A Demonstration

Just another video of a Northern Korean team demonstrating ITF Taekwon-Do. Of course it is all choreographed, but that is after all the purpose of a demonstration of this sort. This particular demonstration goes to great lengths to focus exclusively on fundamental techniques (i.e. basic movements) in action. The fact that some of the boards do not break shows that these are actual hard boards, not the cardboard thin planks customarily used in the demonstrations of other taekwondo version.

Whatever qualms people have about the practicability of ITF Taekwon-Do, including its controversial sine-wave motion, they cannot deny the dexterity, power, and precision that this martial art can instil. But with all things, such feats requires lots of dedicated training.

Three-in-One Imbalance in Taekwondo

I'm currently attending the 2012 Seoul World Taekwondo Leaders Forum (서울 세계 태권도 권도 지도자포럼), and in particularly the academic symposium. I came late for a paper by Youn Je Hong, head of the Korea Martial Philosophy Research Center, but the bit I did catch (and understood -- it was in Korean) was quite interesting. His focus was on "Measures to Innovate Taekwondo Training for Young People".

Young argued that Taekwondo has a "Three in One" composition consisting of Musul (무술 / 몸 / "body"), Muye (무예 / 감성 / "sensibility" or "emotion"), and Mudo (무도 / 겅신 / "spirit"). (See my post on Moosool, Mooye, and Moodo.)He pointed out that Taekwondo has wrongly focussed on only one aspect of the "Three in One" composition, namely on Musul, or the physical aspects of Taekwondo.

Since Young started his presentation against the background of the 2012 Olympic Games and also because the symposium is a Kukkiwon sponsored event, it is safe to assume that he refered to WTF (Kukkiwon) Taekwondo almost exclusively and not ITF Taekwon-Do; in the case of the latter the "Three in One" is much better balanced.

The lack of the more abstract and philosophical components (Muye and Mudo) is indeed an unfortunate current state of WTF Taekwondo and it is therefore heartening to see that it is being addressed at an academic symposium like this one. At the same time, it serves as a warning to ITF Taekwon-Do which seems to place ever more emphasis on the sport aspect (i.e. Musul) of the style.
It is my opinion that the reason for the "Three in One" imbalance in WTF (Kukkiwon) Taekwon-Do is its over-emphasis on Taekwondo as a martial sport, rather than a martial art. ITF Taekwon-Do is not immune from such a focus shift, in part because the more abstract and philosophical qualities are exceedingly difficult to measure. (See my post on "How Do You Quantify Taekwon-Do?")

Why I Don't Train in (Kick-) Boxing

Image Source

The gym in Seoul, Korea, that I am associated with, in other words, where I am an instructor, provides a good spectrum of training. At 'The Way' Martial Arts & Fitness we offer Taekwon-Do (ITF for adults and WTF for children) augmented with Hapkido, an amateur MMA program, and Cross-Fit training. The MMA program contains two types of classes: stand-up fighting classes based on Boxing, Muay Thai, Kickboxing and ITF Taekwon-Do; and ground-fighting classes based on Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and Yusul (Korean jujitsu).

I'm one of the primary instructors for ITF Taekwon-Do and Hapkido and also occassionally help out with the grappling class. However, while I sometimes join the stand-up fighting classes, there are certain exercises, particularly those from Boxing and Kickboxing that I opt out of; in particular, I refuse to practise in the slipping, and bobbing and weaving drills.

Don't get me wrong, I think Boxing (and by implication I include here the hand techniques of Kickboxing) is very effective, and even for street fighting purposes people with a good foundation in boxing can often handle themselves very well (although they often break their hands which are not used to the impact of an unpadded fist on a naked skull, but that is besides the point). Some of the fighters I know personally and would not want to fight are trained foremost in Boxing.

There is very little one can do to improve on the offensive techniques in boxing. There are basically only four offensive techniques in boxing: the jab, the cross, the hook and the uppercut. Boxing has pretty much mastered the mechanics of these techniques and I don't mind training in them. And when I do, I am reminded of my instructor who often said: "Taekwon-Do is firstly Boxing." It is, however, in the defensive techniques of Boxing that I feel ill at ease, particularly those techniques that tilt the spinal alignment from the straight posture where the head is over the centre of gravity and the shoulders, hips and feet are in equilibrium.

