|
Author |
Message |
LLosik
Guest
Posts: 5
Registered: Jan 2006 |
 Posted February 15th, 2006 11:48 AM IP   
I Have available moo duk kwon copies of So Rim Jang Kwon and Tae Kwuek Kwon instructions for each hyung. Send me your email or fax nomber on my email lenlosik@sbcglobal.com and I will get them to you right away. They include more instructions that the original illustrations in the original books they were published.
LLosik
|
|
  |
|
Mac
Cyber Master
Posts: 2195
Registered: Apr 2004 |
Posted February 15th, 2006 12:25 PM IP
Hey Len, is the TaeKukKwan Hyung the one that was standardized in 1956 - (the taijiquan in 88 forms)? I belive that was the one that was used in the MDK. I think most groups that do it today perform the shoter versions.
Have you had much luck with your book? How much are you selling it for?
Dennis McHenry, Houston, TX
http://www.SungshilKwan.com/TangSooDo
McHenry's TangSooDo
|
|
 |
|
Butch
4th Degree Master
Posts: 740
Registered: Jun 2004 |
Posted February 15th, 2006 02:08 PM IP
Master Mac,
Have you seen the TaeKukKwan form? If you have is it the Yang Style short form? I do the Chen Man Ching short form of 37 Postures but it has about 80 something moves in it.
Butch
Butch Voss
Time is yours to use or waste....its your choice!
|
|
|
|
Mac
Cyber Master
Posts: 2195
Registered: Apr 2004 |
Posted February 15th, 2006 03:29 PM IP
I have, it's call "88 forms", and has 400 moves in it. Many of them are repeating. From what I understand, it was what was standardized by the Chinese Government back in 1956 and used in the MDK back then.
I've discussed this with others, and most everyone will do one of the shorter versions. I don't think I have enough patience to do the whole form slow 
I think that's why some of the Chil-song forms seemed interesting, because it has some slow and fast moves, which I do like (but don't really practice the forms).
Mac
Dennis McHenry, Houston, TX
http://www.SungshilKwan.com/TangSooDo
McHenry's TangSooDo
|
|
|
|
glenmar3
Kodanja Student
Posts: 1988
Registered: Jun 2004 |
Posted February 15th, 2006 05:02 PM IP
The 88 forms was as Mac stated a concentrated version of the longer, traditional Yang style form. The 88 forms are actually the number of the finished postures in the set although there are numerous "transitional" movements enabling movement from one form to the next. I'm sure those are the 400 movements you're referring to.
The Maoist regime tried to standardize many traditional systems in order that they could be more easly taught and practiced by the populace for health and to lend themselves more readily to competition.
The original Yang style long form has about 108 postures or "forms" in the set and many of them are redundant. I used to actually know it and it took about a half hour do perform if done properly.
There are now even shorter versions, the 42 and 32 form sets.
Glenn
"Bushido is all very well in its way, but it is no match for a 30-06". Jeff Cooper
|
|
|
|
Chizikunbo
Guest
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted April 19th, 2006 05:34 PM IP
Quote:
Mac wrote:
Hey Len, is the TaeKukKwan Hyung the one that was standardized in 1956 - (the taijiquan in 88 forms)? I belive that was the one that was used in the MDK. I think most groups that do it today perform the shoter versions.
Have you had much luck with your book? How much are you selling it for?
|
Hello Master Mac,
I was talking to Master Hancock over the phone the other night, and this topic came up, he said that it is often believed to be the yang style 88 form. It is said that this was a two man drill, and that onehalf was learned at Eedan the other half at Childan.
The first Moo Duk Kwan was founded in 1945, thus Dojoo Nim Hwang Kee would have had to learn the Tae Keuk Kwon prior to this, under the guidence of Master Yang.. However if this form (88 form) was not standardized until 1956 that leaves a problem. Interesting to note is that the Yang Family actually stopped using this form, shortly after they "tried it out".
Tang Soo!
