8 posts / 0 new
Last post
David Holland
David Holland's picture
Kick catch takedowns and escapes from Joong-Gun

Hi everyone. I've been researching ITF forms for over 2.5 years now and have just completed an analysis of Joong-Gun that I'd like to share. I believe that the form is logically organized around the theme of kick catching. The form gives you four takedowns you can perform after catching a kick, as well as four escapes in case your kick is caught. Half the form is a counter to the other half of the form.

The organization is like so:

  • Ready position & moves 1-3/4-6: Front kick catch and takedown, ver.1
  • Moves 7-8/9-10: Front kick catch and takedown, ver. 2
  • Moves 11-13: Front kick catch counter, ver. 1
  • Moves 14-16/17-19+20: Front kick catch counter, ver. 2
  • Moves 20-22/23-25: Roundhouse kick catch and takedown
  • Moves 26-27/28-29: Roundhouse kick catch counter
  • Moves 29-31: Side kick catch and takedown
  • Move 32 & return to ready position: Side kick catch counter

I cover the applications in three blog posts, with pictures and explanations for everything:

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

Tau
Tau's picture

I am familliar with the pattern. Without going into depth, all applications from the TKD forms are inherantly flawed by the nature of their origins. Any sound applications are born out of the standard, ability and imagination of the practitioner and their ability to overcome the flawed nature of the patterns. Your work is good. If that's how you want to see those applications then that's great. It makes sense to keep to a theme and seek a particular lesson or seek principles from the pattern.

David Holland
David Holland's picture

Hi Tau. I'm glad you liked the work. 

I disagree with your statement that the TKD forms are "flawed by the nature of their origins." The ITF forms were collaborative creations of various Korean commanders sharing their self defense knowledge. The evidence -- both internal and external/historical -- supports the existence of deeper applications. The first two forms -- Hwa-Rang and Choong-Moo -- were created by Nam Tae Hi for instance, whose primary art was not karate but Chung Do Kwan. Chung Do Kwan included Judo throws into its syllabus, and in fact Choong-Moo contains several Judo throws, as well as some contingency applications if the throw fails.  

I haven't experienced any real "flaws" with the form designs. My applications for Joong-Gun use the form very literally. The takedowns aren't esoteric either, they are common kick defenses/single leg takedowns from several martial arts: sanshou, muay thai, karate, wrestling, etc. So even if the form is "flawed" as you say, it works just as well as an unflawed form.

Tau
Tau's picture

David Holland wrote:

I disagree with your statement that the TKD forms are "flawed by the nature of their origins." The ITF forms were collaborative creations of various Korean commanders sharing their self defense knowledge. The evidence -- both internal and external/historical -- supports the existence of deeper applications. The first two forms -- Hwa-Rang and Choong-Moo -- were created by Nam Tae Hi for instance, whose primary art was not karate but Chung Do Kwan. Chung Do Kwan included Judo throws into its syllabus, and in fact Choong-Moo contains several Judo throws, as well as some contingency applications if the throw fails.

My experience of studying both TKD and Karate is that the TKD patterns are essentially the Karate kata thrown up the air and allowed to smash on the floor, and then badly reassambled. This is why, after reaching TKD 1st degree, I went back to Karate to better understand my TKD. This is why the TKD patterns appear to make no sense and contrived applications need to be sought.

David Holland
David Holland's picture

My experience of studying both TKD and Karate is that the TKD patterns are essentially the Karate kata thrown up the air and allowed to smash on the floor, and then badly reassambled. This is why, after reaching TKD 1st degree, I went back to Karate to better understand my TKD. This is why the TKD patterns appear to make no sense and contrived applications need to be sought.

I don't want to delve into this too much because it's off-topic, but your sentiments are subjective ones. While it's true that the first five ITF forms have their basis in the 5 Heians, the majority of sets in the ITF forms are original, and even the sets that are taken from kata have been altered significantly. Some of the movements are original too, like our hooking block. Simon O'Neill explains this in more detail in The Taeguek Cipher.

Some martial artists will tell you with a serious face that all kata is useless. They only make sense once you understand the underlying applications and logical structure. If you and I were to look at a Taijiquan form together, we'd probably have no idea what's going on because the style is so different from the forms we practice, but that doesn't mean applications don't exist.

Tau
Tau's picture

David Holland wrote:

My experience of studying both TKD and Karate is that the TKD patterns are essentially the Karate kata thrown up the air and allowed to smash on the floor, and then badly reassambled. This is why, after reaching TKD 1st degree, I went back to Karate to better understand my TKD. This is why the TKD patterns appear to make no sense and contrived applications need to be sought.

I don't want to delve into this too much because it's off-topic, but your sentiments are subjective ones.

I disagree. There's no doubting the history of the patterns and the arts studied by the founders of TKD. The subjective part is my personal oppinion of the patterns. Whereas I don't regret my time in TKD in hindsight my time could have been much better spent in other arts. Compared to the Karate kata I find almost no value in the patterns. Some aspects are pleasurable to perform, sure. Athleticism starts earlier in the TKD patterns that it does in the kata but I place next to no value on the practicality of them.

David Holland wrote:
While it's true that the first five ITF forms have their basis in the 5 Heians, the majority of sets in the ITF forms are original, and even the sets that are taken from kata have been altered significantly.

When I took up TKD I had a limited kata repertoire and so I saw that too. However the more kata I learn the more kata I see in the TKD patterns. Only in 2015 I learned the solo form of Jitte and thought "that's where Toi Gye gets it from - Jitte meets Heian Godan." Ditto learning Empi and seeing it in Chung Moo.

David Holland wrote:
Some of the movements are original too, like our hooking block.

What do you mean by the "hooking block."

David Holland wrote:
If you and I were to look at a Taijiquan form together, we'd probably have no idea what's going on because the style is so different from the forms we practice, but that doesn't mean applications don't exist.

I think we could make educated guesses. But I don't feel it's a fair comparison anyway.

Finlay
Finlay's picture

I agree with Tau on this. When going through the patterns I can take out a number of applications. However, in all patterns there are movements that as yet, for me, seem to have no application to them that goes with the movements before or after. Researching possible applications for each patterns is interesting and worth studying but you do have to get ready for some frustrations

PASmith
PASmith's picture

Hooking block isn't original to TKD IMHO. Tensho kata has them and various other kata have hooking block motions (albeit sometimes the other hand is assisting or touching the hooking arm rather than coming back to the hip. I'm with Tau on this. Having done TKD and Karate and reading the work of Iain and Gavin Mullholland the karate kata are generally much better structured than TKD patterns in terms of practical lessons that can be drawn from them. And as Finley says it can be really frustrating, for example, when you see something like the head throw entry in Toi Gae, which in the kata is then followed by a throw type movement, followed by a move that negates the throw entry.