Traditional Taekwondo Ramblings

Kwan Heon - A closer look at Kwan creeds of early Taekwondo part 3: Kang Duk Won

2026-03-06T14:23:00.026+01:00

Yun Byung In is one of the more interesting Kwan founders to research in that he had multiple sources for his martial art. Unfortunately he disappeared from viewpoint of the south during the Korean war (1950-53), but Gm Kim Soo found out he had made a life for himself in North Korea, unable to return to the South after the country was divided up in 1953 in a truce.

Yun Byung In not only made his mark in his own school, he worked as an instructor in the Yeon Mu Kwan Kong Su Do Bu together with Chun Sang Sup (who also disappeared during the Korean war) and while his exact school did not survive the war, he did in a way father two prominent Kwan or schools through his senior students; Chang Mu Kwan and Kang Duk Won. These two schools shared a lot of material both being from the same "ryupa"; Yun Byung In, but they did have their own Kwan Heon, creed or philosophy. In this post I want to look specifically on the Kang Duk Won one, and I guess it is only natural to go to Chang Mu Kwan in the next part.

I have so far in this series shared snippets of my first book (The Lost Forms of Oh Do Kwan Taekwondo Volume 1) to set these creeds in a sort of historical context. I think it is fascinating to see where the likely originators of the creeds came from in terms of social status, training, prior style(s) etc. In this post you can read what I wrote about Yun Byung In below, I do know his story continues after his disappearance during the Korean war, but from the perspective of his students until recent years he simply vanished. I will ask you to google "Kim Soo + Yun Byung In" if you want to read more.

Quote from "The Lost Forms of Oh Do Kwan Taekwondo" page 20-21:

"Yun Byung In and the YMCA Kwon Bup Bu

Yun Byung In was born in 1920 and grew up in Manchuria, China, where his family had relocated. In his youth, he studied an unspecified Chinese martial art before traveling to Japan in 1938 to continue his academic studies at Nihon University in Tokyo.

While in Japan, Yun became known for an incident that showcased his martial skill. He intervened when a fellow Korean Karate student was attacked by his seniors, who resented the student’s decision to spend time with his girlfriend rather than train. Yun successfully defended him by skillfully deflecting all attacks, and word of the encounter soon reached the university’s Karate instructor; Toyama Kanken.

This encounter led to a friendly exchange: Yun taught Toyama elements of his Chinese martial art, while Toyama taught Yun Shudokan Karate. Yun earned instructor certification in Shudokan before returning to Korea in 1945.

Upon his return, he initially assisted at the Yun Mu Kwan, but soon began teaching his own system at the Jung Ahn YMCA in Seoul. There, he established what became known as the YMCA Kwon Bup Bu. The term Kwon Bup (권법, 拳法) is the Korean pronunciation of the same characters as the Chinese Chuan Fa, often translated as “Fist Law.”

Tragically, Yun disappeared during the Korean War (1950–1953). It was later discovered that he had been taken to North Korea, where he reportedly died in 1983.

Despite his absence, Yun Byung In’s teachings lived on. His school would go on to give rise to two important postwar Kwans: Chang Mu Kwan and Kang Duk Won - both of which continued to carry elements of his unique blend of Chinese and Japanese martial influences." End quote

Seeing as Yun Byung In is not the originator of the Kang Duk Won Creed I find it only fair to include a little history on Kang Duk Won and the founders:

Kang Duk Won

The school is said to have been founded in September 1956 in Seoul by two senior students of Yun Byung In: Hong Jong Pyo and Park Cheol Hee. (The latter name might be a little familiar if you have done a really careful read of my book as it is from him I got the Kang Duk Won variations.). The school was unofficially started even earlier calling it the Mudo-won Taekwondo/Kwonbeop training hall. This proto Kang Duk Won consisted primarily the Tang Su Do students of Yonsei University. The title Kwanjangnim was not in use at this time, Hong Jong Pyo served as the instructor (Sabeom) of the Mudo-won.

Several months after the founding of the school Mudo-won Hong Jong Pyo withdrew due to personal circumstances, and Park Cheol Hee took up the mantle of instructor, formally establishing the school as Kang Duk Won. The name of the school means "Institute for Teaching Virtue", and Park Cheol Hee would later go on to publish one of the earliest manuals of Korean Martial Arts; PasaKwonbeop in 1957.

The reason he used the term "Won" instead of the more common "Kwan" was that Park felt that "Kwan" had Japanese connotations. Won meaning Institute was chosen because Park was trying to break away from Japanese influence. In his book (which I have not read myself, I have just read some of the forms) Park references Haeinsa Temple Gyeonghakwon as the place where he got the "won" from.

According to “(2015-07-30) Taekwondo Grand Masters Invitational Commemorative Project - Historical Source Collection”. Park himself stated that Chang Mu Kwan was established first, Kang Duk Won second, so that Kang Duk Won was a sister school or sub-kwan of Chang Mu Kwan. Most of this post draws from that work so now you have the source I am using :) The document also cites a Chang Mu Kwan dan certificate record of 1954 which might suggest that from a Chang Mu Kwan perspective the Kang Duk Won could be seen as having branched off from the Chang Mu Kwan.

In the 1958 Kang Duk Won instructor committee list we find that the recorded personnel were:

Instructor Park Cheol Hee

Senior Instructor Hong Jong Pyo

Assistant Instructor Lee Eun Jae, Joo Jin Cheol, and Kim Yang Il.

Forms practiced in the Kang Duk Won (Not a complete list)

Pyeongahn - Pinan/Heian
Jinjeong (there is a tutorial available on my Patreon) - Chintei/Chinte
Gong Sang Kun - Kushanku
Balsaek - Bassai
Gima 1-3 - Naihanchi - Tekki (Gima = Kibadachi, the stance used throughout the forms)
Balchae (not sure what form this could be)
Wanshu - Empi
Jaeun - Jion
Nopae - Rohai
Oshipsabo - Gojushiho

There were more forms than this, but these are the ones listed in the 2015 document. The document itself says that the list is incomplete ("Kang Duk Won training includes: ...."). Again I would look to Kim Soo and his Chayon Ryu if you want to know exactly how the forms were performed and see more than what is included in this list. The Jinjeong form could be a different version to the one I teach on my Patreon as "my" Jinjeong is sourced from the 1959 Taekwondo Textbook.

I have provided all of this info since I do not know exactly who made the Kwan Heon, but if I am allowed to speculate I might put forth Park Cheol Hee. It was he who formally founded the Kang Duk Won, he was the one who wrote a whole book on martial arts, so I am inclined to think it was him that made the Creed as well.

Kang Duk Won Creed:

Original text

우리는 무도를 수련하여 국민체위 향상을 도모하자.
우리는 무도를 수련하여 정도선행하자.
우리는 무도를 수련하여 민족사회의 모범이 되자.

As you can see we have 3 sentences that in this case explains why we train and for what. All sentences starts the same way and translating them directly makes for very clunky English. In essence the sentences starts with "we train martial arts for ...." or We martial arts training....." followed by some more words that do differ :-) The term used for martial arts is Mudo, so Martial Way might be more appropriate here. I have written about the term "Mudo" several times before on this blog. It is often translated as Martial Arts, but in this context it is the philosophical Do (道) that I think is important, the Mu (武) is simply the means to the Do - The Way. I think whoever made the pledge specifically chose this term carefully.

The term I translated as "train/training" is suryon 수련(修鍊) in the original text, and I doubt this term was chosen at random either. There are several terms in Korean that we can translate into "train/training" in English, but suryon has been chosen here. It consists of two Hanja 修 and 鍊 which we can then break down to see what these means.

修 (수) "Su" in SuRyon can mean several things , some of the core meanings that show up when you look at the Hanja (character) in isolation is: "to refine", "cultivate", "improve", or "to put in order". In Confucian and Buddhist texts, 修 (수) is overwhelmingly used to imply deliberate self-cultivation and moral or spiritual refinement over time.

A few examples of this is:

修身 (수신) "SuSin" meaning cultivation of the self (from Confucian moral philosophy)
修道 (수도) "SuDo" meaning cultivating the Way (Do)
修行 (수행) SuHaeng meaning ascetic or spiritual practice

All of these terms are often used in Hwang Kee´s 1958 textbook, showing that these are things appearing in several different Kwan.

鍊 (련) "Ryon" can also be seen in isolation and mean several things. If you have read anything about traditional taekwondo or Korean Martial Arts litterature using Korean terminology you have likely come across this many times. The literal meaning(s) that shows up when you look up this Hanja (character) are:

to smelt metal
to refine by fire
to temper steel

鍊 "Ryon" originally refers to the process of repeatedly heating, hammering, and purifying metal to remove impurities and make it stronger. In Traditional Taekwondo it sometimes shows up as "Forging"; Dallyon 鍛鍊 (단련), or forging"/striking post = Dallyon Joo. Ryon/Lyon is the same, only the sound changes sometimes in Korean. In East Asian philosophy, 鍊 is commonly used metaphorically for "forging character through hardship".

Now that we have looked at the two characters in isolation, lets put them together and we get something along the lines of "deliberate self-cultivation through a process of refining and tempering". "Training" is certainly a valid translation but you see how much nuance is lost in translation. Suryeon can also be paraphrased quite literally to: “To improve oneself by repeatedly refining one’s body and mind, like metal forged in fire.” It is therefore not "training" in a modern sense, i.e. what we think about when we hear the word training.

I hope you all forgive me for this detour, but this is Traditional Taekwondo Ramblings so some ramblings is to be expected. I have broken down the term used in the creed that is often translated into English as "training" and I did allude to there being several terms in Korean that also translates into English, so let us compare these to the one we actually got:

One of the first words I learned in Korean language outside of just Taekwondo terminology was "Hunryeon/Hullyeon" 훈련 (訓練), as in "Taekwondo hunryeon" = "Taekwondo training". I asked my original teacher about this and he thought it was an inapropriate word for taekwondo training due to it being more militaristic and dependant one someone else training you. In some schools the word works just fine, and I guess General Choi would have used it in his context. If you look the word up you get:

訓 = instruction / command / drill
練 = practice / repetition

"Training through instruction and repetition". So it is great for military drills, if someone trains you, you are following orders. So in a sports team setting, police and army training etc this is a good word, but it is not suitable in a philosophical manner. Perhaps instead of translating the word to "Training" we should translate it as "drilling under orders" :-) (I guess that depending on the individual Dojang and or teacher the term is perfectly usable as Taekwondo Training, I just wanted to add that.)

