WTF clubs that credits General Choi as founder and/or developer of TaeKwonDo

[Dirty Dog]

Without wishing to resort to ad-hominum attacks, you don't seem to be able to.

I said "Ohdokwan definitely still has a presence in South Korea", you replied with "It was not an opinion that there is one ITF school located in Seol [sic] (at least at the time of writing). To call that "a presence" is pretty optimistic."

Ohdokwan and ITF are very different organisations - if you even consider the ITF one organisation, even though it's now splintered into 3-4 groups - that's funny in itself. Taekwondo was a vehicle of unification for 9-10 kwans, ITF wanted it's own way so set off doing its thing, then while the rest of Taekwondo is unified, ITF has now splintered into different groups, all claiming legitimacy. Reeks of irony!

While I agree with your assessment of the OPs argument, it's a fallacy to claim that "the rest of Taekwondo is unified" since there are plenty of Tae Kwon Do associations that are neither KKW nor (any flavor of) ITF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dirty Dog]

BTW, he doesn't even need to go into the schools (neccesarily). If the practitioners wear ITF or old Karate doboks, chances are that they are doing Chang Hon patterns.

Bollocks. The Tae Kwon Do world is full of people wearing all manner of uniform. Do I suddenly change our curriculum based on what dobak I wear to class?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Axiom]

Bollocks. The Tae Kwon Do world is full of people wearing all manner of uniform. Do I suddenly change our curriculum based on what dobak I wear to class?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm making a probabalistic claim. The KKW adopted a different dobok, with a black collar. But I am aware that some instructors (especially in Tang Soo Soo Do!) like to complicate matters

 

[Dirty Dog]

I'm making a probabalistic claim. The KKW adopted a different dobok, with a black collar. But I am aware that some instructors (especially in TangSoo Do!) like to complicate matters

I don't think "probabilistic" is quite the word most people with significant amounts of actual knowledge and experience would choose to describe your claims...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Axiom]

I don't think "probabilistic" is quite the word most people with significant amounts of actual knowledge and experience would choose to describe your claims...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you dispute that the KKW uses a characteristic black collar dobok? Did I get that right?

 

[TrueJim]

"in the city of Seoul, home to over ten million Koreans, and probably thousands of WTF dojangs, there is one, and only one, ITF dojang." Training with the ITF in Korea.

I don't know how many ITF dojangs there are in Seoul, but one of the ITF splinters is headquartered there. Reference: 국제태권도연맹 ITF 공식사이트

 

[Axiom]

Now, you might be surprised (or not) to learn that the respective ITFs reject each other. I was discouraged to compete in a rival ITF tournament ( I asked). They also sued each other for using the ITF logo. And these guys used to be united and friends when General Choi was alive

 

[andyjeffries]

While I agree with your assessment of the OPs argument, it's a fallacy to claim that "the rest of Taekwondo is unified" since there are plenty of Tae Kwon Do associations that are neither KKW nor (any flavor of) ITF.

It's a fair point, but I was just intending to refer to Korea - where I would say independent Taekwondo dojangs are even rarer than ITF ones ;-)

 

[andyjeffries]

Now, you might be surprised (or not) to learn that the respective ITFs reject each other. I was discouraged to compete in a rival ITF tournament ( I asked). They also sued each other for using the ITF logo. And these guys used to be united and friends when General Choi was alive

Yeah, I don't think any of us are surprised by that or even find it news. It's been discussed ad nauseum since Choi's death. To be fair though, it was fair predictable. When you run an organisation by dictatorship, with one person wanting sole credit for everything and all the power; when they pass away there's bound to a)be a power vacuum and b)no shortage of people that want to grab it.

 

[Axiom]

It's a fair point, but I was just intending to refer to Korea - where I would say independent Taekwondo dojangs are even rarer than ITF ones ;-)

Ah, so you agree then that locating one ITF dojang (in 2011)in the capital is indicative of the number of independently run Chang Hon schools operation in South Korea?

 

[TrueJim]

...let's go with some estimate numbers - 60% of practitioners were from the big three kwans, and the remaining 40% were split amongst the other 6 (let's assume fairly equally). This means that early Ohdokwan (Chang Hon) had about 7% of Taekwondo practitioners. If they abandoned their Chang Hon roots, that's still not a "large portion".