--Josh
|
|
|
|
Mac
Cyber Master
Posts: 2195
Registered: Apr 2004 |
Posted April 19th, 2006 05:47 PM IP
Yup, the dates are a "problem" that don't add up. But from the old texts the form that was used was the Yang style 88, which was standardized by the Chinese Govmt. in 1956. {shrug} I've tried Tai Chi a few times, I think I'm too impatient.
Dennis McHenry, Houston, TX
http://www.SungshilKwan.com/TangSooDo
McHenry's TangSooDo
|
|
|
|
Chizikunbo
Guest
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted April 19th, 2006 05:51 PM IP
Quote:
Mac wrote:
Yup, the dates are a "problem" that don't add up. But from the old texts the form that was used was the Yang style 88, which was standardized by the Chinese Govmt. in 1956. {shrug} I've tried Tai Chi a few times, I think I'm too impatient.
|
Yep, its a little wierd LOL
This stuff will all get figured out eventually ;-)
Ive done Tai Chi (Yang Short Form), its okay, Im thinking about trying this Chen tai chi place out, but I dont know yet 
I will always prefer my hyungs! 
--Josh
|
|
|
|
Craig
1st Degree Black Belt
Posts: 140
Registered: Mar 2006 |
Posted April 20th, 2006 09:19 AM IP
Taiji takes a certain dvotion and level of patience that many of us who have practiced other systems wont be able to grasp.
If you have the right teacher, and dont get those "government approved" sets, there is a lot of valuable combative technique hidden away in there. My Shifu states that you can learn to fight with kunngfu, or you can learn to fight with Taiji, both get you to the same place--but one takes you on a longer journey.
Its slow, and tedious, and doesnt seem as demanding initially... but what it can do to increase the softness and flow of your kungfu (or other martial arts) is amazing. I would speculate that when this form was introduced to the curriculum, that is what it was intended to do. Also the sensitivity you cn develop from pushing hands is incredible.
All that being said, Im stll not all that keen on practicing my forms
Someday, somehow, I am going to say something so brilliant, so utterly profound, that you will find my words being quoted in incredible people's message board signatures worldwide."
Craig T. Marks Esq.
|
|
|
|
RCarrasco
Posts: 39
Registered: Mar 2006 |
Posted April 20th, 2006 11:20 AM IP
I enjoy Tai Chi, it makes me feel very good, takes my aches, pains and stress away for a couple of days after performing it. If you ever see Tai Chi done fast or at normal speed it looks like kungfu/wushu.
|
|
|
|
elvislee
Posts: 277
Registered: Apr 2006 |
Posted April 20th, 2006 01:30 PM IP
Quote:
RCarrasco wrote:
I enjoy Tai Chi, it makes me feel very good, takes my aches, pains and stress away for a couple of days after performing it. If you ever see Tai Chi done fast or at normal speed it looks like kungfu/wushu.
|
Very true...I love it. Have only been tinkering with Tai Chi Yang style for about a year. when practicing the long or short form (of which I know neither all the way through yet) I can get in a mode of focus and concentration not quite like when doing hard style hyungs. The breathing and meditative aspect seems to clear the soul if you will and has actually dropped my blood pressure readings most times. It does take quite a bit of patience and if you lack patience and stick with it; patience can also be achieved...And patience has not always been one of my virtues...LOL
"History and war are cruel pedants. Those who know too little of the former are likely to have too much of the latter."
