Three Po-Euns and a Tekki Shodan

[dancingalone]

Interesting to see the evolution over the years.

Shotokan karate: Tekki Shodan
[yt]BBI8JUz1Jj4[/yt]

TAGB Po Eun
[yt]QWGgjfrhdrI[/yt]

ITF? Po Eun
[yt]_AYUC_Xjdrs[/yt]

ITF? Po Eun
[yt]2bwx-s2bU2Q[/yt]

 

[dortiz]

Nice!

That of course is the Okinawan Motobu Choki form.
At the Kukkiwon school we use for our Hapkido classes that form is also part of the Black Belt Curriculum. It has a Korean name but is intact in its Shotokon style. It was passed down from the Korean G.M. that studied in Korea originally.

 

[terryl965]

Thank you for sharing and it is nice to see the evolution of poomsae.

 

[dortiz]

I also think this is the Kukkiwons revised version.

http://www.natkd.com/movies/Forms/Taegeuk_Forms/PyongWon.mpg

 

[Manny]

The poomsae I did in the past 80's were palgwes, then in 1987 we change the pattern to Taeguks, the poomsae you show where never taught to me, however I liked alot the karate form, even more than the ITF forms.

I have always consider the karate katas to be more beautiful and martial than the korean ones but this is personal taste, I am not saying japanese forms are better then korean ones, I just like the most the japanese.

Manny

 

[dortiz]

Manny,
the Palgwes were the first Kukkiwon forms. They were only around a very short period, maybe five years. As the last kwans joined the Kukkiown a now complete team formed the taeGeuks that are and have been in place. Its funny because while the Palgwes went away the Masters that left for here who were now dosconnected from the Kukkiown kept this very short lived series alive despite it not really belonging to any organization anymore but that a an entirely different thread in itself.
Many Kwans were using either Chois forms or the Shotokon version brought to Korea. But even Choi was using those before coming up with his own set.
Most of the main Masters studied Shotokon in Japan.

 

[dancingalone]

Nice!

That of course is the Okinawan Motobu Choki form.
At the Kukkiwon school we use for our Hapkido classes that form is also part of the Black Belt Curriculum. It has a Korean name but is intact in its Shotokon style. It was passed down from the Korean G.M. that studied in Korea originally.

Dave, do you call it Chul-Gi? I have a Chung Do Kwan kata book that shows the three Naihanchi/Tekki forms and it uses that name.

 

[dancingalone]

The poomsae I did in the past 80's were palgwes, then in 1987 we change the pattern to Taeguks, the poomsae you show where never taught to me, however I liked alot the karate form, even more than the ITF forms.

I have always consider the karate katas to be more beautiful and martial than the korean ones but this is personal taste, I am not saying japanese forms are better then korean ones, I just like the most the japanese.

Manny

Tae kwon do was the first martial art I studied. The way I learned to perform hyung looked a lot like the approach used by the British TAGB gentleman. The extreme bounce in the bottom 2 forms is the newer way implemented by the ITF although I understand Mr. Weiss, an ITF expert, will say they've always used 'spring leg' movement even prior to the eighties. <shrugs> I've never seen any one move up and down in such an extreme fashion until the Internet made such sharing possible. Celebrate in the differences, I suppose.

 

[Haakon]

Tae kwon do was the first martial art I studied. The way I learned to perform hyung looked a lot like the approach used by the British TAGB gentleman. The extreme bounce in the bottom 2 forms is the newer way implemented by the ITF although I understand Mr. Weiss, an ITF expert, will say they've always used 'spring leg' movement even prior to the eighties. <shrugs> I've never seen any one move up and down in such an extreme fashion until the Internet made such sharing possible. Celebrate in the differences, I suppose.

Same with me. Back in the mid 80's we were taught to try and keep smooth and level, more like Shotokan I suppose. I too had never seen any of the chong-ji forms performed the modern ITF way, not in class or at any tournament, until I started looking at them on YouTube. With my background the over exaggerated bouncing in those last videos looks ridiculous to me, I showed them to my wife and she burst out laughing.

Fortunately there are thousands, if not millions, of different forms and interpretations of them - something for everyone.

