Uniform Standard

[TrueJim]

It's not reasonable to expect every Taekwondoin to wear the same dobok worldwide...

Indeed, that dobok would become quite smelly very quickly.

 

[IcemanSK]

Indeed, that dobok would become quite smelly very quickly.

"Can't train today, sir. I'm not scheduled for the dobok until the 18th."

 

[EvanWinther]

In my dojang we all get white doboks, and if a black belt would order a new dobok our sibbum would order us a white dobok whit black trim.

 

[Chris Parker]

If I think about it objectively, I need to understand why a white gi was / has been worn.

Okay… really, when it comes down to it, the answer is always purely down to the individual system and it's decision making process itself… the reasons for one art/system using a white gi (or dobok, or anything else) are entirely their own. So… look into the particular art itself. Other arts reasons aren't particularly relevant.

It is only after understanding this can it be decided what one will do.

Er…

Also, if we call it simply tradition, why still bow? Why still use "traditional" weapons? Why train in a dojo (dojang)?

Again, the reasons are entirely centred around the system itself… one arts usage of "traditional weapons" will be different to anothers… even in regard to the reasoning for it. Some will keep bowing as an anachronistic holdover from a misunderstood cultural trapping, others will have much more intimate meaning attributed, and so on. As far as a dojo/dojang, well, look to the word… it's not a specific place, and has a similar meaning to asking why people work out in a "gym"…

What criteria are used to decide if a "tradition" is still useful?

That's simply too vague a question, and covers too broad a range of both actual traditional methods and aspects and what I would generously call "pseudo-traditional" aspects… I mean… first you'd have to define the tradition itself… then you'd have to look at it in the context of the system you're thinking of… then look to that systems reasons for maintaining it… then decide if that consists of relevant criteria. Then you'd have to do it again with another tradition… another context (in the same, or a different art)… and so on…

Never been a standard for anything?

Not a universal one, no.

Is there or has there been curriculum?

Not a universal one, no.

What about kata?

Not a univer… you know, you probably know where I'm headed with this. Hell, even the simple format of what a kata is, and how it's applied within the art in question, isn't anything that could be described "universal" or even "standard".

There is not really a universal standard in "modern" / "traditional" martial arts, that I will agree with, but it all came from some standard somewhere.

No it didn't.

First of all, there has been a standard in martial circles since the beginning...breathing at the end of a battle is better than no longer breathing at the end of the battle...and everything has evolved from there.

That's a highly simplified (and, honestly, not overly accurate) assessment of the aim of a combative encounter from a personal standpoint… but it's not a "standard", and doesn't actually have much to do with martial arts, let alone there being a "universal standard" for them "since the beginning"…

The belts are absolutely a new invention,

Really? Belts didn't exist until Kano created the first one? Oh, you mean the application of belts as an outwardly displayed indication of rank, yeah? In that case, I'd ask you to define "new"… as the vast majority of arts taught and trained today are all younger than the advent of belt ranking, which has been around for over 130 years now… with additions coming from about 80 years ago onwards…

and the gi is used in a new way,

The gi… being about as old as the belt ranking system itself… is being used in a "new" way? New compared to what?

but the gi has always been there...at least for the warrior class.

Er… I know I've asked this before, but exactly where are you getting this "information"?

In other words, no. Not at all. If you're going to reference a "warrior class", based on your other posts, you're most likely (erroneously) referring to the bushi class of Japan (small note: this is in the TKD section… so not overtly relevant here…), in which case I might point out that, while there was a form of "under-kimono" worn, that's not the origin of the gi… it is more realistically based on a form of hard-wearing, simple work clothes called samue… which is far more a peasant/farmer dress than a "warrior" one. So you know, some koryu systems (particularly sword systems) train in such "uniforms" today… wearing hakama for public demonstrations and so on… others wear keikogi and hakama for both… I even know of some systems where it's not uncommon to see practitioners train in jeans and t-shirts, or even business suits…

The difference is that training was never really done in the gi by itself. It was not the unifrom.

Well, the gi itself didn't really exist then, so yeah, it was hardly a "uniform"… but, by the same token, the idea of a uniform in the first place is very much a modern thing as well…

Because that's Korean.

Well, yeah… you may want to pay attention to the sub forum the topic is being posted in…

The gi as it is, sure it has evolved, but the wearing of a gi-type garment was always there...but why white?

Er… no, the wearing of a "gi-type garment" was not "always there"… nor is white in any way part of the equation. Why are Judo-gi and most karate-gi white? Because that's what they chose… realistically, though, if we go back to their origins, you might find that they weren't actually "white"… more "unbleached"… which made them cheaper to make (and replace), which is ideal for something that can get roughed up and damaged in regular usage… as well as not having a dye (or bleach) weakening the fibres for the same reason…

Is there a reason why they wore white undergarments into battle, which is what the gi really is, white undergarments.

First off, no, the gi is not "white undergarments"… secondly, there were any number of colours for the under-kimono (a shitagi, a form of light under-shirt, was most commonly white, but that wasn't universal at all, and depended, as today, on the fashions of the day itself). Thirdly, when heading into battle, a samurai (keeping with the idea that that's what you think you're talking about) would wear what's called a yoroi-hitatare under his armour… which was rarely white, more commonly unbleached, or coloured to match the armour itself (depending on the wealth of the samurai themselves). In fact, no historical, or historically based forms I've ever seen are white.

 

[Metal]

I'd say that's a very American question. ;-)

In most other countries (besides Korea) people wouldn't even think about colored doboks for example.

And regarding the standards: There definitely is a Kukkiwon uniform standard, see World Taekwondo Headquarters

They even have rules where you may have prints/embroidery or patches on your uniform:
Rules for Promotion Test_2011_06_최종.pdf
(Pages 6 & 18/19)

So as a Kukkiwon practitioner I stick to that Kukkiwon standard. And I think any Kukkiwon Taekwondoin should.

 

[Jedmus]

We wear the official ITF doboks while training in the Dojang

 

[Balrog]

What is your school's uniform standard? We wear a white V-neck with black trim dobok with black pants.

We wear the traditional white crossover dobok.