The video above demonstrates the defensive method
of slipping and rolling (or weaving) used in Boxing. 

Within the close fighting context of Boxing as a combat sport the defensive techniques of slipping and weaving is valuable. It allows one to avoid attacks without losing ground, which is a sensible skill if your aim is to stay withing the close fighting range.

However, for me specializing in a traditional martial art fond of kicking and with a self-defence focus, I find slipping and weaving contra-productive to the types of skills I wish to engrain. Firstly, slipping and weaving makes sense in a fists-only context, but the moment you bring leg attacks (kneeing and kicking) into the equation, slipping and weaving just becomes dangerous. You are in effect lowering your head towards the opponents knees or kicks! Not wise. With the exception of kickboxing, if we can apply the term "martial arts" to include kickboxing, I cannot think of any other martial art that trains in kicks and also slipping and weaving. (An exception may be Capoiera, but there is diffferent dynamics at play in this Brazilian fighting-dance.) Even a long established combat sport like Muay Thai does not use slipping and weaving as primary defensive movements.

Also, slipping and weaving requires you to shift your head's position away from its prime balance position over the centre of gravity. The traditional martial arts puts a lot of emphasis on keeping correct posture and ensuring a balanced position. The head is almost always kept directily over the centre of gravity and the shoulders and hips are usually in line and balanced relative to the knees and feet. Once a person has his head positioned away from its primed balanced position, take downs  and throws become much easier.

In ITF Taekwon-Do, my base style, I can think of maybe five fundamental techniques where the posture is not erect. Considering that ITF Taekwon-Do allegedly containts over 3000 techniques, that should speak volumes about the principle of keeping an erect, well-balanced posture. My other training in Hapkido and Taekkyeon puts similar emphasis on keeping an erect posture and I can assume the same for many of the other styles I had dabbled in.

Of course, it is necessary to mention that there is good slipping and bad slipping. Good slipping is only the slightest amount of tilt and movement that allows the opponent's fist to miss its target (your head); then there is bad slipping which is an exaggerated bend in the posture. For a good exposition on both good slipping and bad slipping, read "How to Slip Punches" at ExportBoxing.Com.

And so, whenever I join the stand-up fighting class at my gym, I train in most of what the class has to offer, but deliberately sit out whenever slipping and weaving is practised. Again, I don't doubt the value of these defensive motions in the confined context of competition sparring where hand techniques and close range fighting is preferenced. ITF Taekwon-Do athletes have incorporated some of these bobbing weaving motions for tournament sparring and within this confined context there might be value at the close fighting ranges and since knee kicks, grabbing and throwing are illegal in ITF tournament sparring, some of the dangers that slipping (particular of the bad type) presents, are less worrisome. For other contexts and particularly the self-defence contexts, exercises that compromise erect posture, and therefore optimum equilibrium, are not the types of exercises I want to ingrain. 

Plyometrics

Boosabeom Philip of the Soo Shim Kwan Potchefstroom Dojang informed me of the focus they have on plyometric training for dallyeon at the moment. Plyometrics uses explosive movements in which you have to quickly, and forcefully, move as much of your body weight as possible. Think of doing powerful vertical jumps from a squatting position. The advantage of plyometric exercises is that they dramatically improve both strength and speed, which are important ingredients in martial art training.

See the link for a host of different plyometric exercise ideas. Although many of these exercises require some training equipment like a medicine ball or boxes, there is quite a number that can be done without any equipment.

Because of the sudden exertion of force plyometric exercises can lead to injuries, particularly of the tendons, so make sure that you  first have conditioned the body to at least an intermediate fitness and strength level before starting a plyometric training program. Also, never do plyometric exercises unless you have thoroughly warmed up your body to a light sweat, ensuring the muscles are ready for action.

GM Rhee Ki-Ha and Sine Wave Motion

If Grandmaster Rhee Ki-Ha says "down-up-down", then who am I to disagree?! (-;

Grand Master Park Jung Tae Seminar, Ireland 1987

The Republic of Ireland Taekwon-Do Association (RITA-ITF) recently did the ITF Taekwon-Do world an exquisite favour by uploading onto YouTube a series videos of a technical seminar presented by Grandmaster Park Jung Tae, who was in his time both Secretary General and Technical Director of ITF Taekwon-Do (and later president of GTF).