The other word (the third one I know) for "training" is "undong" 운동 (運動). This word is what I think is closest to the English word "Training". If you look up the Hanja characters you get:

運 = move / carry
動 = movement

In other words: "Physical movement / exercise". It is all about health, fitness and bodily activity, and nothing about any spiritual/ moral/ philosophical things. Dallyon is also sometimes translated as "training" but we have already looked at that one.

(I attended a talk done by Master Jon Lennart Løbak and took notes for this part of the post (Suryon/ Dallyon/ Hunreun and Undong. So thank you for holding that talk.)

So you see the exact wording in the Kang Duk Won Creed are carefully chosen, and translating it into English puts us in risk of losing so much nuance, but having done a deep dive on the key phrases (Mudo I have written about before on my blog) I think it is time to look at translating the creed itself.

Sentence 1:

우리는 무도를 수련하여 국민체위 향상을 도모하자.

"We cultivate ourselves in the Martial Way to improve the physical strength of the nation"

"We shall train ourselves in the martial arts to help rise the physical fitness of the nations people"

"Let us by training in the Martial Way to seek the improvement of the nations physical strength"

I have done three valid translations here based upon the Korean original text playing around with different translations to the key terms use. "Let us" is perhaps the most literal translation but I prefer:

"We shall cultivate ourselves through the Martial Way to improve the strength of the nation".

I think that in this translation we preserve much of the original nuance, and the general vibe of the creed. "We shall ... " seems more appropriate in a Creed to be recited. Having played around with a few examples I will simply translate to the best of my ability the rest of the creed and summarize them at the end. Please remember I am not fluent in Korean, nor am I in any way a professional translator. I am simply a very very very eager student of Taekwondo.

Sentence 2:

우리는 무도를 수련하여 정도선행하자.

Just a tiny bit of neuance of key terms: "Jeongdo" 정도 (正道) means the right path/ righteous way/ proper course and it is a strong moral/philosophical flavor (very Confucian or purely ethical). "SeonHaeng" 선행 (善行) means good deeds/ virtuous conduct. If we put these two together as in the creed we get something along the lines of “to follow the right path and do good” or possibly “righteous living and virtuous action”. The second line is therefore quite tricky to get right but I will try my best (keep in mind what I have said about my abilities):

“We shall cultivate ourselves in the Martial Way so that we may follow the righteous path and practice virtuous conduct.”

We can also be quite brief and get much the same meaning but might lose some of the neuance:

“We shall train in martial arts to live rightly and do good.”

Sentence 3:

우리는 무도를 수련하여 민족사회의 모범이 되자.

“We shall cultivate ourselves through the Martial Way to become exemplary members of our national society.”

So what do we have here? We have a creed that in the first sentence stresses that the reason for training is to become strong, fit, healthy individuals to help build a strong nation, i.e. contribute well to society. In the second sentence the creed stresses moral and ethical conduct, again so martial artists trained in the Kang Duk Won is a positive contribution to society as a whole. In the third one we again see the importance of the nation, where we are asked to be so strong (sentence 1) and morally just (sentence 2) and that we serve to be an inspiration for all others (sentence 3). Kang Duk Won therefore did not teach martial skill only as a way to learn how to fight, but it was very much geared to the betterment of society through the betterment of one self. The plural "We" in the creed stresses that this is the whole school (Kwan) responsibility, not just the individual student or teacher.

The amalgamation of all the Kwan into one single "style" organized in the Kukkiwon meant that we kinda lost the original Kwan (schools) teachings. We gained a lot by the founding of the Kukkiwon style, we got standardization, new forms, terminology, etc and all of this coupled with government support meant that the art of Taekwondo could spread far and wide. What I find kinda sad, is that on the way to standardization we also lost some of the unique things relevant to each Kwan. If you in 2026 try and google Kwan Creeds or Kang Duk Won philosophy for instance you will find relatively little information. I do hope that this series highlights what the original intent of the early Taekwondo (Kong Su Do/ Tang Su Do/ Kwonbeop etc) was. I really think this helps us understand our modern martial art of Taekwondo much better looking at where we came from.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider supporting my research into Taekwondo history by becoming a patron on Patreon.

My Taekwondo Nerd tier is only 3 USD per month, and supporters get access to additional material such as translations, historical notes, and form tutorials that I am working on behind the scenes.

If Patreon is not for you, please consider sharing the post with someone who might enjoy it. Sharing helps new readers discover the blog.

Kwan Heon - A closer look at Kwan creeds of early Taekwondo part 2: Song Mu Kwan

2026-02-05T17:20:00.000+01:00

In August 2025 I started on a quest to finish one of my more ambitious posts that I started, but never finished, a post where I shared and explained the different Kwan Creeds, or the underlying philosophy of each Kwan. Originally it was going to be one large post, but I never got around to finishing it, despite having some good notes and crude translations from a Korean source (which sadly does not exist anymore, but I have since found more to verify). In post 1 I tackled the Chung Do Kwan Creed, a creed that consists of 3 sentences. In post 1.2 I revisited the Chung Do Kwan after a great person took his time to point out I had made a mistake :-) So again thank you for that, I hope post 1.2 is better :-)

This, post, the third one, but I am calling it part 2 is focusing on Song Mu Kwan, a school that for some reason does not stand much out in discussions online. It seems that most people focus on Mu Duk Kwan, Chung Do Kwan, Oh Do Kwan (most often through an ITF lense) and sometimes Ji Do Kwan. Other schools like Chang Mu Kwan, Kang Duk Won, Han Mu Kwan, Song Mu Kwan etc are often overlooked. Song Mu Kwan in particular seems to often be written off as "Korean Shotokan". I do not possess any technical documents on Song Mu Kwan from the Kwan-era so I will not comment on how the techniques were performed, but we do have some oral testimony of the training, where it is said that Ro stressed striking the Dallyon Joo (Makkiwara or striking board, literally forging post), lifting weights (though I have yet to find details) and strong basics focusing on stopping power; "one strike - one kill" mentality.

Luckily enough the Kwan Heon of Song Mu Kwan does survive and it is those I want to focus on today.

Here follows a brief history of Ro Byung Jik and Song Mu Kwan from my book "The Lost Forms of Oh Do Kwan Taekwondo Volume 1: Taegeuk 1-3 Hyeong". I have previously shared the text here on the blog so feel free to skip ahead if you wish, but I find that grouping the history and background of the Kwan founder and the Kwan together with the Creed makes for a better read :-) Especially if you have not already read it.

"Ro Byung Jik and the Song Mu Kwan

Ro Byung Jik was born in 1919. Like many Koreans of his generation who sought higher education, he traveled to Japan in 1936, where he studied Karate under Gichin Funakoshi and his son Yoshitaka “Gigo” Funakoshi.

After returning to Korea, Ro made several attempts to establish a martial arts school, beginning around 1944–1945. His efforts met with limited success at first, but after the Korean War, he began to gain traction - especially as American military personnel began training at his dojang. This post-war period marked the real emergence of his school, which he named the Song Mu Kwan (송무관, 松武館).

Ro played a key role in organizing the direction of Korean martial arts during the early years. He held prominent positions within the Korean Taekwondo Association (KTA) and was instrumental in supporting Choi Hong Hi in founding the International Taekwon-Do Federation (ITF) in 1966.

According to A Modern History of Taekwondo by Kang and Lee, training in the Song Mu Kwan under Ro began with weight training and hundreds of repetitions on the striking board (dallyeon ju, also known as makiwara), even before formal instruction began. Ro emphasized strong basics and disciplined repetition, an approach that echoes the intense, foundational training style of Yoshitaka Funakoshi, known for elevating the athletic and combative intensity of Karate in the 1930s and ’40s.

The name Song Mu Kwan is composed of:

• Song (松) meaning “pine tree,”

• Mu (武) meaning “martial,”

• Kwan (館) meaning “school” or “hall.”

Interestingly, the Song (Sho in Japanese) is the same character used in Shotokan (松濤館), possibly a deliberate nod to Ro’s roots in Shotokan Karate, reflecting both reverence for his lineage and a desire to localize that identity within Korea." End quote

Trivia: Song Do Kwan is Shotokan in Korean, so SONG Mu Kwan and Chung DO Kwan both has a possible Shotokan/Songdokwan nod in their name.

According to my sources Ro Byung Jik developed tenets for his school to have as their underlying philosophy, in a similar manner to the more well known tenets of Taekwon-Do later developed by General Choi. There is a lot of overlap between the two sets which I find very interesting.

The Kwan Heon of Song Mu Kwan

예의 존중 (Yeui Jonjung)

This tenet might seem somewhat similar to the more well known ITF/Oh Do Kwan tenets of Taekwon-Do where the first part of this creed is the same as the first in ITF: 예의 (Yeui). In most texts it is translated as curtesy, but Yeui (禮儀) can also be etiquette, propriety, ritual courtesy. My original teacher who is a Korean native translated it once to me as "The correct way of doing something". The second part of the tenet: 존중 Jonjung (尊重) can be translated as "respect", "honor", or "esteem". Together this can be translated as: "Respect for etiquette and propriety". The "propriety" is added to reflect the Confucian depth of "Yeui" better than mere "etiquette" alone would. Online you might see: "Respect for curtesy", "respect for etiquette" or simply "Be curtious" but I hope breaking down the phrase shows that there is a little more going on than that. Gichin Funakoshi once famously said: "Karate begins and ends with courtesy", so there is no wonder that Ro, a direct student of Funakoshi, would include this in his Kwan Heon. Another slightly simpler translation which is also valid is Courtesy AND Respect :-)

극기 겸양 (Geukgi Gyeomyang)

Once again the first part of this tenet might look familiar to those more aquatinted to the ITF tenets, 극기 or Geukgi (克己) shows up in the tenet "self control" and it contains the same meaning here (self-control, self-mastery, overcoming the self). The second part 겸양 (謙讓) can be translated as: "modesty", "humility", or "yielding attitude". Together the meaning can be translated as: "Self-control and humility". Again we see a very strong Confucian influence on the tenets Ro uses.

