This article was originally published in Totally Taekwondo Magazine 1st of July 2016. It looks at Taekwondo litterature ranging from 1958 to 2010 and looks into how Taekwondo textbooks have defined sparring and forms individually and then tackles the age old quesiton wether the two have a relationship between them. I hope you will find this interesting, and since this is meant to be a serious article and not "just a blogpost" it contains references to all the books I have used for this article, as well as exactly where each of my quotes has been found. Earlier I have done a lousy job With this, just providing the person behind the quote and maybe a title, but if a reference is to have true value it needs to pinpoint a location so that people can go and check all my claims, and do it easily instead of having to sift through a whole book each time. It is my hope that more will try to write and produce more serious Taekwondo litterature over time so that we can elevate the martial art we all love and respect. I might not be a scholar but I do try, and this is the result of just that.
Back to the sources:
The relationship between sparring and
forms,
a Taekwondo perspective
By Ørjan Nilsen
In many Dojang around the
world today free sparring is almost if not entirely equal to competition
sparring. Typically free sparring in the Dojang today is done to get some
excersice and to prepare the student for competition. If you go to a so called
«WTF Taekwondo Dojang» you will expect students who free spar to use 99,9%
kicks, if they do use hands they will only punch to the body, there will be no
grabbing, low kicks or sweeps of any kind. If you go to a so called «ITF
Taekwon-Do Dojang» you will see more punching, and a greater variety of
techniques, but it will still be kick heavy, and have most of the same
constraints as in a WTF Taekwondo Dojang (no low kicks etc). Typically the free
sparring done has no apparant overlap between what is drilled in basics, forms
or self defense.
In this article I want to
look closer on what the «sources» of Taekwondo say about what forms are, as
well as the relationship between forms and sparring. Perhaps doing competition
sparring for free sparring is not the way the founders of Taekwondo envisioned
the art to be practised? Since modern Taekwondo comes from the same
organisation namely the Korean Taekwondo Association no matter what lineage you
hail from I will look into sources from the Kwan era, as well as more recent
sources from both a Kukki Taekwondo view, and a Chang Hon Taekwon-Do view.
Before we start to look
at how Taekwondo sources define and view forms and sparring we should establish
if there ever was a precedence in Taekwondo in favour of a relationship between
sparring and forms. Both Hwang Kee, Choi Hong Hi, Son Duk Sung and others
clearly states that there is a relationship between forms and sparring. The
degree of direct overlap in this relationship between forms and sparring
depends on the author however. Hwang Kee states very clearly that: «DaeRyon (fighting/sparring) is inseperatly connected to Hyung (forms/poomsae)» (Hwang 1958 p 166). We will see that
this is a common view when looking at Taekwondo litterature, but we will also
look a little deeper on what this relationship is.
Let us look at how
Poomsae is described in various Taekwondo books. Choi Hong Hi, founder of the
Oh Do Kwan and the Internation Taekwon-Do federation describes forms in the
following quote:
«The
«pattern» is thus a set sequence of movement of attack and defence in a logical
order. Imaginary opponents are dealt with in sequence logically and
systematically under the assumption of various situations.» (Choi
1965 p 173).
This definition is very grounded in what I would call
«combat reality». We are not talking about moving meditation, or Ki-gung
(development of inner strength) here. Choi being a military general, developed
his Taekwon-Do in part to be used by the Korean millitary defines forms as a
sequence of attack and defense in a logical order. Later many Korean martial
arts students adoped the view that was prelavent on the Japanese mainland in
Karate that forms were Karate attacks and defenses against karate attacks.
Several imaginary opponents would attack from different angles. Choi states
that imaginary opponents (as in plural) exists, but they are dealt with
logically and sytematically and not only that he adds: «under the assumption of
various situations». In other words the definition he makes opens up a very
broad view of what kind of «combat» you can envision during the performance of
forms. Many are still stuck in the idea that the form is a continoius battle
against imaginary opponents who will await their turn and attack with stylized
taekwondo techniques. Choi`s definition can be interpreted this way, but it can
certainly be interpreted to include self defense and close quarter combat. The
latter becomes more interesting when you take into consideration the year this
was written in, his millitary position, and the fact that these forms were
taught primarely (at the time) in the Korean millitary. Son and Clark gives
another definition on forms in their first book:
«Taekwondo
forms are stylized sequences of attacks and blocks of varying degrees of
difficulty. Forms contain from twenty to nearly fifty positions, each of which
involves either an attack or a block or a combination of attacks and blocks.