What I find fascinating about this seminar is that what I'm teaching today in 2012 is not that much different from what he taught in 1987. And I'm specifically referring to the kinaesthetics: e.g. the use of hip twist and sine wave motion (body raising or dropping) in power generation; the employing of a small loop-motion in order to adhere to the “once the movement is in motion it should not stop until it reaches its target”-principle (I like how he said: “No punch comes out from the hip!”); stances and stepping; real focus on “snappiness” in balgyeong techniques, such as knife hand strikes; a clear sense of intermediate positions; and the importance of relaxation. Keep in mind that my personal influences have been quite eclectic: I had trained under instructors from South Africa, England, Australia, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan and Argentina; technically, I consider my personal techniques to be most closely in line with the Chang Ung ITF group.

Grandmaster Park's seminar goes through the colour belt patterns, starting with Dan-Gun Teul and ending with Choong-Moo Teul. While watching the videos, focus on Grandmaster Park's movements and teaching, rather than that of the participants as some of them are still adjusting their techniques and sometimes perform it clearly wrong.

Dan-Gun 

Do-San 

Won-Hyo

Yul-Gok


Joong-Gun


Toi-Gye

Hwa-Rang

Choong-Moo

Thoughts on Women's Self-Defence

I'm submitting this as a very late contribution to a recent Blogging Carnival on Women's Self-Defence. Unfortunately other priorities did not allow me to be part of the planned Blogging Carnival date. Regardless, I hope that this short essay may add some value to the discourse of Women's Self-Defence.

You can find links to the official contributions to this blogging carnival here.

...ooOoo...

Every two weeks I host a martial art workshop. Generally I facilitate the workshops myself, but often I also get other instructors to present it. I try to keep the workshops different and interesting in order to get as wide an audience of martial artists to interact with each other as possible. After these bi-weekly workshops the participants usually enjoy a meal together at a local restaurant and just get to know each other better. During one such a conversation, one of the participants, a female who had recently been in a potentially violent situation, said that the reason she decided to join the workshop was in order to learn to defend herself. The particular theme of the workshop for that day was Basic Hapkido Principles and she wanted to know if I think she should take up Hapkido or Taekwon-Do (knowing that I teach both), since she is feeling somewhat unsafe at the moment.

Image Source

Knowing that her need for self-protection is an immediate one, I told her that she would be better off taking a focussed self-defence seminar, and then, at least for the short term, taking up a non-traditional system such as boxing, kick-boxing, Muay Thai or amateur MMA classes. Incidentally the gym I teach at has an amateur MMA (stand-up fighting and grappling) program as well, but that was not the reason I made the suggestion. There are many other things that self-defence advice should include, particularly "soft-skills" such as building awareness, but when all else fails some fighting skill is prudent and acquiring some martial art skills are imperative.

The question is, why did I as a nearly 20 year practitioner of traditional martial arts and long time instructor of Taekwon-Do tell her not to take up a traditional martial art but instead take up a combat sport? Don't I believe that traditional martial arts are good for self-defence? Actually, I think that traditional martial arts, when taught with the correct emphasis, can be excellent vehicles for acquiring self-defence skill. The problem is that traditional martial arts take a long time to become proficient at. If your only goal is to gain some fighting skill in a relatively short time, then taking up a combat sport, I believe, is better.

Image Source

For a majority of women the biggest hurdle in acquiring self-defence skill is their conditioned (or natural?) aversion to offending or hurting another person and also their acceptance of being “oppressed”. Often, my biggest struggle as a martial art instructor with women is getting them to do their techniques with realism. And just because they can do it with a sense of reality on a target pad or punching bag, doesn't mean that they will do it with the same, albeit, controlled realism on their training partners, for fear of hurting the other person. Getting them to forego their fear of not being ladylike is a surprising but difficult obstacle for many women. If nothing else, combat sports for example Boxing, Kickboxing or Muay Thai, force a person to very quickly get used to “hurting” other people. At the same time, the high frequency of contact during practise also forces the student to get used to getting hit, getting used to “violent” contact. These two skills—being used to aggressive contact and the willingness to “hurt” someone else—are crucial ingredients for self-defence and the rate at which you acquire these skills are generally much higher among combat sports than traditional martial arts. For example, in a typical combat sports class one may start basic sparring even from the first class. In a traditional martial art it is often the case that the student is guided into sparring over an extensive period.