부단 노력 (Budan Noryeok)

The third tenet consists of two words; 부단 (不斷) which can be translated as "unceasing", "uninterrupted", or "never-ending" and 노력 (努力) that can be translated as "effort", or "striving". Together this tenet can be translated as "Ceaseless effort", or perhaps a little more plain-talking: "Never give up". Again we see a similarity in the more well known tenets by Choi Hong Hi, although he uses other words to get to the same meaning, often translated into English as "perseverance". So to be clear the tenets wording is different, but the overall meaning in language is the same. A trend we see is the Confuscian language used by Ro vs the sometimes militaristic language used by Choi Hong Hi, but Choi´s military backgroung is well known so there is nothing strange about that. Taekwondo and indeed Martial Arts instructors in general often say that (insert martial art here) is a marathon, not a sprint, which is also something we see reflected in this tenet.

기웅 만부 (Giung Manbu)

The fourth tenet consists again of two parts; "Giung" and "Manbu". I have seen this tenet translated as "Indomitable Spirit" online, but if you look at the wording used we see that 기웅 (氣雄) can be translated as heroic spirit or perhaps courageous energy, ki showing up often enough that well read readers of this blog will know it is a little difficult to translate directly, but "energy", "spirit" and even "principles" are sometimes used. In this context courageus/ Heroic spirit/ energy all works. 만부 (萬夫) literally means ten thousand men, but the phrase shows up in classical military and moral litterature in idioms so we can infer a more poetic; "unyielding before any opponent" according to a more knowledgeable person than myself. Literally it means something like “a spirit that ten thousand men cannot overcome.” This is a similar tenet to the indomitable spirit used in Choi Hong Hi´s tenets: 백절불굴 (Indomitable Spirit). But as you can see the wording is different. I will revisit Choi´s tenets in a future post, its just that his are so well known that they are good to compare to, but I will not go into them indepth until I have put forward more of the lesser known creeds.

문무 겸전 (Munmu Gyeomjeon)

The fifth and last Song Mu Kwan tenet is Munmu Gyeomjeon, again consisting of three parts, the two first characters can probably be grouped as one though. 문 (文) which can be translated as: "civil virtue", "learning", or "culture", and 무 (武) meaning martial virtue, military skill. It is the same Mu as in Mudo/Muye/Mu Duk Kwan/ Musul/ Musa etc etc. The second or third depending on how you group this together is 겸전 (兼全) meaning possessing both fully. This phrase is a classical Confucian ideal going back centuries, and the possibly best translation into English I can come up with for the term, a translation that other translators much more clever than I also have put forth is: "Harmony of civil and martial virtue".

Together these tenets that together makes the "Song Mu Kwan Heon" or Creed of Song Mu Kwan gives a great insight into what the founder of Song Mu Kwan, Ro Byung Jik tried to instill in his students.

Often on sites presenting the Song Mu Kwan Creed in English there is a misconception on what is presented in the original language and what is actually present in the English text. A typical example of this is the following examples of typical Song Mu Kwan Heon is taken from here

"예의 존중 (禮儀尊重)
Everything begins and ends with Courtesy and Respect."

The problem I have with this presentation on that site is that it presents the English explanation as a translation, but it does not really say "Everything begins and ends....." only "Courtesy" and "Respect" is present. It could work as a highly interpretive translation.

"극기 겸양 (克己謙讓)
Your pursuit of the Way must be with humility, and indifference to pain or pleasure. "

This English text is so interpretive of what it really says in the original language that I am not sure if we should call it a translation. Again if someone had a talk "about what the creed means" and talking around the meaning it is fine, but often this is presented as a translations which it is not. "Self control and humility" is what the text actually says (taking into account that some variations will be OK depending on what nuance of meaning a translated wishes to come across. There is no "pursuit of the Way....." in the original.

"부단 노력 (不斷努力)
Realizing the Truth of Song Moo Kwan is a lifelong pursuit."

Again if you were to talk around the original concept the English is ok, but as a translation it is very overreaching. There is no mention of Song Mu Kwan, truth or anything like that. "Never ending effort" and slightly interpretive but completely ok as a translation "lifelong pursuit", is in the original tenet or creed. Nowhere does it say what the English says.

"기웅 만부 (氣雄萬夫)

Your Indomitable Spirit should reflect the power of a million men."

This one is actually OK based upon my research into the phrase. Manbu as in 10 000 is idiomatic and does not necessarily mean exactly 10 000, a million in the translation is just as idiomatic in English.

"문무 겸전 (文武兼全)

Unite the wisdom of the Scholar with strength of a Warrior, integrating your mind and body into one."

This one too works. Slightly interpretive but it is inline with what the original actually says.

I do not want to infer that the text I borrowed here is not authentic. For all I know this might even come from Gm Ro Byung Jik himself. If that is true however I think he talked about what the Creed says, and not actually translated it, because as we have seen in the post when you check what it originally says it is not the same as the English provided in the site I linked to. The problem arises when people who can not read Korean look at the English text and say: "This is what these characters mean".

I hope you enjoyed this look into the Song Mu Kwan Creed :-) If you enjoyed this post please consider sharing it online on facebook or other social media, especially if you think it is important that people get to know more about Kwan philosophy. It is this that takes us from Taekwon to Taekwondo ;-)

Kwan Heon - A closer look at Kwan creeds of early Taekwondo part 1.2: Chung Do Kwan

2026-01-09T11:01:00.000+01:00

This post is "Part 1.2" so not part 2 :-) You see I already wrote about the Kwan Heon (Kwan or school creed) of Chung Do Kwan back in 2025. This post is both a continuation of that post and a revisit. So please read part 1 by clicking here before you read part 1.2. In that post I go briefly through the history of Chung Do Kwan which I have taken from my book (click here to buy) where I also share the history of several more Kwan (and you can read those on the blog as well). Anyway, here is the kicker: I provided my own translation of the Korean text and it was (slightly) flawed as pointed out by a brilliant commenter who took the time to comment on this outdated blogging format. Thanks to him I had to reevaluate my translation and saw where I had gone wrong. It does change the sentiment a little, but overall the meaning is in my opinion the same. And my original translation is way better than the other ones circulating the web. So here goes, part 1.2 Chung Do Kwan Creed revisited:

Originator of the Chung Do Kwan Creed, or was it Oh Do Kwan?

There has been a little discussion on who the originator of the Kwan Heon (Kwan Creed) of Chung Do Kwan was. As far as I can tell sifting through Korean articles that mentions this (they are few and far between) they all point to an origin within Chung Do Kwan, but I could not find a source that specifically said Lee Won Kuk made it. The debate that I sometimes see is that the Oh Do Kwan which we all know were founded by Choi Hong Hi initially used the Chung Do Kwan Creed too. Since some therefore present the Chung Do Kwan as the Oh Do Kwan creed and this also happens in Korean language articles so it is not a "western" thing many believe Choi Hong Hi made the creed. That last part I have only found in "western" forums and SOME, and is not as far as I know something people believe in Korea. To present the Chung Do Kwan Creed as the original Oh Do Kwan Creed is actually historically accurate as there are enough sources saying Oh Do Kwan initially used this as their creed, but the creed was imported from Chung Do Kwan and did not have its origin in Oh Do Kwan if that makes sense.

The reason for the Chung Do Kwan Creed being used in Oh Do Kwan is simple: Choi Hong Hi surrounded himself with talented and well trained instructors which he head hunted from one of the more well established and biggest Kwan there was at the time when he got the order to start implementing Martial Arts training to soldiers; the Chung Do Kwan, Nam Tae Hi being in the forefront of these initial instructors. Seeing as they were from the Chung Do Kwan, and the importance Chung Do Kwan put on their creed, there is nothing strange of them importing the creed over until they found something they could use themselves (tenets and student oath).

So to recap: Chung Do Kwan Creed was made within Chung Do Kwan, most likely by the Kwanjangnim Lee Won Kuk, and it predates the Oh Do Kwan. Choi Hong Hi picked it up and ran with it initially in the Oh Do Kwan before implementing their own creed later on, making the Chung Do Kwan Creed the original Oh Do Kwan creed. Some internet sources (even Korean ones) presents the Chung Do Kwan Creed as the original Oh Do Kwan creed giving no historical context. But now that you have read all this you know :-)

The Chung Do Kwan Creed original text:

So to break it down a little we have three sentences all starting with the same phrase "우리들 관원은" which sounds clunky when we translate it into English. We as members, we as students, we, the members of the kwan etc are all valid in this context. The most popular by far translation circulating says: "We, as members...." in all three sentences. The term kwanwon 관원 (館員) does not mean student however, if you look it up you´ll see that Kwan can mean School, and Won in this case means "Member" or "Personell". The Creed therefore is for anyone associated with the Kwan, that being student, senior, instructor or headmaster. So perhaps best way to translate it would be: "We the members of the Kwan...", but I am nitpicking here. The sentiment should be that as a member of the Kwan you were expected to.... (insert stuff here) .....

The Chung Do Kwan Creed as I translated it in part 1:

We, as members, train our spirits and bodies according to Mudo (무도).”

“We, as members, are united in mutual friendship.”

“We, as members, will comply with regulations and obey instructors.”

The error I made (The horror)

I have made several remarks over the years that I am not fluent in Korean, this is not actually that big of a problem when translating because it forces me to really check my self, be humble and double check again. The problem is that I do know some Korean (I did live there for a year and had maaaaany trips there lasting 2-4 weeks at a time) when I would learn more and practise what Korean I could. This time I read the original text and I thought I understood everything so I just translated almost without looking anything up. And this made me miss a crucial part of the first sentence. It does not only say mudo, it says mudo-jungshin. Jungshin is a term on its own that is frequently used in martial arts texts, so it was just an oversight but luckily "World Chung Do Kwan Federation certificate number 5-5544" (I do not know his name) commented on my post and made me aware of my mistake. So the first line should be:

"1: We, the members of the Kwan, discipline our mind and body, based on the martial spirit." (or mudo-spirit).

The second line can then be:

"2: We, the members of the Kwan, trust and care for one another and firmly strengthen our unity.”

And the third line can be:

“3: We, the members of the Kwan, strictly observe the Kwan’s rules and obey the orders of the instructor.”

