applications, whilst still following the line of non-questioning students at seminars. Others mentioned in this thread have hinted the same, say "other possibilities" exsist, whilst not comfirming what these are.. but at least they are half way there!

I have experience of this 1st hand. A guy I know has been to numerous patterns courses under an ITF master. In a email he sent me, he told me how all the courses had been similar... moves of patterns, do them like this, this blocks a punch, this blocks a kick etc etc... until the course following the release of my book where the master started showing alternatives, beyond the p/b/k variety.. applications lifted directly from my book, but with no acknowledgment to me. I actually found it funny, as despite the lack of acknowledgment, it did show my thoughts had gained a foothold and is causing a change and it also made me understand the bit i previously mentioned about saving face, so again, at least this master was part of the way there, ingerity of the matter not withstanding!

Stuart

Thanks Stuart excellent points by the way.

 

[StuartA]

I, also having attended several seminars on Poomse by GM Park Hae Man. I distinctly remembering him demonstrating on me, the SD applications on several of the TG poomse, as well as the BB poomse. I don't recall him holding back any "secret" applications, as a matter of fact, he demonstrated some of the movements and suggested there are other plausible applications.

I think many would be interested in hearing if the applications shown were more than the p/k/b variety or if he demonstrated (rather than just suggested) what these plausable applications were (see my last post regarding Gen Chois get out clause). Also, how would you know he was holding back on "secret applications" after all, they, by nature are secret!

Poomse is

the essence of the Art.

Actually, I disagree with this, personally they are one part of the art, part of the sum of the whole.

The Name of the Book, uses the word "cipher" in the title. No disrespect to the author, I would have used a different word. For one of the definitions of the word "cipher" means:

4.
something of no value or importance.

When I read the word "cipher" I would certainly not have thought of that definition. Reading from (I presume) the same online dictionary, I would read the word similar as it states on no 4 "
a. A cryptographic system in which units of plain text of regular length, usually letters, are arbitrarily transposed or substituted according to a predetermined code.
b. The key to such a system.
c. A message written or transmitted in such a system"
....certainly more so considering the contents of the book! Personally, I think its a great title that describes his work well!

How about, Maybe, My Take on the Tae Gueks?

Because it sound silly and is dismishive of the authors work and intentions. It isnt just his take, but a study also based on historical research and historical facts also.

Now in the Title, I know what denotation the author is referring to. Does any one see my point here?

I do.. you feel (as others do) that unless the author of the patterns defines this is for this, then this is for that, all others must ensure they add a disclaimer of sorts... my question is why should he? If patterns, kata and poomse furfilled what they were suppose to be in the first place, there would be no need for books like mine, Simons or indeed Iains! Sadly, for whatever reasons they dont.

So you can:
a) Accept present applications of the p/b/k type as they were prescribed, which means you also accept that the creators were fully aware of what kata/patterns were for (pre-karate) and deliberatly chose to ignore everything about them in favour of offering 50 blocks to stop an attack that rarely, if ever, happens in real life.

b) Accept that perhaps the pattern creators were not fully aware of what kata were for, simply copied a template of things which they believed at the time was correct but has since been proved incorrect as time has moved on and that they themselves were a product of the era and as such not infallable and make ends to correct this - as Simon has done.

I will continue to use GM Park Hae Mans interpretation(s) until he says otherwise

Whichs comfirms my points above! Until he says otherwise or until they get you injured I presume (no disrespect intented to GM Park).

Finally, I don't know how many of you have had to use your SD skills for real. Unfortunatley, I have. Simplicity, and responding to the "situation at hand" is a far cry from movement number "whatever" of any form.

I have and it one of the reasons I find most modern pattern interpretations lack real value for what they are meant to be.. "a series of offence and defences movements".. no matter who is doing the telling! Realistic pattern applications no longer become move number "whatever" but instead furfill their true purpose and become infused in the student for quick decisive action and thus create a valuable self defence toolbox!

Stuart

 

[StuartA]

Out of interest is this the Park, Hae Man many are refering to?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7HO0yRJ-btM

Stuart

 

[Kwanjang]

Stuart,

All great points!

Yes the youtube video is GM Park Hae man

How will I get hurt doing it his (GM Park) way? Been A student almost 30 years- Haven't been hurt yet, (knock wood )

As one of the TG Authors are you suggesting GM Park Hae Man does not know how to teach application of something he had a hand in creating?

"cipher" also suggest a secret code. is the author claiming to have unlocked that which not have been locked? (people are always looking for some hidden meaning)

Sir, you are talking to a forms junkie, and I am most certainly, not a newbie. Man can not live off form alone.

However, I believe, like I said, Poomse is like a multi-vitamin. This is how much emphasis I personally place on it. To me, Poomse is the essence of the art. Yes Stuart, There are other facets of TKD, I am well aware of them.

Stuart, I wiill have to read the book and like others come to my on conclusion.

R.I.F (how many of you know what this means?)

 

[StuartA]

All great points!

Thanks.. and apologies if I came across a bit grumpy in my last post.. it wasnt intentional.. just late here in the UK (nearly 4am).. hence tired

Yes the youtube video is GM Park Hae man

Thanks for clarifying.

How will I get hurt doing it his (GM Park) way?

Because anyone who is led to believe that something like a mid section block will stop a punch from a committed attacker, will get hurt if theyw ere to try it for real... and these are the type of applications (p/k/b) that he is teaching (I believe).

Been A student almost 30 years- Haven't been hurt yet, (knock wood )

Then I can only summise that you dont use patterns in a self defence enviroment and that when you ahve had to defend yourself (noted from your previous post) it didnt involve anything earnt in the patterns (and I hope not that spinny move in your video clip on your site either :uhyeah

As one of the TG Authors are you suggesting GM Park Hae Man does not know how to teach application of something he had help in creating?

Ah! Now the crux of the matter. I believe he is teaching the applications he feels are correct, based on his knowledge and what he learnt, which is based on the karate kata from before (aka Funakoshi era).. do I believe in light of recent research that the applications he thought were blocks are really blocks.. no, not for a minute. So yes/no

"cipher" also suggest a secret code. is the author claiming to have unlocked that which not have been locked?

Perhaps.. he gives good evidence in his book that they might have been locked by the authors.. only 1 of 7 (I believe) was Park Hae Man! Or he could be refering to unlocking the system planted in all kata/patterns and then applying it to the Taegueks! Ill await Simons own response to that for a difinitive answer.

Sir, you are talking to a forms junkie, and I am most certainly, not a newbie. Man can not live off form alone.

Not sure what that means! Many in my system consider themselves 'patterns' experts and they are in once sense, as they know the A,B,Cs pretty well.. however, that doesnt make a sentence unless you study how to link it all up! If a door is closed, one cannot see beyond it after all! No offence intended here btw.

Stuart, I wiill have to read the book and like others come to my on conclusion.

That would be a good idea yes.. sorry, I thought you had read it already

R.I.F (how many of you know what this means?)

Resistence is futile maybe!

Stuart