--Oliver North
|
|
|
|
rmclain
4th Degree Black Belt
Posts: 11
Registered: Apr 2006 |
Posted April 27th, 2006 02:18 PM IP
The Chang Moo Kwan and Kang Duk Won also had a form titled, "Jang Kwon," which the founder ,Yoon Byung-in, learned growing up in Manchuria in the 1920's & 30's. Grandmaster Kim Soo in Houston, Texas was an early student of the Chang Moo Kwan & Kang Duk Won and still teaches this form (both offensive & defensive sides). Would be interesting to see if this is close to the same form as Moo Duk Won's "Sorim Jang Kwon Hyung." http://www.kimsookarate.com
R. McLain
Robert N. McLain
Chayon-Ryu Martial Arts
http://www.arlingtonchayonryu.com
|
|
|
|
RCarrasco
Posts: 39
Registered: Mar 2006 |
Posted April 27th, 2006 11:41 PM IP
SRJK is a one person form.
|
|
|
|
rmclain
4th Degree Black Belt
Posts: 11
Registered: Apr 2006 |
Posted April 28th, 2006 02:39 PM IP
Quote:
RCarrasco wrote:
SRJK is a one person form.
|
Must be a different form than the Chang Moo Kwan and Kang Duk Won.
Does anyone have video of this (Moo Duk Kwan Sorim Jang Kwon) form?
R. McLain
Robert N. McLain
Chayon-Ryu Martial Arts
http://www.arlingtonchayonryu.com
|
|
|
|
Chizikunbo
Guest
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted April 28th, 2006 05:01 PM IP
Quote:
RCarrasco wrote:
SRJK is a one person form.
|
Actually the Yang Style 88 form is a two man form, offensive and defensive, however they are practiced as one eventually to my understanding...
I guess the first half was taught at eedan, and the second half at childan.
Funny because I know someone who was an MDK Eedan in 56 and 57 but there was no so rim jang kwon taught, just the okinwan forms. Also Jang Kwon just means "long fist" it could be any form of chinese or korean origin.
--Josh
|
|
|
|
Patrick K.
4th Degree Master
Posts: 78
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted April 28th, 2006 11:35 PM IP
Actually, RCarrasco is correct. The So Rim Jang Kwon form is nothing more than a set of Shaolin drills.
In fact, So Rim is translated as Shao Lin. Jang Kwon is translated to mean Long Fist. The interesting thing about the So Rim Jang Kwon form is that so many people MDK people are looking for it.
Supposedly the So Rim Jang Kwon hyung was taught around the 2nd dan level of the Moo Duk Kwan. Unfortunately, I do not think it was something that was shared with a lot of members.
Now the form that RMCLAIN is describing sounds an aweful lot like So Ho Yun.
Best of luck to those of you on the search for these two forms...
Thanks,
Patrick K.
|
|
|
|
RCarrasco
Posts: 39
Registered: Mar 2006 |
Posted April 29th, 2006 08:06 AM IP
SRJK was translated already, not a perfect translation, but it's very hard to perform, there is a double front kick at the beginning. It's very difficult to perform. Also some of the steps say: "same as step # 9". It wasn't written so you could learn it from the book, but writen so you could remember the steps. Reads as personal notes. You have to learn it from somebody and then you can use the notes to practice or remember it.
|
|
|
|
Chizikunbo
Guest
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted April 29th, 2006 08:35 AM IP
Quote:
RCarrasco wrote:
SRJK was translated already, not a perfect translation, but it's very hard to perform, there is a double front kick at the beginning. It's very difficult to perform. Also some of the steps say: "same as step # 9". It wasn't written so you could learn it from the book, but writen so you could remember the steps. Reads as personal notes. You have to learn it from somebody and then you can use the notes to practice or remember it.
|
Yes I am familar with the term Shoalin, So Lim, So Rim etc as it relates to this hyung. I was refering to an earlier post that simply used "Jang Kwon".
The double front kick just does not sound chinese...it seems like it would be more of a grounded from being that Master Yang also taught Grandmaster Tae Keuk Kwon (Tai Chi Chuan)...
but it could be GMs interpretations like the Chil Sung and Yuk Ro hyung...
--josh
|
|
|
|
rmclain
4th Degree Black Belt
Posts: 11
Registered: Apr 2006 |
Posted April 29th, 2006 08:49 AM IP
something that was shared with a lot of members.
Now the form that RMCLAIN is describing sounds an aweful lot like So Ho Yun.