Image Source

Personally I still believe that in the long run properly taught traditional martial art training is a better option to prepare one for self-defence scenarios as it teaches a variety of skills preparing one for a variety of scenarios. A combat sport limits the type of techniques one may use because of the rules of the sport. A traditional martial art, on the other hand, may include many "illegal" techniques such as elbow and knee strikes, eye gauging, biting, throat and groin attacks, and so on. However, if a woman has not overcome her aversion to punching a person, she is even less likely to bite or scratch at the eyes. While combat sports are limited in technique, the faster forging of a fighting spirit is probably the biggest value for a person wishing to gain self-defence ability. Often merely putting up a spirited fight may dissuade the attacker from further action. Violent crimes tend to be performed by criminals picking on easy targets. Many a person have defended themselves by shear determination, not by martial art skill. It is this fighting spirit that contact sparring can develop and such sparring experience will happen much quicker in, say, a kick-boxing or MMA gym, than in a traditional martial art gym.

It is for this reason that if somebody where to ask me, what “style” should I study in order to protect myself in a short time, that I advise them to take up a combat sport, as I did with the women that posed me that question recently. This, of course, must be done in conjunction with at least an introductory course in realistic self-defence.

Image Source

On the other hand, if one want to learn a strong foundation with a variety of ingrained techniques that can by applied in an array of different situations, I would definitely suggest a good traditional martial art school that has proper emphasis on self-defence training. Traditional martial arts also have a variety of fringe benefits, including the progressive and increasingly difficult goals (be they short term belt exams, breaking more boards, learning more difficult techniques), that set up regular victories over a long period to recondition a person into establishing a good self-worth. One's sense of self-worth is probably one of the greatest impulses to carry oneself in a confident manner; in other words, carrying one self in such a way that you communicate that you are not an easy target. But one needs to be careful: I believe it is better to train at a mediocre sport combat gym, than train at a poor traditional martial art school, for at least at the sport combat gym you will get exposure to contact sparring, while at a poor traditional martial art school you are likely to gain mere illusions of proficiency.

Original Taekwon-Do?

It has been about two months since my last post. Appologies to regular readers of this blog. It had been the end of the semester and as a university lecturer I had exam papers to compile, and then grade, which is an exhausting exercise. I didn't have the time to write about martial arts and when at last I had the time I didn't have the energy or inclination.

But onto something else. I was talking to my Kwanjang here in Seoul, and the question came up, when did Taekwon-Do really become Taekwon-Do? When did it stop being Shotokan Karate. Was what General Choi Hong Hi, the principle founder of Taekwon-Do, taught as Oh Do Kwan “original” Taekwon-Do? At the time, like most of the other original Kwan, it didn't differ much from Karate.

Should we consider the Taekwon-Do of 1955, when the term “tae kwon do” was coined, as the Golden Age of original Taekwon-Do? At this time most of the patterns used were still Karate kata, with only a handful (plus minus five), new Chang Hon patterns developed. In 1959 when the first international Taekwon-Do demonstrations were held, it was already something else—something different from mere Karate, but even at this point Taekwon-Do was still “incomplete”.

Or is the time that the 24 patterns were set, around 1965, the Golden Age of “original” Taekwon-Do, or maybe 22 March 1966 when the International Taekwon-Do Federation, was formed—was that the pinnacle of “original” Taekwon-Do? But we all know that General Choi was still altering the ITF style, and even as late as the early 80s major changes were introduces, such as a more thorough implementation of the sine wave motion. The principles for the sine wave motion had by this time already been available in the ITF Encyclopaedia, but not really applied, until Grandmaster Choi began emphasizing it at seminars. Is this “original” Taekwon-Do?