So having redone this one I stand by my first post and my conclusions there so I will not write much more about what this means in this post. I want to add one thing though: the commenter who commented did a great job, and I salute him for taking his time to comment. This post would not exist if not for him. Another thing I want to add is: where mudojungshin appears in sentence 1 there are many different translations. The most popular being "strict code", the commenter had seen "hwarangdo" and I have seen "Taekwondo". None of those appear in the original text and is an inference done by the translator, and in "strict code" I wonder if it is google translate.

Anyway, now there exists a faithful translation on the Chung Do Kwan Creed in English :-) So if you enjoyed this post please comment or share it. If you come across any other translations that deviate from this one, share this post and ask if I am very incorrect or if the translation in question might be very loose in parts.

New Year, Traditional Taekwondo Ramblings Reflections

2026-01-06T11:48:00.007+01:00

We now write 2026, and as we say in Norway: New year - New opportunities :-) I used to be good at these kinds of posts, looking back at the old year and write about the upcoming plans. I have failed to do this for several years now :-P You got to go back to 2019 for a similar January post.

A.I. and the future of Traditional Taekwondo Ramblings

The A.I wave has hit us hard in 2025, to the point that even in martial arts media we are drowning in a.i slop, both in video, articles, blogs and I guess it is just a matter of time, books. Google has started trying to answer searches not with links going to blogs like mine, but first A.I, then sponsored pages, then "trusted pages" such as reddit and then perhaps you might find my posts. This is the current trend now, and I found myself thinking, what can Traditional Taekwondo Ramblings possibly offer people in 2025 and forward? I can not in any way shape or form compete with a.i driven blogs, and I KNOW for a FACT that there are several martial artists out there using A.I to publish articles which reads like they have written a prompt and published whatever Chatgtp had written as their own work. I make at most a few posts a month, someone using A.I can churn out 10+ articles every single day.

I confess to have used Chatgtp in a purely editiorial fashion for a few posts in 2025 and I have used A.I to make a few thumbnails, but whenever I have used chatgtp for writing I first write myself the whole text, then I ask chatgtp to clean up the language, flow and spelling errors. I then work through each paragraph going back and forth to make it just right. The end result is that I do not actually save as much time using a.i, but I do get a text that reads as an actual human being has written it.

Then it hit me: I can not compete with A.I, but I have something that A.I and A.I-heavy users do not have: Authenticity :-)

I believe people still want to read stuff written by an actual human, something not being the results of hallucinations and made up, something that while flawed looking at the writing itself, makes up for it in content and "soul". Traditional Taekwondo Ramblings started out as a the blog I wished someone else had written, and so that is how it will stay. I will write what I would have wanted to read, and one thing I just can not stand any more of is a.i slop. I do need a favor if this blog is something you enjoy; if you hear or read other peoples questions on taekwondo and you know the answer might be hiding on the blog ask them to check it out. I might not be the fastest answering comments, but I do read each and every one made on here:-)

Milestone reached:

2025 marks the year where I actually managed to go through the whoooooooole process of writing a book, I made the outline, translated source material, added my own material, edited the text (many many many times), was a model for the pictures (which I only got due to my wife being there for me), and with the help of Master Roy Rolstad (who kindly checked the ITF terminology), Master Jon Lennart (who gave me access to Kang Duk Won variants and checked some of my translations), Master Christian who provided feedback and encouragement and many many more it became a manuscript.

I then edited everything into formats that could be printed as a paperback or read on a kindle. The book: The Lost Forms of Oh Do Kwan Taekwondo Volume 1: Taegeuk 1-3 Hyeong is one of my proudest achievements :-) (It is availble on amazon, and if you already bought it thank you so much, if you liked it would you pleeeeease consider dropping a review and or some stars on amazon? and if you have not bought it yet, please do :-P

On this blog in 2025:

We had 173 000 views
76 comments
Most read post was:

Religion and Taekwondo (1 290 views)
Honoring the pioneers of Taekwondo; Chung Sang Sup (913 views)
Taegeuk Poomsae, why does everybody "hate" them? (847 views)
(only 2025 post that made the list was: Kwan Heon, Chung Do Kwan 747 views)

I managed to write 25 blog posts, perhaps the best of which were excerpts from the book.

I started out with a "reach your goals" in January, continued with sharing the Ji Do Kwan Taegeuk 1-3 Hyeong, followed that up with a lot of Taekwondo history, then started a series on Kwan creeds which I have to pick up again because I feel that might be one of the most important works outside of the book and Patreon projects I will do in 2026. The ITF tenets (not tenants) of Taekwondo and the 5 laws of Taekwondo are very well known and documented, but you will have a very hard time finding anything good on the other styles/ schools of Taekwondo.

Patreon:

I have kept up with the blogging despite also giving attention to my Patreon, and getting a book out there. I must admit that I might have putten more of my energy over there than here in 2025.

I started taking the Patreon more seriously in 2025 and revamped it from a video tutorial training channel (which I quickly understood I did not have the means to provide with enough consistency due to logistical difficulties ) to a more hybrid video tutorial, research sharing, translations and more "Taekwondo nerd sustenance" :-) There is a good mix of public posts (open for all), free posts (you must be a member but you do not want to pay) and patron only posts (posts you will have to pay to read).

Note that I have only one tier; Taekwondo Nerd Tier which is as low as I can set it (3 USD a month). I hope that enough people find my work interesting enough that the expenses to my research can be covered. Books, prints/scans by library, computer licenses etc all cost, not to mention the time put into it :-)

In 2025 I made Patreon

Video tutorial:

The video tutorials have low production value, in that I just video myself as I would teach the form to a student. So all of these tutorials are made with the goal in mind that you will know how to execute the form, know a little history, a little applications etc if you have followed along with the videos. I put repetitions into the sessions, so you do not have to go back and forth in the video.

Patreon Booklets:

Hwang Kee´s list of forms anno 1958
5 Major Tenets of Training by Choi Hong Hi 1959 (pdf 14 pages)
Hyeong names and lineages by Choi Hong Hi 1959 (pdf 50+ pages)
Funakoshi-notes, transcribed from my handwritten notes

Some of these are available on my Patreon shop for 3 USD, but if you want to save money you can become a patron for the Taekwondo nerd tier, pay for one month (3 usd) and get access to all then unsubscribe ;-P

Patreon book previews:

ABC´s of Practical Poomsae Application (this one fell to the wayside)
Lost Forms of Oh Do Kwan Taekwondo (contains almost all the introduction part of the book prior to the forms themselves).

Patreon article(ish)

A series of posts going through all the forms covered in the 1959 Taekwondo Textbook by Choi Hong Hi, their history and background and place within the syllabus.

Plans for 2025?

My goals for 2025 is to provide my patrons with at least one highvalue post a month on Patreon. That will take precedence over the blog, but I do have plans for both the blog and Patreon, so do not worry :-)

Finish and publish Volume 2 of Lost Forms of Oh Do Kwan Taekwondo
Completing the Kwan Creed blog series
Share some Pyeongahn related material (history of Pyeongahn and Anko Itosu)
Video Tutorials for Pyeongahn 2-5 (Patreon)
Video Tutorials for Do-San, Won-Hyo and Yul-guk (patreon)
Booklet on the history chapter of the 1959 Taekwondo Textbook
Booklet on "the name change" (Kong Su Do/ Tang Su Do to Taekwondo) from the 1959 Textbook (Patreon
Booklet on the definition of Hyeong from the 1959 Textbook (Patreon).

So much energy on the Patreon in 2026, but when I make something indepth for the Patreon, I can share interesting stuff from that on here too :-) So you will have if not weekly posts on here, I will do my best to have at least a monthly post on here in 2026. And since I had 25 posts in 2025 I guess I will easily manage 12 in 2026 if not many more :-)

What I want for Christmas 😇

2025-12-22T10:31:00.002+01:00

If you have purchased my book and enjoyed it. I would be incredibly grateful if you left a review on amazon🙇🏻🙇🏻😇🙏

https://a.co/d/56y7rvy

If you haven't purchased it yet, what's stopping you? 😉

Previously untranslated material from the 1959 Taekwondo textbook soon available

2025-12-16T17:04:00.002+01:00

(Post written by actual human, no A.I💻🚫)

🤷‍♂️ Did you know there were 24 patterns in the original Taekwondo Textbook from 1959?

😀Below is appendix 1 for my upcoming Patreon booklet (instant access for taekwondo nerd tier or 3usd if you don’t want to become a Patreon) coming December 24th.

📚This appendix simply lists the forms contained in the 1959 Taekwondo Textbook in order of appearance.

The booklet consists of:

✅ Full translation of Choi Hong Hi’s naming and lineages of Taekwondo forms with original text so you can check my work

✅ Choi Hong Hi’s thoughts on the strength and differences between the different schools or lineages and how we should approach them

✅ Translation of each of the background/information on the forms in all 3 lineages or schools (Sorim-Ryu, Soryeong-Ryu, Changhon-Ryu

✅ Look at first ever writings on the original Chang Hon patterns (Hwarang, Chungmu, Samil, Ulji, Unam),

These are different from later writings.

✅ Extensive commentaries and background information by yours truly on all of the text and all of the forms covered in the 1959 book.

All in all around 50(!) pages.

You can visit my Patreon and sign up as a Patreon (support me with 3usd a month and get access to everything I give out there, there’s already exclusive video tutorials and another booklet also based on the 1959 book available) or visit my Patreon shop on December 24th :-)

https://www.patreon.com/TraditionalTaekwondoRamblings?utm_campaign=creatorshare_creator

Kwan Heon - A closer look at Kwan creeds of early Taekwondo part 1: Chung Do Kwan

2025-08-25T05:00:00.002+02:00

My original teacher (Gm Cho Woon Sup) wrote some of the earliest Norwegian language Taekwondo

books out there. He also included some things that I have come to understand are very rare things in Taekwondo litterature. One of those things is the explanation of Taekwondo philosophy from the point of view of Ji Do Kwan (Wisdom Way School) which is the Kwan he hails from. In the text he explains that Kwan could be translated as School and that Heon could be translated as Life-directive. He went on explaining that there were many different Kwan and each had their own Heon, but they had the same underlying principles. That section in his book is one of the reasons I started looking into the different Kwan all those years ago, and in this series I want to explore the different Kwan Heon that the different Kwan has. If you saw the last post on this blog I can tell you that this post was started in 2016, and is a great example of me starting way too big and never finishing it. This time I am confident and know that I can tackle it piece by piece. So first Kwan out of the gate is Chung Do Kwan.