Best of luck to those of you on the search for these two forms...
[/quote]
No, I practice the form So Ho Yon (Little Tiger's Play)and I'm surprised someone else knows the name of this form. The So Ho Yon form we practice is very close to the version on Master Mac's videos. Do you practice this one also? This is not the same as Jang Kwon, though both forms follow a straight line during the forms. I believe all of the chuan-fa form I practice follow that "straight line"same path.
I also, practice the form Jang Kwon (long fist) as taught from Yoon Byung-in. Jang Kwon is taught as two seperate forms in our system: offensive part at 1st dan, defensive form at 2nd dan. You can practice the forms individually, or two people can practice together with an offensive & defensive side.
R. McLain
Robert N. McLain
Chayon-Ryu Martial Arts
http://www.arlingtonchayonryu.com
|
|
|
|
Patrick K.
4th Degree Master
Posts: 78
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted April 29th, 2006 08:59 AM IP
RCarrasco is referring to the translation of the form in the Soo Bahk Do Dae Gahm. And he is correct it is more along the lines of personal notes than anything else.
Mr. Paszkiewicz there is a difference between learning the translation for Shaolin and learning Shaolin itself. The system is very involved. Not to mention there are many off shoots within the system and the two major brnaches (Southern and Northern Style). Further there are well over 100 forms for using the staff. If you have studied any of the Northern Style Shaolin Long Fist, then you would see these kicks and similar types of moves in them and wouldn't be so apt to question whether it is Chinese or not.
With regard to the Tae Kuek Kwon Hyung, I think you are wrong about it being Yang Style altogether. In fact, the dates aren't the only things that are wrong with the form when you mention the Yang Style 88 form. But my opinion isn't the one that is important.
If you really want to learn SRJK, then go out and buy some Shaolin videos or books. It has been public for years. It still cracks me up that so many people are hunting for the SRJK hyung.
Once again, best of luck to you....
Thanks,
Patrick K.
|
|
|
|
Chizikunbo
Guest
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted April 29th, 2006 09:07 AM IP
Quote:
Patrick K. wrote:
RCarrasco is referring to the translation of the form in the Soo Bahk Do Dae Gahm. And he is correct it is more along the lines of personal notes than anything else.
Mr. Paszkiewicz there is a difference between learning the translation for Shaolin and learning Shaolin itself. The system is very involved. Not to mention there are many off shoots within the system and the two major brnaches (Southern and Northern Style). Further there are well over 100 forms for using the staff. If you have studied any of the Northern Style Shaolin Long Fist, then you would see these kicks and similar types of moves in them and wouldn't be so apt to question whether it is Chinese or not.
With regard to the Tae Kuek Kwon Hyung, I think you are wrong about it being Yang Style altogether. In fact, the dates aren't the only things that are wrong with the form when you mention the Yang Style 88 form. But my opinion isn't the one that is important.
If you really want to learn SRJK, then go out and buy some Shaolin videos or books. It has been public for years. It still cracks me up that so many people are hunting for the SRJK hyung.
Once again, best of luck to you....
|
you can call me josh ;-)
Thanks for the info, all of the masters I have spoken to say that it is yang style. One that I trust and admire alot, It would seem that it is, I mean the yang family did try this out?
Also many people know that the forms are out there,
but we, or they are looking for the Moo Duk Kwan version, or Hwang Kees interpretation, that is not out there.
--josh
|
|
|
|
Patrick K.
4th Degree Master
Posts: 78
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted April 29th, 2006 02:35 PM IP
Josh,
I think that some of the Korean Martial Arts practitioners need to understand that Chinese Martial Arts are more family style based. And even within the family you will have variations. For example, there are several sub-groups of Yang Style (Large Frame, Small Frame, Medium Frame, etc). And since the Chinese styles are family based, the people that are searching for the Moo Duk Kwan version, should really be focused on which family style to find it or the closest representative of it. At least that is my opinion. I agree that the search is an admirable and arduous one.