Each position is specific: there is only one right way to do it.» (Son & Clark
1968 p 61)
Do not get too
hung up on the «blocks» in the quote above. Son was translating the word
«Makki» which can be translated as «block» but it is a much more neuanced term
when translated than what the english term «block» means. If he were to write
it again I am confident he would substitute «blocks» with «defense». In Son
& Clark`s definition we see that they have focused more on the performance
part of the form, than that of the combative nature of the form. They still
touch on it though, as they do say that the movements include either an attack
or a defense or a combination of an attack and a defense. I find it interesting
that they include the last sentence that each position is specific and there is
only one right way of doing it. Henry Cho also includes a definition that I
think is pretty similar to the one provided by Son & Clark:
«Many
forms or, in taekwondo terminology, «hyung» are practiced, going from fairly
simple ones for beginners like Tae Kuk Hyung to the highly complex ones for
advanced practisioners. Basically, they all consist of various offensive and
defensive movements performed in a sequence. The forms are intended to help the
trainee develop speed, strength, accuracy and balance. To accomplish these
objectives, the trainee must practice them constantly.» (Cho
1970 p 52)
Cho does not seem to
offer much direct overlap between sparring and forms. In his definition he puts
much more weight into the fact that the forms develop attributes which then can
be exploited and used in sparring. The attributes being speed, strenght,
accuracy and balance. In later years there has been a growing trend in Karate
and Taekwondo where the older «textbook applications» also known as the block
kick punch paradigm (every move has to be a block, kick or punch) has been
rejected and new paradigms has been in development. One school of thought is
that forms are movement education, and Cho`s definition certainly fits well
within this school of thought. The movement education idea is often presented
as something that has come into being in the last decade or so, but here we do
see that in Taekwondo litterature this idea can be traced back to the 1970s,
and possibly even longer back. The other school of thought regarding forms that
have been gaining traction is that the forms demonstrate close quarter combat
and self defense techniques against habitual acts of violence rather than the
duelling, taekwondo student vs taekwondo taekwondo student we usually see in
textbook applications. There are consensus for the forms detailing actual
fighting techniques in Taekwondo litterature in newer material (as well as in
older material as we saw in Choi`s definition). Kukkiwon Textbook provides a
detailed definition of forms.
«From
the technical viewpoint, the poomsae itself is Taekwondo, and the basic
movements are no more than the preliminary actions to reach the poomsae. The
kyorugi is a practical application of the poomsae and the taekwondo spirit
is manifested not in an abstract mental philosophy expressed in the documents
but in the actions of Poomsae.» (Emphasis by the author. Kukkiwon 2006 p
304).
In Kukkiwons definition
of forms we see that there is a much broader view in forms and training of
forms, than what the other sources depict. Here you practise basics to train
poomsae, and sparring is a practical application of poomsae. I find this view
interesting and refreshing. The definition also touches on noncombative aspects
of forms by saying that they contain the «taekwondo spirit». In the
introduction I stated that Olympic sparring does not really have much in common
with the techniques, tactics and strategy that we see in forms. The fact that
Kukkiwon states that Kyorugi is the practical application of forms seems to
suggest that we should look into the reason why there is not much overlap
between forms and sparring when they do say that there should be one. Kukkiwon
is not the only one who makes this claim though. Lee Kyu Hyung includes an
interesting definition on forms in his book «What is Taekwondo Poomsae».
«Definition
of Poomsae by Kim Yong Ok:
Kim
Yong Ok who was a former professor of Koryo University and author of
«Principles of the philosophy of taekwondo» defines poomsae as
«stereotypification of success cases in sparring, and its primary purpose is to
make its learners reach the inspiration of successful sparring (1990).» (Lee 2010 p 66)
Again we see the
close link that should be between forms and sparring, but looking at Olympic
sparring today this link seems to be lost. Sihak Henry Cho made the case for
forms being indirectly applicable in sparring in that it developed usefull
attributes, but Kim and Kukkiwon both seems to suggest that forms should have a
much more direct relationship than the indirect overlap that Sihak Henry Cho
suggested. Choi Hong Hi touched upon the reasons for forms training in his
Taekwon-Do:
«Practice
in the «pattern» enables the student to go through the fundamental exercise, to
develop sparring techniques, to improve the flexibility of movements, to
familiarize with the body shifting, to build up the muscles properly, to
control the breathing and to acquire certain special techniques which cannot be
obtained from the fundamental exercise alone» (Choi 1965 p 173).