Short history of Chung Do Kwan (Skip if you have read my book)

Quote from my book:

"Lee Won Kuk and the Chung Do Kwan

Lee Won Kuk was born in Korea in 1907 and traveled to Japan in 1926 to pursue higher education. While studying law at Chuo University, he began training in Shotokan Karate under Gichin Funakoshi, making him an early Korean student of Karate, even by Japanese standards.

After returning to Korea, Lee requested permission to open a martial arts school. According to some accounts, he had to make the request three times before finally receiving approval. In 1944, he established his school and named it Chung Do Kwan (청도관, 靑濤館), meaning “Blue Wave School.”

Lee Won Kuk is widely credited as being the first Korean martial artist to use the full term Tang Su Do (당수도, 唐手道), by adding the philosophical suffix Do (도, 道) meaning “the Way”, to Tang Su, the Korean pronunciation of To-de (or Kara-te) meaning “China Hand.” This usage reflects the early terminology of Karate, which originally referred to itself as To-de (“Chinese Hand”) before Funakoshi popularized the homonym Karate (空手), meaning “Empty Hand,” in the 1930s.

As a result, in early Korean martial arts circles, terms like Tang Su Do and Kong Su Do were used, both being alternate Korean readings of the same characters used in Japanese Karate-Do (空手道). These were not different martial arts, but alternative names for the same system, rooted in Japanese Karate.

Sometime after the World War II and before the Korean War, Lee faced accusations of pro-Japanese collaboration. Although the full details remain murky, this led him to leave Korea and relocate with his family to Japan in 1950. Later in life, around 1976, Lee moved to the United States, where he continued to teach. He passed away in 2003.

Leadership of Chung Do Kwan was passed on to his student Son Duk Sung, who became the second Kwanjang (관장, Headmaster) after Lee’s departure."

End quote

So Chung Do Kwan was funded by a very very early student of pro-shotokan karate, who studied directly under Gichin Funakoshi. Based on my reading of Funakoshi's works there were two main things he stressed a lot and that was Kata (Hyeong) and Do-philosophy. Lee did not copy Funakoshi's Dojo-kun, but made one for Chung Do Kwan after he got back to Korea and opened his own school (Kwan).

According to a Korean article I read Lee made his creed and it was normal that students and even prospective students would sign a contract to uphold the creed. Another thing they did was to stand at attention sometimes before and sometimes after class often after saluting the flag reciting the creed, reinforcing it over time.

The Chung Do Kwan Creed:

We, as members, train our spirits and bodies according to Mudo (무도).”

“We, as members, are united in mutual friendship.”

“We, as members, will comply with regulations and obey instructors.”

Son Duk Sung took this creed with him when he moved to the USA and funded his Taekwondo organisation.

The Chung Do Kwan creed reflects traditional Confucian values like obedience to authority, camaraderie among peers as well as the virtue of self-discipline.

The thing we are going to see time and time again while looking at the different Kwan Heon is that they all point in the same direction of fostering good citizens that contribute positively to the society, and this creed is no different.

Seminar Report Bojeon Taekwondojang in Moss

2025-08-18T13:29:00.000+02:00

I never actually got around to post this, but once upon a time, in what might be considered one of my highlights in my Taekwondo career; little old me was contacted by a Dojang at the other side of Norway and I (a nobody who happened to have a blog) was hired for a weekend seminar :-) It was one of the most fun and rewarding taekwondo weekends I have had :-) Covid and the lock down happened soon thereafter so I never pursued doing more seminars. In fact I wrote this back in 2020 after the seminar, but never posted it. I just found it going through my "drafts" in blogger to see if there is something I started on that I could finish (sometimes I go a little too big on things and do not get around to actually finish and post it. Anyway, if you want to know how a seminar focusing on practical poomsae applications with me might look, you can read on :-) Just remember I am still a student of Taekwondo so I am sure there would be things done differently if someone where to hire me today.

Last weekend (at the time of writing) I had a blast teaching a two day seminar focusing on the practical applications of poomsae to a club located in the east of Norway; Moss. I thought the regular readers of this blog might enjoy a summary of my weekend, and perhaps by sharing the contents of the seminar someone else wanting to learn more might get in touch?

I think it was back in October 2019 I got a PM on facebook by a representative from Bojeon Taekwondo Club located in Moss asking if I did seminars. After a little back and forth we landed on the date (22nd and 23rd of February 2020) and the training time, the maximum number of participants and other details.

I have almost never travelled by train in my entire life, so it was a fun experience travelling to the seminar by train. The suspense was hightened by the fact that there were a lot of snow which sometimes blocked the lines in the days before the seminar, but I got through Ok and arrived Friday evening. I was picked up at the station by a smiling Birger (one of the key enthusiasts and assistant trainer in the club). I was dropped off at the hotel, feeling like some kind of celebrity, before being picked up a little later to go to dinner, where I also got to meet Marianne, the main instructor of the Dojang. We shared a pleasant meal, discussing everything taekwondo, and I was very taken by the founding values of Bojeon Taekwondo, offering Taekwondo in an inclusive way. Respecting the roots, looking outside of the box, while also keeping the traditions alive. I was already looking forward to start the seminar itself, but know I was looking even more forward to it.

Day 1; Basics (The basics are the advanced techniques)

The Dojang was in no way a stranger to Hosinsul (self defense techniques), but the practical applications of poomsae beyond block kick punch was a new area for them. Therefore I wanted the first day to give them a short historical context, which would also give them a context of what the poomsae are adressing (self defense and close quarter combat, not "outdated" olympic sparring). I also wanted to give them a good grounding for them to look at the poomsae themselves after I leave by giving them the keys to understand simple techniques or Gibon Dongjak (fundamentals) in a new way. I started with a short introduction and historical lecture before we started the training itself.

1st hour: Jireugi/Punching with emphasis on the pulling hand (hand on hip)

The first hands on training we did was focusing on traditional punching techniques like we see in Poomsae. I demonstrated 3 types of punches (an idea I borrowed from Iain Abernethy). Here I demonstrated the "traditional" punch (hand on hip for no reason), boxing style punch from/with a guard and a practical application punch where the hand on the hip had a function by pulling the hand of the opponent toward my hip while the other hand punched. I discussed the benifits of the pulling hand indepth before we partnered up and started drilling the use of the punch with an emphasis on actually using the pulling hand.

We practised 3 main scenarios, grabbing the lead guarding hand of the opponent pulling it away so we cleared a path for our strike, grabbing and removing a covering up attempt by the agressor after being punch in the face a few times, and from a crossed hands position which can be just about anything (a punch was blocked for instance).

Next we practised the same drills using focus mitts, so that we got to train impacting the techniques as well (we cant continually drill punching our training partners face now can we?). After that we looked more on power-generation, where in the transition from long front stance to long front stance do we connect the punch?

2nd hour: Makki-techniques, theory and applications for arae makki

I started by explaining what "Makki" means. "Block" is a valid translation but there is a lot more neuance that gets lost in translation. I have a whole article on this which you can read here so I wont go into more detail on this in this post. We then looked at Arae Makki (Low "Block") where we covered it as:

Release against same side wrist hold
Release against a cross grabbed wrist hold/ downward armbar
Upward armbar into hammerfist strike to the groin
Linked same side wrist grab defense to armbar punch combo
trained that on the focus mitts

Lunch 30 minutes

3rd hour: Momtong An Makki/ Bakkat Makki (Inward/outward block)

We looked and drilled at the use of inward and outward block, looking at the traditional technique itself and its solo performance, really looking at what we are doing, and then applying the movement against various situations. The inward block was among other things trained as a hammerfist strike, a defensive entry against a haymaker and as an unbalancing technique. The outward block was demonstrated both the old version (chambering on the inside) and the modern version. We then trained and explored the "parry-pass-concept" for quite some time, using different scenarios and drills, including the 3 point flow drill which I find very fun :-) We did some more power-generation work on the focus mitts too.

4th hour: Sonnal Geodeuro Makki (Knife hand guarding block)

We looked at the solo form of the technique, both what people today consider to be the Karate-chamber (which was part of Taekwondo into the 1970s depending on the Kwan), and the normal taekwondo version. We drilled the applications for this drill with partners using different scenarios (haymaker, limb control etc), and we also looked at a striking application or a slightly modified application from the opening of taegeuk 4 jang.

5th hour: Eulgeul Makki (High section block)

Here we looked at the high section block as a lapel grab defense (two variations), a parry-pass variant building upon what was learned earlier, and a few examples from Poomsae.

6th hour: Basic techniques, line work with applications

This is a concept I have been working on for some time but I have not shared anything on my blog (or at least I don't think I have). We all do the line work: marching up and down the Dojang floor doing single techniques or combinations of single techniques. Often I think many instructors simply link whatever they feel like, or inherited combinations which does not work in real life. I think we can start raising the bar by either drilling techniques used in sport (footwork and competition style techniques), isolated basic techniques taken from Poomsae, sequences taken from Poomsae or as in this case our own string of basic techniques which learns different free flowing from one to the next, while working.

We did the following string of basic techniques:
From a fighting position we shift our weight forward throwing a cross (no pulling hand to the hip), we slide forward while chambering and doing the knife hand guarding block as we come forward. We then shift shift to long front stance and to a twisting outward knife hand block (as in taegeuk yuk jang) followed by a side kick. After moving up and down the Dojang a few times we partnered up and drilled the application for the sequence. This sequence does not appear in any Poomsae, it is simply my invention to teach stringing applications together, and it should only function as ONE EXAMPLE not the complete truth. It is like a finger pointing a way to the moon. Do not focus on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory (as Bruce Lee probably would have said :-P ).

We throw a punch, the punch is blocked by some kind of inward parry which connects on the outside of our punch. We slide forward, using the chamber to clear the limb and controlling, and flowing into a knife hand strike. This is blocked. We shift outward while clearing the limb with a twisting knife hand block, and finish by a low kick to the side of the opponents knee which takes the opponent down.

This kind of sequence demands a lot from teachers/instructors so I have no idea if this concept will ever catch on, but it was fun.