I'm asking this question about what or when “original” Taekwon-Do was, because there are now so many people claiming to be doing “original” Taekwon-Do. For some it means a complete return to the Oh Do Kwan days of the 1950s. To them I would say, why bother with Taekwon-Do at all? Go find a good hard Karate system, like Kyukushin Karate and do that instead. Others want to do something “Korean”, but without the later (embarrassing?) North Korean connections or the inclusion of the sine wave motion. To them, I'd say, stop doing Taekwon-Do and adopt Tang Soo Do.

Taekwon-Do had never been “original”. From its very start it had been a type of mixed martial art. It developed out of Karate, was flavoured with Taekkyeon, and then spiced with some Kung-Fu, Western Boxing, Judo and later Hapkido. It sourced a lot from military strategies (particularly Western military strategies), and is heavily influenced by a selection of centuries old Oriental philosophies. And the moment Taekwon-Do became international, it also became international in its characteristics. The form of ITF practised in South Africa has a different “personality” from the form practised in, say, Japan.

Admittedly, I have used the terms “original” and “authentic” Taekwon-Do myself, but such terms, as this essay hopes to highlight, are innate problematic. Taekwon-Do is a constantly evolving organism. Not only ought one be suspicious of people claiming to teach “original” Taekwon-Do, one must also wonder if what they are doing is not stagnating the natural adaptation of the organism.

Momentarily moving away from the term “original” to the term “authentic”, for me “authentic” Taekwon-Do is anything that manifests Taekwon-Do's Theory of Power and other such principles. In this sense, Taekwon-Do is less of a style, but more of a Tao / “Do” and I can sometimes see Taekwon-Do in an MMA fighter's “Brazilian kick” or an urban free-runner's vault, or a baseball pitcher's throw, or a B-boy's equilibrium, or a cat's pounce, or the oscillation of an arrow as it darts toward its target, or the suppleness of an erect bamboo yielding in the wind.

Just some incomplete thoughts on the question of “original” (and “authentic”) Taekwon-Do.

"Drilling" Simplicity

I've been having some interesting conversations with Ymar recently—one point we have been disagreeing on is the nature of ingraining habits in martial art training. You can read some of our discussions in the comments section of my previous post on “Motion Without (Muscular) Movement” and also at his blog.

One point Ymar makes is that we should minimize all habits. This reminded me of an Introduction to Jeet Kune Do Workshop I hosted recently.

Dr. Zee Lo and me.

Our guest instructor for the day was the amiable Dr. Zee Lo. Unfortunately we had some time constrains so the workshop was quite short, but the good thing about this is that it forced Dr. Zee to really get down to the essence of Jeet Kune Do. For him Jeet Kune Do is all about simplification. One example he gave, for instance, was that there is only one stance in Jeet Kune Do. The beauty of simplicity, particularly for self-defence purposes, is undeniable.

For one thing, under stress, simple proves to be much more practical. When adrenaline dump causes you to lose fine motor function and some cognitive ability, it is the simple techniques that will work best.

My friend Leo Snel (right) and another attendee practising
trapping drills at the Jeet Kune Do workshop.

Few people realize exactly how radical Bruce Lee's teaching was. Bruce Lee broke away with centuries of Chinese martial art tradition, yet he did not really produce anything new. The martial art principles he based his teaching on were taught in one form or another by many other well established martial arts. What he did was break through the clutter of tradition, and bring to light the fundamental principles; as Dr. Zee said, “Jeet Kune Do is all about simplification.”

Bruce Lee wrote (and I think Ymar will agree): “A martial artist who drills exclusively to a set pattern of combat is losing his freedom. He is actually becoming a slave to a choice pattern and feels that the pattern is the real thing. It leads to stagnation because the way of combat is never based on personal choice and fancies, but constantly changes from moment to moment, and the disappointed combatant will soon find out that his 'choice routine' lacks pliability. There must be a 'being' instead of a 'doing' in training. One must be free. Instead of complexity of form, there should be simplicity of expression.”

I agree. How can I not?

So do I think that simplicity means no drilling, no creation of habits? For me the answer lies not in drilling habits, but gaining certain skills. I think I address the issue in my post on the purpose and value of pre-arranged sparring.