From the combative
rooted definition of forms that we saw earlier it seems that Choi too saw forms
as more than just training for sparring or fighting. He highlights helpful
attributes that will help people in sparring, but at the same time he is very
clear that training in forms develop sparring techniques. Eventhough he
highlights helpful attributes that gives us an indirect relationship between
forms and sparring, he still maintains the notion of a direct relationship
between the two. Son & Clark provides us with their answer on «why practise
forms» in their book:
«Forms,
being combinations of attacks and blocks, teach the student to put together
into combinations the basic attacks and blocks he has learned. These
combinations become so habitual to him that he can use them in fighting without
having to stop and figure out what comes next. Also, the process of putting
together attacks and blocks itself becomes familiar to him, so he is able to
execute combinations of movements necessary to meet a given situation without
having to think out each step in the process. Learning the process of combining
attacks and blocks is more important than learning the individual combinations
because the process once learned offers an infinity of attacks and blocks.» (Son & Clark
1968 p 61-62)
In the quote above
we see that the key point on the relationship between forms and sparring is to
learn how to intuitivly link techniques together in an infinite noumber of
ways, so we can adapt to any situation without thinking. Eliminating concous
thought is a great asset to learn in any combative setting, not matter if you
are in a millitary close quarter combat situation, or if you are defending your
self or a loved one. Likewise in a sport setting, being able to move without
thinking is a great asset. While other authors focuses on the physical
attributes learned from forms, Son & Clark gives us a look into an
interesting and helpful mental attribute from training forms. Lee Kyun Hyung
lists reasons for training forms as well. He lists health benifits, and other
non combative benifits for forms training in his book, but the first two
reasons for training forms in his book is as follows:
«Poomsae
training purpose:
1:
Poomsae training primarily aims to learn the face-to-face fighting arts for an
actual field to protect oneself in an emergency
2:
Poomsae training is one way to learn face-to-face fighting arts for an actial
field. It primarily aims to apply one`s learned techniques immediately to the
actual field by repeating in advance countless attack and block techniques.
3:
It is very improtant to understand exactly technical contents about how to make
a defense and try attack back against opponents and characteristics, functions,
and methods of each movement.
4:
Apart from face-to-face fighting in Poomsae training, it has been considered as
physical training for good health in recent years.
5:
As Poomsae has no opponents, there is no risk at all. You can learn some
movements of face-to-face fighting. It has been recognized that it has
physiological effects as you can move freely your whole body and four limbs.
6:
In addition to the rules restricted in competition sparring, you can learn a
variety of techniques to be used in the actual field. It is a safe physical
activity and more people continue to focus on health improveent and mind and
body training.» (Lee
2010 p 42)
Lee`s purpose for
forms training is the first one that gives us a look into why there is not that
much overlap between competition sparring as most Dojang today consider free
sparring and forms. He makes it abundantly clear since his top two purposes to
forms training is to prepare yourself for self defense in an emergency in a
setting outside of the Dojang (he says «in the actual field»). We talked about
the movement education paradigm for forms training that has become increasingly
popular, but here we see a pretty recent publication stating that the top two
purposes or reasons for forms training is to prepare yourself for an emergency.
Kukkiwon Textbook also mentions this view when looking at forms training:
«Training
of Poomsae
1) Pattern.
The first step of training Poomsae is to learn the pattern. Concentration of
spirit, eyes, angles of movement must be emphasized in addition to the accuracy
of actions.
2) Significance.
In the next step, the emphasis must be laid on the balance, strength and
weakness, low or high speed, respiration and Poomsae line. The significance of
movements, connection of pooms and the complete Poomsae must be learned
correctly.
3) Practical
use. One must adapt what he has learned to his practical use, finding out the
practicability.
4) Self
style. One must evaluate his findings about the effectiveness of what he has
learned, comparing with his or her bodily structure, speed, strength, impulsive
power, point of emphasis in training etc., and modorate the techniques
into his own style.
5) Completion.