Day 2; The structure of Poomsae

Samir Bernardo from Brazil, and Giles Hopkins have both taught me a lot on the structure of Poomsae and Samir especially has forced me to rethink a lot of my ideas on Poomsae applications. People need to understand that there is a difference in saying a low block is just a movement with thousands of applications, so a low block in taegeuk il jang has a thousand applications, as well as a low block in taegeuk yuk jang has a thousand applications. The thing is that that is not the case. The poomsae are not the basic technique, the basic technique is one movement removed from the poomsae. The basic technique as a movement has a thousand applications by itself, but once you look at the poomsae you are forced to take a lot of stuff into account. The turn, the stance, what came before, what comes after. The application you chose should ideally fit in with everything in a logical manner and suddenly the applications for the low block in taegeuk il jang suddenly drop from thousands to just a single one or a handfull of them.

We started the day looking at how a Poomsae can be seen as a whole, or the structure. Dismantling it, and putting it back together. We then had an indepth look at Taegeuk il jang step by step and how it all fitted together. Next we had an indepth look at Taegeuk Sa Jang doing the flow drill which uses the structure of poomsae I explained to flow from one application to the next against one single opponent from start to finish. I have a lot of different applications to the single techniques that together makes this poomsae, but I have to chose one specific application/scenario for each of the techniques when looking at taegeuk sa jang for it to work as a coherent whole. That is what I mean by looking at the structure of Poomsae, moving from practical applications to the basic techniques to the practical applications of poomsae. And if you have not already I'd advise you to google Samir Bernardo as he does have a few clips on youtube now, and hopefully we will see more public stuff in the relative near future.

I will see if I can make a "contact me" page or something on this blog so it is easier to get in touch with me in the near future. In the mean time I am easily reached through my blogs facebook page where you can PM me. Usually I get in touch after a few hours if not right away :-)

Special thanks to Bojeon Taekwondo Klubb Kambo who hosted me, and gave me permission to use the pictures in this post :-) I had a great time and hope to see you all again :-)

Taekwondo Kwan history part 7: Choi Hong Hi and the Oh Do Kwan (and Book project revealed)

2025-08-12T13:21:00.002+02:00

At long last, here is the revelation I have been dying to reveal:

My (first ever) Book is LIVE :-D

Click here for amazon

I have not seen it myself yet, but Kindle and Paperback version of The Lost Forms of Oh Do Kwan Taekwondo Volume 1: Taegeuk 1-3 Hyeong is live. The series on Kwan history has all been from the introduction section of the book, with the meat of the book being the Taegeuk forms as practised in Oh Do Kwan and Chung Do Kwan (they practiced the same versions).

In 1959 Choi Hong Hi published the first ever book on Taekwondo called Taekwondo Kyobon or Textbook, where he among other things presents a lot of old Hyeong later phased out. Some he also included in the 1965 English language book, the Taegeuk forms did not make it into that one though meaning that for most people their practice was unknown.

I translated the forms for my own research, and wanted to share their story and make the material more available for English speaking people who might not even know that a 1959 Taekwondo Textbook even existed.

This is just Volume 1, and I seriously contemplated starting directly at the Pyeongahn or Heian forms instead. The Taegeuk are not flashy, or "exciting". They are fundamental movements taught to beginners. In the 1959 book appendix we find a grading diagram revealing all 3 Taegeuk was required at a students first belt promotion test. I do see the value of the basics and fundamentals however and since its not really a commercial project I decided to make it from the beginning anyway :-)

The "Oh Do Kwan" in the title is there because the main source material I am framing this series on is the 1959 Taekwondo Textbook, but it is not a Kukkiwon Taekwondo book, nor is it an ITF or Chang Hon Ryu Taekwon-Do book, it is for people interested in Taekwondo history and nerds like myself. In that spirit I have included Kwan variations that I could find documentation from:

Ji Do Kwan (Sihak Henry Cho 1970)
Mu Duk Kwan (Hwang Kee 1958)
Kang Duk Won (Park Chul Hee 1957)

And since I used Choi's book: Oh Do Kwan, and since Chung Do Kwan practiced the same version move for move Chung Do Kwan. In short most of the older Kwan are represented, the ones missing (like Song Mu Kwan) is not missing out of disrespect but because I could not find era-appropriate documentation in either English or Korean.

Below you can read the final excerpt from my book focusing on Choi Hong Hi and the Oh Do Kwan. Together in these 7 blog post series I have given away most of the introduction chapter, but there are a few goodies for those who buys the book itself: deep dive into the name Oh Do Kwan, as well as a discussion of the different Kwan variations and a deep dive into the alternative names for the same Taikyoku based foundation forms.

Quote from my book:

"CHOI HONG HI AND THE OH DO KWAN

Choi Hong Hi was born in 1918 in Yongwon Village, located in what is now North Korea. His father owned a brewery business, which made the family financially secure even during the otherwise harsh conditions of Japanese colonial rule. In 1930, Choi’s father paid a significant fee to Han Il Dong to provide Choi with instruction in the Chinese classics, calligraphy, and - according to some sources - the Korean art of Taekkyon. I say “some sources” because accounts vary: in some, Choi learned and mastered Taekkyon; in others, he only received a brief introduction or was shown a few basic kicks and evasions. Choi proved to be a diligent student under Han Il Dong, and the family eventually saved enough money to send him to Japan for higher education.

According to Choi’s own accounts, just days before he was scheduled to leave Korea in 1938, the 20-year-old Choi attended a card game where he lost most of the money set aside for his travel and tuition in Japan. Also present was a well-known wrestler named Haak Soon Huh, who had won the money from Choi. Suspecting he had been cheated, but knowing he couldn’t win in a physical confrontation, Choi pretended to leave the venue-only to return with a heavy ink bottle, which he threw at the wrestler, knocking him unconscious. He quickly retrieved his money and fled to Japan earlier than planned. Once there, fearing reprisal from the wrestler who had promised to break every bone in his body, Choi began training in martial arts to protect himself.

While studying in Kyoto, Choi found a fellow Korean named Kim Hyun Soo, a karate instructor who agreed to teach him. Motivated both by fear of reprisal and by the difficult conditions facing Koreans in Japan-who were often bullied and treated as second-class citizens-Choi devoted himself to karate training. He reportedly practiced obsessively, toughening his striking surfaces on trees, lamp posts, and other available materials. In one story, Choi claimed to have defended a friend from two bullies, knocking one unconscious with a punch and causing the other to flee. Later, he is said to have traveled to Tokyo, where he continued training at Chuo University and at the Tokyo YMCA Karate Club. He also visited the Shotokan dojo, home of Gichin Funakoshi´s Karate, though there is no evidence of prolonged formal study under Funakoshi himself.

According to Alex Gillis in Taekwondo: The Killing Art, when Choi returned to Korea in 1942, the wrestler who had previously threatened him observed him training from a distance. Choi was seen kicking and punching the air and reportedly breaking roof tiles with his bare hands. There was no confrontation between them. Choi had, in effect, defended himself from reprisal through visible skill and deterrence rather than violence.

Toward the end of World War II, Japan conscripted approximately 4,300 young Koreans into their army. In 1943, Choi Hong Hi was among them. Opposed to serving the Japanese, he and several others planned a mass desertion in 1944. However, the plan was betrayed by a fellow Korean, in what would later be referred to as the Pyongyang Incident. The group had intended to escape and join Korean guerrilla forces in the Baekdu Mountains to fight against the Japanese occupation, but instead Choi was arrested and imprisoned. He endured harsh treatment and poor living conditions while awaiting what he likely believed would be execution. To maintain his sanity, he practiced martial arts in his cell and during time in the prison yard. He was released in 1945 following Japan’s defeat and the end of the war. Upon returning to his village, Choi found it under communist control and, unwilling to remain there, relocated to Seoul. He became one of the first to enroll in the newly established Korean Military Academy-an American-supported institution created to help rebuild Korea and establish a modern national army.

In the years following World War II, Choi began exploring ways to transform the Japanese martial art he had studied into something uniquely Korean. At the time, he referred to what he taught as Tang Su Do or Kong Su Do, following the terminology widely used by Korean martial artists who had learned Karate in Japan. It was during this period that the first seeds of what would eventually be called Taekwondo were planted.

In 1950, war broke out between North Korea, supported by Communist China, and South Korea, backed by the United States. Choi Hong Hi rose quickly through the ranks and became a two-star general in 1952 at the age of 33. Although the war did not officially end, an armistice was signed in 1953, establishing a ceasefire. That same year, Choi was assigned to form and train the 29th Infantry Regiment on Jeju Island. To assist in martial arts instruction, he recruited Nam Tae Hi, a decorated war hero who, according to some sources, used his Tang Su Do skills to kill enemy combatants with his bare hands during the 1950 Battle of Incheon

Nam Tae Hi was born in 1929 and reportedly began martial arts training in response to bullying by Japanese students during the occupation period. He is said to have trained five days a week at the Chung Do Kwan under its founder, Lee Won Kuk. In 1953, he was summoned to Jeju Island to serve as the martial arts instructor under Choi Hong Hi, teaching Tang Su Do and other related skills to the soldiers of the 29th Infantry Regiment.

A year later, in 1954, President Syngman Rhee observed a demonstration by fifty soldiers who had been trained in Tang Su Do. The soldiers performed forms, sparring, self-defense against unarmed attacks, and defenses against weapons and bayonets. According to Alex Gillis, Nam Tae Hi and Han Cha Gyo also demonstrated the newly developed Hwarang Hyeong during this event, though I have not found independent historical confirmation of this claim. Hwarang is widely regarded as the first Korean-developed form, and it appears as one of five such forms in Choi’s 1959 textbook, but the exact date of its first public demonstration remains unclear. The finale of the demonstration was a breaking feat in which Nam Tae Hi broke thirteen roof tiles with his bare hand, an act that reportedly left President Rhee deeply impressed. Rhee is said to have referred to the martial art as “Taekkyon,” which created a problem for Choi. He had been teaching Tang Su Do, and what Rhee had seen was certainly not Taekkyon. Following the event, President Rhee ordered Choi to expand martial arts training to more soldiers.

That same year, 1954, the Oh Do Kwan was formally established in Kangwon Province as a training hall dedicated to martial arts practice. Choi Hong Hi was appointed as its head, with Nam Tae Hi serving as the primary instructor. Choi also became the honorary director of Chung Do Kwan, while the second Kwanjang (headmaster), Son Duk Sung, continued managing the school’s daily training. This arrangement positioned Oh Do Kwan as the martial arts school of the military and Chung Do Kwan as the school for civilians. It also meant that Son Duk Sung now had access to military resources, while Choi gained influence outside of the military through his connection to Chung Do Kwan.