As far as the Tae Kuek Kwon Hyung goes, I am familiar with Master Hancock's hypothesis. And I had come to the same conclusion as him around the same time he had published his hypothesis on some of the message boards. But now, some of the people I have spoken with and some of my own research seems to indicate the hypothesis is incorrect. I found too many holes and other things that didn't make sense. Now, I could still be wrong, and Master Hancock may be correct. But it is just my humble opinion. Personally, I don’t really care if I am wrong so long as we find out the truth. In the end, I am thankful for people like Master Hancock that have gone before me and asked some of the same questions seeking the truth. It could not have been easy for those seniors that went and challenged their Korean seniors about the validity of the yarns that were being spun in those days.
On a different note, you mention a MDK practitioner that was a 2nd Dan in 1956. Do you personally know this MDK practitioner, or do you know them through someone else? What is this person’s name?
Thanks,
Patrick K.
|
|
|
|
Chizikunbo
Guest
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted April 29th, 2006 02:48 PM IP
Quote:
Patrick K. wrote:
Josh,
I think that some of the Korean Martial Arts practitioners need to understand that Chinese Martial Arts are more family style based. And even within the family you will have variations. For example, there are several sub-groups of Yang Style (Large Frame, Small Frame, Medium Frame, etc). And since the Chinese styles are family based, the people that are searching for the Moo Duk Kwan version, should really be focused on which family style to find it or the closest representative of it. At least that is my opinion. I agree that the search is an admirable and arduous one.
As far as the Tae Kuek Kwon Hyung goes, I am familiar with Master Hancock's hypothesis. And I had come to the same conclusion as him around the same time he had published his hypothesis on some of the message boards. But now, some of the people I have spoken with and some of my own research seems to indicate the hypothesis is incorrect. I found too many holes and other things that didn't make sense. Now, I could still be wrong, and Master Hancock may be correct. But it is just my humble opinion. Personally, I don’t really care if I am wrong so long as we find out the truth. In the end, I am thankful for people like Master Hancock that have gone before me and asked some of the same questions seeking the truth. It could not have been easy for those seniors that went and challenged their Korean seniors about the validity of the yarns that were being spun in those days.
On a different note, you mention a MDK practitioner that was a 2nd Dan in 1956. Do you personally know this MDK practitioner, or do you know them through someone else? What is this person’s name?
|
Hello,
Thanks again for the info,
it is somthing I could do some research into.
Sorry I had my time wrong...it was 66-67. but yes I was in his association. His name is Hanshi D'veed Natan, he is a Ryukyu Kenpo man these days...
--josh
|
|
|
|
Chizikunbo
Guest
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted April 29th, 2006 02:49 PM IP
Quote:
Chizikunbo wrote:
Hello,
Thanks again for the info,
it is somthing I could do some research into.
Sorry I had my time wrong...it was 66-67. He was graded eedan by 67 but yes I was in his association. His name is Hanshi D'veed Natan, he is a Ryukyu Kenpo man these days...
--josh
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick K.
4th Degree Master
Posts: 78
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted May 8th, 2006 10:02 PM IP
Josh,
Thanks for the info.
I may take you up on the offer of doing some research at some point in the future. But for now, I would like to finish some of the research I started. I will keep you posted as to what I find. By the way, it has been very slow going. So please be patient.
Thanks,
Patrick K.
|
|
|
|
rmclain
4th Degree Black Belt
Posts: 11
Registered: Apr 2006 |
Posted May 15th, 2006 08:52 AM IP
Just to throw another angle in this discussion, I've heard that Hwang Kee was an acquaintance of Yoon Byung-in in S. Korea. Yoon Byung-in studied chuan-fa for about 20 year and taught a form called, "Jang Kwon" at several places before the Korean War (Chosun Central YMCA, Sung-Kyun Kwan University, Kyoung-Nong Agricultural College). This form had two parts taught seperately, but is also practiced as a two-person form.