The Axiom part of this discussion is boring, but this is interesting. I was under the impression that Ohdokwan was larger because I think I recall reading that a lot of civilians were drawn to the idea of practicing the "army's" martial art. But for the sake of discussion let's agree that Ohdokwan is in the 7%-ish ballpark.

I reckon that means that when the Palgwae forms came along, some 93% of taekwondo instructors in South Korea who wanted to "retool" to the new style had to convert from using using karate-based forms, and 7% had to convert from using Chang Hon forms.

My question: I wonder how many of those 7% made the transition? They had other options: emigrate, retire, etc. I wonder if the actual number of transitions is only a "little" smaller than 7% or a "lot" smaller than 7%? I suppose there's no way to know.

 

[Axiom]

The Axiom part of this discussion is boring, but this is interesting. I was under the impression that Ohdokwan was larger because I think I recall reading that a lot of civilians were drawn to the idea of practicing the "army's" martial art. But for the sake of discussion let's agree that Ohdokwan is in the 7%-ish ballpark.

I reckon that means that when the Palgwae forms came along, some 93% of taekwondo instructors in South Korea who wanted to "retool" to the new style had to convert from using using karate-based forms, and 7% had to convert from using Chang Hon forms.

My question: I wonder how many of those 7% made the transition? They had other options: emigrate, retire, etc. I wonder if the actual number of transitions is only a "little" smaller than 7% or a "lot" smaller than 7%? I suppose there's no way to know.

Some Chang Hon pioneers moved to Canada and other places. But the ones staying were pretty much stuck with the new forms.

 

[TrueJim]

Now, you might be surprised (or not) to learn that the respective ITFs reject each other. I was discouraged to compete in a rival ITF tournament ( I asked). They also sued each other for using the ITF logo. And these guys used to be united and friends when General Choi was alive

We had a very extensive discussion on this topic here on MartialTalk not too long ago. It's a complicated story but I attempted to summarize it to the best of my ability. ITF split (history)

 

[TrueJim]

Finally, I'd like to talk about "Chang Hon was banned in South Korea".

Maybe I'm comparing apples to oranges here, but as I recall...in 1971 the South Korean Ministry of Education required "private school permits" for taekwondo dojangs, which reportedly outraged many of the remaining school owners in Korea. For example, of the 350 dojangs in Seoul, only 79 met the Ministry of Education requirements. This further caused some taekwondo teachers to emigrate from South Korea to teach overseas, contributing to the perception that those wishing to learn non-Kukki-style could only do so outside Korea.

 

[RTKDCMB]

I don't think "probabilistic" is quite the word most people with significant amounts of actual knowledge and experience would choose to describe your claims...

I bet I know what the word is.

 

[Axiom]

We had a very extensive discussion on this topic here on MartialTalk not too long ago. It's a complicated story but I attempted to summarize it to the best of my ability. ITF split (history)

Interesting. I heard in my school that the start of the disagreement between Choi and his son was when Chois son corrected a technique instructed by his father to a student during the same seminar. Choi the elder was told of this and all hell broke loose from there.

 

[TrueJim]

I bet I know what the word is.

I think it's a question of intent. I and others participate in MartialTalk to learn. Axiom participates to lecture. If you've already decided that you know more than everybody else, you're not going to wear your listening ears.

 

[Axiom]

To clear things up: The ITF Seoul article was written in 2011 and I made it perfectly clear : that at the time of writing: "Only one was in existence"

It may very well be that the ITF/Chang Hon schools had an explosive rise in popularity in Seoul since 2011, but I somehow find that unlikely.

 

[Gnarlie]

Well, I don't consider any ITF with Sine-wave to be traditional TKD anyway. So I disagree with the reporter. And since most ITF affiliation teach SW, I don't care what they wear

Then why did you bring it up??

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Axiom]

Then why did you bring it up??

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Because it's irrelevant to the discussion. He was searching for Chang Hon/ITF schools first and foremost, and concluded that only one was in existence in Seoul in 2011. The only part I disagree with (supposing they teach Sine Wave) is his label "traditional". The ITF was Sine Wave free in the 60s and most parts of the world in the 70s.