In 1955, Choi proposed a new name for the martial art: Taekwondo. He ordered its use within the Oh Do Kwan, although Chung Do Kwan and other schools continued referring to their martial arts as Tang Su Do, Kong Su Do, or Kwon Bop. President Syngman Rhee was initially opposed to the new name, preferring the term Taekkyon. However, after lobbying efforts and committee discussions, he eventually accepted "Taekwondo" as the official name. In 1956, Choi left the army but continued to focus on developing Taekwondo, beginning work on a manuscript that would become the first book to feature Taekwondo in its title.

In 1959, Choi returned to military service and spearheaded the creation of a joint organization intended to unify and promote the various martial arts schools (Kwan) in Korea. This organization became known as the Korean Taekwondo Association (KTA), with Choi serving as its first president. That same year, he finally published the Taekwondo Gyo-bon (Taekwondo Textbook), the first official book to present the martial art under its new name.

The 1959 Taekwondo Textbook is a landmark publication. Although it was not the first Korean martial arts manual-Hwang Kee had already published books in 1949 and 1958-it was the first to explicitly present a martial art under the name "Taekwondo." Choi Hong Hi’s textbook included both traditional Karate-derived forms and newly developed Korean forms. The forms covered in this volume, such as the three Taegeuk Hyeong (derived from Taikyoku Kata), the five Pyeongahn (Heian/Pinan), the three Cheolgi (Tekki/Naihanchi), and Ban Wol Hyeong (Hangetsu or Seisan), are among the many Karate-based forms found in the book. Alongside these were five newly created Chang Hon Ryu forms: Hwarang, Ul-ji, Cheong-mu, Sam-il, and U-nam. These five constitute the complete set of Chang Hon Ryu forms found in the 1959 edition and were clearly intended for Dan-level practitioners, as indicated by the grading chart in the appendix. U-nam was named in honor of President Syngman Rhee’s pen name (U-nam), but the form was later removed from official practice, reportedly due to political reasons following Rhee’s fall from power. The remaining four continue to be practiced in the modern ITF system. “Chang Hon” was Choi’s pen name, and the name eventually adopted for his style.

The years 1960 and 1961 were politically turbulent for South Korea. In 1960, President Syngman Rhee resigned and went into exile following the student-led April Revolution. The following year, on May 16th, the military seized control in a coup, bringing Park Chung Hee to power. According to Alex Gillis in Taekwondo: The Killing Art, Choi and Park had crossed paths earlier. Park had been a Japanese collaborator during the colonial period, and Choi was reportedly among those who voted for his execution 13 years earlier. Culturally, it is possible that Choi viewed Park as a junior in social status, despite Park being one year older. Choi had entered the Korean Military Academy before Park began his own studies there. By this time, Choi had already coined the term “Taekwondo” as the name for a unified Korean martial art, but many of the other kwan headmasters were hesitant to adopt it. They petitioned instead for the term “Tae Su Do,” which was approved by President Park that same year. The name “Tae Su Do” was reportedly proposed by Yun Kwae Byung as a compromise, combining the “Tae” of Taekwondo and the “Su” of Tang Su Do and Kong Su Do.

Possibly due to the political shift and the perception that Choi Hong Hi might pose a threat to President Park’s authority, Choi was effectively sidelined in 1962 when he was appointed South Korea’s ambassador to Malaysia. While stationed there, he began teaching Taekwondo and is credited with founding what may have been the first Taekwondo association outside of Korea. That same year, Nam Tae Hi was deployed to South Vietnam to instruct military personnel in martial arts. Having received substantial support from the United States during the Korean War, South Korea now returned the favor by supporting U.S. operations during the Vietnam War. In Vietnam, a separate Taekwondo association was also established.

During his time as ambassador, Choi continued to develop Taekwondo. He focused on creating new Chang Hon Ryu forms and began drafting what would become the first English-language book on Taekwondo. Alongside his diplomatic duties, he taught and trained Taekwondo actively until his return to Korea in late 1964.

In 1965, Choi Hong Hi was elected president of the Korean Tae Su Do Association and successfully lobbied for a return to the name “Taekwondo.” That same year marked the publication of the first English-language book on Taekwondo: Tae Kwon Do: The Art of Self-Defense. This book reintroduced many Karate-derived forms, now using Japanese names instead of the Koreanized names found in the 1959 publication. Notably, despite the overlap in content, the three Taegeuk Hyeong forms from 1959 were omitted from the 1965 book. The number of Chang Hon Ryu forms had grown significantly-from five in 1959 to twenty in 1965-still four short of the final total of twenty-four, which later came to symbolize the 24 hours of a day. Some Oh Do Kwan dojang continue to teach only the twenty forms listed in the 1965 edition.

Another major development in 1965 was the World Ace Demonstration Tour, led by Choi Hong Hi. Although Taekwondo associations already existed outside Korea, they were primarily located in Asia. This tour marked the first major introduction of Taekwondo to the West, outside of the limited military context of the Vietnam War. Copies of Choi’s 1965 English-language book were distributed, new international Taekwondo associations were established, and the demonstration team gained near-legendary status within the Taekwondo community. Meanwhile, in Korea, Kwan representatives began discussing the development of new forms. Since the Chang Hon Ryu forms had been created within the Oh Do Kwan and the military, there was a growing desire for forms that reflected input from all schools. Representatives from all Kwan within the KTA formed a joint committee to begin this development process.

In 1966, Choi Hong Hi stepped down from the presidency of the Korea Taekwondo Association (KTA). Key figures such as Lee Chong Woo and Ro Byung Jik assisted Choi in establishing a new international organization-the International Taekwon-Do Federation (ITF)-with Choi serving as its founding president, a role he would hold until his death in 2002. That same year, a significant number of students from Mu Duk Kwan and Ji Do Kwan joined the KTA. These two Kwan had previously remained outside the KTA structure and had been organized under Hwang Kee’s Su Bahk Do Association, which had been established shortly after the KTA's founding in 1959.

In 1967, the KTA officially introduced the Palgwe forms for colored belts, along with a set of black belt poomsae. Since Ji Do Kwan and Mu Duk Kwan had not participated in the development of these new forms, the KTA formed a new expanded committee that included representatives from both Kwan to ensure broader consensus.

In 1972, the modern Taegeuk Poomsae 1 through 8 and a new version of the Koryo form were formally introduced by the KTA. The original Taegeuk Hyeong-widely practiced during the 1960s-had remained in use up until 1971, with at least two of them reportedly taught before Palgwe 1 Jang in the curriculum. With the release of the new Taegeuk series, the earlier Taegeuk Hyeong 1–3 was removed from KTA usage and phased out.

Due to escalating political tensions in South Korea-most notably between Choi Hong Hi and President Park Chung Hee-both Choi and his close associate Nam Tae Hi relocated to Toronto, Canada, in 1972. They brought the International Taekwon-Do Federation (ITF) with them, effectively removing the KTA’s international representation and operations. In response, the Korea Taekwondo Association moved to establish a new global organization, resulting in the founding of the World Taekwondo Federation (WTF) in 1973, which today is known as World Taekwondo (WT)."

I really hope you enjoyed the series and if this is a project you want to see fulfilled and support please consider buying a copy of the full book (either Kindle or Paperback)

O:-)

Link to buy the book

PS: use your "local" amazon to get it as cheap as possible. If you are in Norway and use the .com USA one you will pay around 60 USD for a 16 USD book. In that case Sweden (.se) or Germany (.de) is a lot cheaper and faster.

Thank you for your support.

Taekwondo Kwan history part 6: Ro Byung Jik and the Song Mu Kwan

2025-08-01T05:00:00.001+02:00

This is part 6 of the Taekwondo Kwan history blog series. So far I have covered Chun Sang Sup, Yun Kwae Byung, Yun Byung In, Hwang Kee, Lee Won Kuk and now Ro Byung Jik. All of the blog posts in this series build directly from my upcoming secret book which does focus on a single Kwan, but none of the ones that we have covered so far. So which one is it? I still will not say, but I am sure many readers can now make a very educated guess as we have eliminated Yun Mu Kwan, Ji Do Kwan, YMCA Kwon Bop Bu (and Chang Mu Kwan/ Kang Duk Won), Mu Duk Kwan, Chung Do Kwan and today Song Mu Kwan. Like the other blog posts this one is rather short since I wanted to introduce the different major Kwan (schools), their founders and their martial roots, but they are not the focus of the book. Material on them are needed however to give historical context. I do hope you enjoy reading this series, and in the next part I will reveal the secret book project, the supersecret Kwan in great detail (since the book is really about one specific Kwan) and let the cat out of the bag. Hopefully the book will be fully formated and ready to be published by the time you read the next blog post in this series. In a way I will have given away much of the two first chapters of the book for free when you have read the next "episode", but I have always felt that knowledge is not something one should hoard or gatekeep and especially when it comes to the martial arts. Anyway, if you are curious to read on about Ro Byung Jik and his Song Mu Kwan here is the chance :-)

Quote from the introduction section of my upcoming secret book:

"Ro Byung Jik and the Song Mu Kwan

After returning to Korea, Ro made several attempts to establish a martial arts school, beginning around 1944–1945. His efforts met with limited success at first, but after the Korean War, he began to gain traction—especially as American military personnel began training at his dojang. This post-war period marked the real emergence of his school, which he named the Song Mu Kwan (송무관, 松武館).

According to A Modern History of Taekwondo by Kang and Lee, training in the Song Mu Kwan under Ro began with weight training and hundreds of repetitions on the striking board (dallyeon ju, also known as makiwara), even before formal instruction began. Ro emphasized strong basics and disciplined repetition—an approach that echoes the intense, foundational training style of Yoshitaka Funakoshi, known for elevating the athletic and combative intensity of Karate in the 1930s and ’40s.

The name Song Mu Kwan is composed of:

• Song (松) meaning “pine tree,”

• Mu (武) meaning “martial,”

• Kwan (館) meaning “school” or “hall.”