 

[dortiz]

Chul Gi sounds right! Plus everyone here in my area is Chung Do Kwan. This is where Lee Won Kuk moved to.

Originally in the Motobu Form the leg action looks more like a footsweep. In Shotokon it went higher and became a block and then in TKD it went to kicks or stomps (of course)
With no offense to the Sine Wave as it may very well work, in this case I just dont see how that form works compared to the early versions I have studied. Its just such a different path. Not good or bad just very, very, very different.

 

[ATC]

Thanks for the post.

I thought the Shotakan version was best performed. No bounce (sinewave). The sinewave just takes away from the form and just looks silly to me. I did not see any real added power from it either. The Shotakan form looked to have the most power, was faster to the block and attack and just seemed cleaner.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Some good videos you posted. I don't know who the gentleman is in the karate kata video but the Taekwon-Doin are: 3rd video: Jaroslav Suska, V dan, Polish national champion and ITF world champion; 4th video: Dr. Zibby Kruk, VI dan, picked by Gen. Choi to demonstrate Po-Eun (and a couple other patterns) on the Legacy CD-Rom from which that video was taken.

If you want a direct chronological order, the last two videos should be reverse as Dr. Kruk's was filmed in 1997 and Mr. Suska's was performed at a seminar a couple years ago.

For more Tekki Shodan influence on ITF tuls you should also check out Yoo-Shin (one of the III dan patterns).

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

Here's a video of Yoo-Sin tul from the LEgacy CD-Rom. You can see some Tekki Shodan influence around the 1:03 mark.

[yt]qfycQi72rFE[/yt]

Pax,

Chris

 

[dancingalone]

I don't know who the gentleman is in the karate kata video

I believe that is Osaka Yoshiharu, 8th dan JKA. He was (is) the technical director for the Japan Karate Association, so I would guess his performance is definitive for JKA Shotokan.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Fortunately there are thousands, if not millions, of different forms and interpretations of them - something for everyone.

Agreed there may be thousands of forms. I feel the term "Interpretation" is a euphemism. A better word would be misinterpretation. (I note that literal translations might allow "Interpretation" as a proper word, but I feel it gives the wrong impression.)

Take music as an example. The composer intends for it to be performed a certain way. The performer may do one of several things.
1.Know how the composer intended the piece to be performed and perform it as intended which is correct.
2. Know how the composer intended the piece to be performed, attempt to replicate it and make some mistakes. This would not be an interpretation just mistakes.
3. Not knowing what was intended and offer some performance. Whatever was not done according to what the composer intended was not an interpretation but mistakes born from lack of education.
4. Know what the composer intended and offer some variation. This would be an interpretation. Now, as a purposeful change, having a reason for the change helps others determine the merits of the variation.

I submit that many so called interpretations of forms (Chang Hon or others) fall under #3 above and not #4. Furhter those falling under #3 may simply be parroting what was shown by an instructor who fell under #2 or #3.

 

[dancingalone]

1.Know how the composer intended the piece to be performed and perform it as intended which is correct.
2. Know how the composer intended the piece to be performed, attempt to replicate it and make some mistakes. This would not be an interpretation just mistakes.
3. Not knowing what was intended and offer some performance. Whatever was not done according to what the composer intended was not an interpretation but mistakes born from lack of education.
4. Know what the composer intended and offer some variation. This would be an interpretation. Now, as a purposeful change, having a reason for the change helps others determine the merits of the variation.

I like that breakdown, Mr. Weiss. I'm assuming the ITF(?) videos I posted falled under #1, meaning they are performed the way they are supposed to be according to the current standards?

I might also note that there should be a #5: The intention of the composer is either lost to time or it was never meant to be a firm, immutable standard. In this case, you should as always, consult your instructor for the proper standard and interpretation of the movements.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I like that breakdown, Mr. Weiss. I'm assuming the ITF(?) videos I posted falled under #1, meaning they are performed the way they are supposed to be according to the current standards?

quote]

The ITF videos, the ones posted and other examples from the CD ROM are meant to be really good examples of the technical standard, however, they are not neccessarily pefect representations. For most practitioners, emulating what is shown on the video would be a really good performance.