To move reflexively, we have to train our bodies, we have to drill and condition. As Bruce Lee also said: “The hands and feet must be sharpened and improved daily to be efficient.”

But there is an important point I also made in my post on pre-arranged sparring: “While there is value in prearranged sparring, an over emphasis can actually become counter productive because practitioners may become too used to the reduction in variables that their preparation is not reflective of the huge number of variables in a real fight. A systematic progression from prearranged abstraction to "reality based" reflection of real combat is crucial.” This concurs with Bruce Lee's opinion: “The techniques, though they play an important role in the early stage, should not be too restrictive, complex or mechanical. If we cling to them, we will become bound by their limitation.”

We cannot forget that the expectations for a beginner are different than for an experienced martial artist. There exists a development from moosool, to mooye, to moodo. And as one moves up this continuum you find that things actually do become simpler. Paradoxically, what the beginner find tremendously complex, is simple to the experienced martial artist. The advanced martial artist is not confined to complexities, yet to have arrived at such simplicity in motion, such grace and ease of technique, required years of (complex) study. That is the paradox of simplicity.

A first degree black belt asked me a while back that we drill in some specific techniques more regularly because it seems like every night I teach I teach something different. I was quite surprised at this because in my mind I'm teaching only a small handful of things—a small ensemble of the same basic principles. It may seem that I'm teaching hordes of techniques, but that is because I'm not confined to any single technique. I'm working from the same principles. Yet it is also true that I can do this because I have, over the years, drilled in many techniques until they have become comfortable. Only because I don't have to think about them do they flow. For me simplicity comes from moving from principles. For beginners, however, it is often difficult to do this. They first need to build up a repertoire of conditioned techniques, and only then can they start to express themselves freely. Like a maestro musician that makes her free expression of the music she plays look so simple and unfettered, this is only possible because she had put in the thousands of hours of drilling scales and other difficult training that now shows the fruit of her labours.

Simplicity doesn't come easy.

My Presence at the London 2012 Olympic Games

I'm going to the London 2012 Olympic Games . . .

Me, in WTF Taekwon-Do attire. 

No, that is not completely true; however, a digital rendition of me will be there.

I had the strange privilege to be part of an art project that will be a permanent part of the Olympic Games History Museum. The visual-kinetic artist Jung Yeondoo creates 360-degree photographic images using high-definition, high-speed cameras, combined with green screen chromatic backdrops and CGI special effects. This latest project of his will depict the five martial arts that are part of the Olympic Games: Boxing, Judo, Fencing, Wrestling, and Taekwondo. The models for the photographs are actual athletes training as part of the Korean Olympic team. The problem, however, is that the photos should give a representative reflection of the multi-cultural quality of the Olympic Games, so using only Korean athletes would not be ideal. Jung Yeondoo and his team had initially considered normal fashion models, but found that while the models could copy the postures of the athletes, they could not show the actual competitive intensity that an actual athlete, an actual martial artist displays. This is where myself and some other foreign martial artists residing in Korea came in.

My co-model, the Taekwondo
athlete Park Chang-Joon.

I modelled with a Korean Taekwondo athlete, Park Chang-Joon, who is on the Korean national training team. Undoubtedly in much better shape than myself and I for not a moment question his athletic ability, Park Chang-Joon was nonetheless very respectful and cordial towards me. I'm guessing that I am about ten years older than him, which in Taekwondo Olympic terms mean that I'm ancient. Olympic Taekwondo athletes are typically young adults in their early twenties. It is not unusual for a Taekwon-Do player to retire under 25.

What I lack in youth, I however made up for in intensity. Jung Yeondoo complimented me on the aggressive energy I projected during the shoot, which is hopefully effectively captured on camera.  After all, this is why they wanted actual martial artists rather than normal models.

Park Chang-Joon and myself testing a
pose for the 360-degree photo shoot.

It was a very nice experience, and while I will not get a copy of the final product (it is copyrighted by the Olympic History Museum), I will receive a DVD of the raw footage captured.

I never imagined that I'll have any part in anything related to the Olympic Games. I'm not by nature a very competitive person. I am an artist at heart, so what better way for me to be involved than as part of a permanent art exhibit! And one day, when I visit London, I look forward to visit myself in a museum!