One achieves a synthetic accomplishment of Poomsae training by mastering the
art of taekwondo techniques including taekwondo spirit.» (Kukkiwon Textbook
2006 p 306)
As you can see the
movement education paradigm largely stops at step 2, bypasses step 3 and 4
completly, before giving us step 5, but this would in my mind be a false step
5. Look at step 3 above and see how they highlight that you should find out the
practicality of the forms. To met his implies very much the same as Lee states
in his book, that there are supposed to be more to the forms than only
performance art, and or simplified block kick punch applications. Kukkiwon does
not talk much more about Kyorugi or sparring, but as we have allready seen they
think that sparring should be a practical application of the forms. If Lee is
correct in his top two reasons for training forms, and kukkiwon is correct that
sparring is supposed to be a practical application of poomsae then perhpas the
way we do sparring today does not fit in with this view? I doubt anyone today
would make a case for how Olympic sparring or competition sparring is great for
self defense, and that the techniqal overlap between forms and sparring is
great in the way sparring is done these days. But what if we were to include a
more non restrictive way of sparring? This would certainly both prepare
yourself for an emergency (as Lee says forms training should) and be a practical
application of forms (as Kukkiwon says it should be) at the same time.
How does Taekwondo
litterature look at free sparring? Have we lost something along the way? Choi
has an interesting view on sparring:
«Sparring
is the physical application of attack and defence techniques gained from the
patterns and fundamental exercise against the actual moving opponent or
opponents under various situations; therefore it is not only inseperable from
the patterns but also indispensable to promoting the fighting spirit and
courage, to training the eyes, to reading the opponents tactics and manoeuvres,
to forging the striking or blocking points, to testing his or her own skill and
ability, to learning other movements hardly to be acquired from the patterns or
fundamental exercise.» (Choi 1965 p 240)
This view of sparring is interesting as it
in my eyes at least looks to promote a much more open free sparring than what
you see today. He also clearly highlights that there should be a huge overlap
between forms and free sparring in that they are unseperable, just as Hwang Kee
did in 1958. This open view is also made even more clear when we look to Son
& Clark`s book:
«One
of the ultimate objectives of Taekwondo training is free style fighting. Of
course, free style fighting is a substitute for the real ultimate of Taekwondo,
self-protection against any attack at any time under any conditions» (Son & Clark
1968 p 267)
This is perhaps the definition of free
sparring that is the least restrictive I have seen in all the books I have
read. Son & Clark`s view of sparring makes perfect sense when you compare
it to the others definition of both forms and sparring. If you make sparring
less restrictive and more self defense oriented you will apply more of your
forms in sparring. This is exactly what those who believe forms contain
practical applications are saying we should do too. The aim of Taekwondo is
self defense in any situation, forms are there to help us prepare for this
situation, and free sparring is what we can do to train for it and still have
safety in mind so we do not end up with a lot of injured students.
Conclusion:
I think we can
safely say that the way we practise free sparring in most Dojang around the
world today is heavily influenced on the specific environment of competition
sparring against a similary trained student. We can also say based on taekwondo
litterature that sparring should be much more open and varied than what we
usually see today. While competition sparring is here to stay, it has gone from
drilling a specific combative range, into a goal in and of itself. Sparring in
the past was seen to test the student in varying situations, and to prepare the
student to defend himself in an emergency. Forms has both an indirect and
direct overlap to sparring depending on how you view and define sparring. They
have an indirect relationship in that forms help develop mental as well as
physical attributes that are helpful for both sparring (of any kind) and self
defense. For self defense and more open and varied sparring forms also has a
direct overlap in that the movements, tactics and strategy of forms can be utilized
and experimented in free sparring against an uncooperative opponent. The thread
that keeps everything together into a coherent system from basics, to forms to
sparring is the goal of being able to defend yourself or a loved one. If this
goal is in the instructor and students mind while training, then we keep forms
and sparring in accordance with how it has been traditionally taught and done
in Taekwondo.
I hope to provide much more video content to this blog in the future. I have therefore set up a GoFundMe page on www.gofundme.com/traditionaltaekwondoramblings which I hope I can crowdfund a video editing software so I can make good quality videos for the blogs readers. If you want to contribute please visit the link to my GoFundMe page. Every donation helps :-)
References:
Hwang Kee 1958 Tang Su Do Textbook
Choi Hong Hi 1965 Tae Kwon Do
Son Duk Sung & Robert J. Clark 1968 Korean Karate; The art
of Tae Kwon Do
Sihak Henry Cho 1970 Better Karate for boys
Kukkiwon
Textbook 2006 edition
Lee Kyu Hyung 2010 What
is Taekwondo Poomsae?
No comments:
Post a Comment