Could Hwang Kee have possibly gotten this form from Yoon Byung-in?
Does anyone on this forum know this form? If so, I could compare and let you know if it is the same version of "Jang Kwon" taught by Yoon Byung-in.
R. McLain
Robert N. McLain
Chayon-Ryu Martial Arts
http://www.arlingtonchayonryu.com
|
|
|
|
Mac
Cyber Master
Posts: 2195
Registered: Apr 2004 |
Posted May 15th, 2006 09:03 AM IP
Hey Robert, welcome to the forum. I began my MA career training under GM Kim Soo’s older brother, Kim Chang-soo, and later while at the UofH with GM Kim Pyung-soo.
I’ve seen several different versions of Jang Kwon, and I’ve seen GM Kim Soo doing a version (on video). I haven’t seen the supposed MDK version, so I don’t have anything to compare it to.
Dennis McHenry, Houston, TX
http://www.SungshilKwan.com/TangSooDo
McHenry's TangSooDo
|
|
|
|
Matt
4th Degree Master
Posts: 140
Registered: Jun 2004 |
Posted May 16th, 2006 10:08 AM IP
Quote:
rmclain wrote:
The Chang Moo Kwan and Kang Duk Won also had a form titled, "Jang Kwon," which the founder ,Yoon Byung-in, learned growing up in Manchuria in the 1920's & 30's. Grandmaster Kim Soo in Houston, Texas was an early student of the Chang Moo Kwan & Kang Duk Won and still teaches this form (both offensive & defensive sides). Would be interesting to see if this is close to the same form as Moo Duk Won's "Sorim Jang Kwon Hyung." http://www.kimsookarate.com
R. McLain
|
Would you happen to know of a video of Yoon's version of Jang Kwon?
Matt
"The essence of Karate-do is to keep practicing." --Gichin Funakoshi
|
|
|
|
rmclain
4th Degree Black Belt
Posts: 11
Registered: Apr 2006 |
Posted May 16th, 2006 04:11 PM IP
[quote]Matt wrote:
Would you happen to know of a video of Yoon's version of Jang Kwon?
Matt
[/quote
I know Grandmaster Kim Soo has video tapes of himself demonstrating this form over the years. He went through great pains to preserve the curriculum from the old Chang Moo Kwan and not be pressured into teaching Taekwondo. Not likely he would give that out unless someone was a direct student. Otherwise, I don't know of another video resource.
You may check and see if Kang Rhee in Memphis has a video on it. I've been told he trained very sporatically at either the Chang Moo Kwan or Kang Duk Won. He demonstrated with Grandmaster Kim in the 1960's in the US. It is possible he may still know Chang Kwon.
The following is a link to a 1968 demo in Dallas. Grandmaster Kim Pyung-soo is performing Jang Kwon with Kang Rhee and seperately demonstrating So Ho Yon. You can't really tell much from the pictures though.
http://www.kimsookarate.com/gallery...t30/uskc68.html
Master Mac,
That's great you got to train with both brothers. Alot of people think that GM Kim Pyung-soo's older brother, Kim Chang-soo trained first. and is senior in rank. Actually, Grandmaster Kim Pyung-soo was already a black belt (don't know which degree) when his brother started training. I never got he chance to meet him (Kim Chang-soo).
R. McLain
Robert N. McLain
Chayon-Ryu Martial Arts
http://www.arlingtonchayonryu.com
|
|
|
|
Butch
4th Degree Master
Posts: 740
Registered: Jun 2004 |
Posted May 16th, 2006 05:51 PM IP
I was just wondering that since everyone is talking about these forgotten MDK forms, has anyone ever seen either of them?
Butch
Butch Voss
Time is yours to use or waste....its your choice!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac's Korean Martial Arts Discussion Board :: Korean Martial Arts :: Tang Soo Do :: So Rim Jang Kwon & Tae Kuek Kwon Hyungs
Page: 1 2 3 4 |
|