Interestingly, the Song (Sho in Japanese) is the same character used in Shotokan (松濤館)—possibly a deliberate nod to Ro’s roots in Shotokan Karate, reflecting both reverence for his lineage and a desire to localize that identity within Korea." End quote

There is actually some debate in Korea as to who opened up the first Kwan, seeing as the first one to open would be the eldest and therefore given the most honor. I believe it was Lee Won Kuk who opened up a lasting Dojang first in 1944 but I do know that if you count the first tries of Ro as the founding of Song Mu Kwan even if the first tries did not last Ro´s Song Mu Kwan might actually be the oldest Kwan. Personally I find that less interesting than the facts surrounding his life, his experience prior to opening the Kwan and to make the history a living thing. It is one thing to read about years, dates and names, it is another to take that information and picture how all of this played out in real life. What forms were they practising, how did they spar, what kind of training equipment did they use? Etc. Anyway I do hope you have enjoyed the series so far, and I also hope that you are excited about the next "episode" or part where more is revealed and more indepth information regarding the Kwan that the book project is centered on.

This blog is a labor of love — if it brought you insight or inspiration, I’d be honored if you’d consider supporting my work on Patreon. www.patreon.com/traditionaltaekwondoramblings Every donation really really helps :-)

Click here for the last part of this series

Taekwondo Kwan history part 5: Lee Won Kuk and Chung Do Kwan

2025-07-22T05:00:00.004+02:00

This is part 5 of a blog post series that is based on the introduction section in a book project which focuses on one Kwan, but it is relevant to know something of all the other major Kwan as well :-) I have therefore been forced to keep it brief for the Kwan that I am not focusing on, so the Kwan I am focusing on can be more indepth. I have been a little coy on what I am working on because it is very very niche and I am having such a fun time making you all guess. Its easier now that we have covered 5 though, it is not Yun Mu Kwan, Ji Do Kwan, Chang Mu Kwan, Mu Duk Kwan or Chung Do Kwan. So which is it? I will still not tell you :-P But I want to share the essiential points on Lee Won Kuk and the Kwan he founded; The Chung Do Kwan. Lee is as all the other Kwan founders a very interesting and special individual, but a few things makes him stand out: He is the first Korean to open up a "Karate Kwan" in Korea (Chung Do Kwan was opened in 1944), he is credited of being the first to add the "Do"-suffix to Tang Su, creating the full term Tang Su Do, and under his leadership the Chung Do Kwan became one of the biggest martial arts schools in korea before the Korean war. He was also among the absolutely first ones to study Karate in Japan, meaning even by Japanese standards he was an early Karate student... I hope you enjoy reading about him and his school :-)

Quote from my super secret book project that is not about Chung Do Kwan:

"Lee Won Kuk and the Chung Do Kwan

Lee Won Kuk is widely credited as being the first Korean martial artist to use the full term Tang Su Do (당수도, 唐手道), by adding the philosophical suffix Do (도, 道) — “the Way” — to Tang Su, the Korean pronunciation of To-de (or Kara-te) meaning “China Hand.” This usage reflects the early terminology of Karate, which originally referred to itself as To-de (“Chinese Hand”) before Funakoshi popularized the homonym Karate (空手), meaning “Empty Hand,” in the 1930s.

As a result, in early Korean martial arts circles, terms like Tang Su Do and Kong Su Do were used — both being alternate Korean readings of the same characters used in Japanese Karate-Do (空手道). These were not different martial arts, but alternative names for the same system, rooted in Japanese Karate.

Leadership of Chung Do Kwan was passed on to his student Son Duk Sung, who became the second Kwanjang (관장, Headmaster) after Lee’s departure." End quote

There is a lot more to say about the Chung Do Kwan that did not make it into the book, and I could possibly make a whole article on Son Duk Sung alone as he too is a very interesting character in Taekwondo history. I actually have two books authored by Son Duk Sung in my collection, which I regard as my window into Chung Do Kwan seeing as he was the 2nd Kwangjang of that school. In the books he covers the Karate derived forms like pyongahn, cheolgi, palsaek/bassai etc, and he also covers traditional training methods you do not often see in modern taekwondo. It is fascinating to compare one Kwan´s forms to other schools forms. Even if the forms are the same there are differences.

Click here to go directly to part 6

Taekwondo Kwan history part 4: Hwang Kee and Mu Duk Kwan

2025-07-15T05:00:00.003+02:00

This is part four of my blog series on Taekwondo Kwan history based on the introduction section of my super secret book project, which will focus on one Kwan, but knowing about the major Kwan is still important. So far we have covered Chun Sang Sup and Yun Mu Kwan, Yun Kwae Byung and Ji Do Kwan and Yun Byung In and YMCA Kwon Bop Bu. All three individuals never had any ties to Shotokan Karate it seems, and they are all kinda related in that they all worked together at Yun Mu Kwan at various points and quite possibly they trained and studied together in Japan. Hwang Kee which we will focus on today is a very unique individual in that he never studied Karate in Japan. He said he learned Taekyon by observation and copying in his youth, he then learned martial arts in China before going back to Korea and picking up Karate forms from various sources there. One auther called Hwang Kee a grandmaster in reverse, which I kinda liked. He did not seem to have much formal martial arts education when he first founded his Kwan around 1945, but he learned a lot from many different sources over time. It is difficult to keep posts about the Kwan founders short as there is so much I want to include, but then again challenging myself to be brief is a good way to test and see what is essential to keep in. I do hope you get some value from this series :-) If you want to learn more on Hwang Kee and Mu Duk Kwan feel free to click read more and read on ;-)

Quote from supersecret book project introduction section:

"Hwang Kee and the Mu Duk Kwan

Hwang Kee was born in 1914 in Korea. According to his own accounts, he encountered a Taekkyon master during his youth. Although the master refused to teach him due to his age, Hwang claimed to have studied the man’s movements in secret and imitated them diligently.

In 1936, while working for the Ministry of Transportation constructing a railroad in Manchuria, China, Hwang met Yang Kuk Jin, from whom he learned Yang-style Tai Chi and a form of training called Ddam Ttui.

Following Korea’s liberation in 1945, Hwang opened his martial arts school, naming it Mu Duk Kwan (무덕관, 武德館) — “School of Martial Virtue.” Initially, he taught a system heavily influenced by Chinese martial arts, which he called Hwa Su Do (화수도, 花手道) — “Flower Hand Way.” However, this name confused many Koreans, who were more familiar with established martial arts terms like Tang Su Do, Kong Su Do, and Kwon Bup. Some sources say that Lee Won Kuk, founder of Chung Do Kwan, advised Hwang to adopt a more familiar name. Whether true or not, Hwang soon changed the name of his art to Tang Su Do (당수도, 唐手道), meaning “China Hand Way.”

There are also unverified accounts that Hwang briefly trained at Chung Do Kwan, though this remains unclear. What is certain is that after adopting the Tang Su Do label, he began teaching a curriculum incorporating several Karate Hyeong (Kata). Hwang claimed to have learned these forms from books — likely those authored by Gichin Funakoshi — which helped formalize his instructional system.

Mu Duk Kwan’s rapid growth in the postwar years was due in part to the incorporation of these Karate forms, but also to Hwang's strategic use of his railway connections to secure inexpensive training spaces across the country.

In the 1950s and early 1960s, Hwang worked closely with Yun Kwae Byung, and together they formed the Su Bahk Do Association, which became a powerful rival to the Korean Taekwondo Association (KTA). However, around 1966, a large contingent of Ji Do Kwan and Mu Duk Kwan students merged into the KTA, shifting the balance of influence.

Eventually, Hwang Kee emigrated to the United States, where he continued to promote and teach his martial art until his death in 2002." End quote

I have access to his 1958 Tang Su Do textbook (korean language) and there are some wonderful material in it, both when it comes to philosophy and theory but also in techniques, forms and sparring and self defense. If you get the impression that he lacked formal training, which is an often directed critisism of him, I would say based on that book alone that he was no better or worse than others in his time. I said someone called him a grandmaster in reverse, and I think that by 1958 he knew a lot if he didnt already when he first opened Mu Duk Kwan.

Click here to go directly to part 5

Taekwondo Kwan history part 3: Yun Byung In and YMCA Kwon Bup Bu

2025-07-08T05:00:00.001+02:00

This is part 3 of a blog post series that is based on a secret book project I am working on. In this series I have quoted from my introduction section of the book and I am looking BRIEFLY into the major schools that were founded between 1944-1955, their founders and their roots. This time we are looking into Yun Byung In, whose lineages include Chang Mu Kwan and Kang Duk Won, Pasa Ryu and Chayon Ryu among others. The man who has done perhaps the most to preserve his teachings in modern time is GM Kim Soo in his Chayon Ryu, and it is also thanks to him that we even know what happened to Yun Byung In after the Korean war. The blog post is brief, there is a lot of stuff that could have been said but did not make the cut when you try to be economical with words, something I struggle a lot with and it was a fun challenge to try to boil the story of a Kwan founder down to rougly 1/2 a page. If I publish the stuff I have written on the Kwan that I am focusing on I think you will forgive my brief handling of the other Kwan. For now you can guess which Kwan is the mysterious Kwan I am focusing my super secret book project on. It will be easier to guess the more blog posts I publish I guess :-P Spoiler: It is not Yun Mu Kwan, Ji Do Kwan, or Yun Byung In lineage Kwan ;-) For now, sit down, relax with a good cup of tea and read a brief (but as accurate to my abilities I could get it) summary of Yun Byung In, his roots and his legacy.

"Yun Byung In and the YMCA Kwon Bup Bu

Tragically, Yun disappeared during the Korean War (1950–1953). It was later discovered that he had been taken to North Korea, where he reportedly died in 1983.

Despite his absence, Yun Byung In’s teachings lived on. His school would go on to give rise to two important postwar Kwans: Chang Mu Kwan and Kang Duk Won — both of which continued to carry elements of his unique blend of Chinese and Japanese martial influences." End quote

I did not include any speculation on his chinese martial art, nor did I include how he organised shoes as a way to prove his good attitude to get into said school, nor the loss of his fingers which is the origin of the white gloves often worn in Yun Byung In lineage schools by instructors when they teach, etc. I often think that many of these men should have their own biopics and I hope that some day we get movies in the same wane as Fighter in the wind got (founder of Kyojushinkai). There is so much material to work with, so many fights, arguments, adversity and interesting history. Even when you shorten everything down to just 1/2 a page you get the sense of great men and great legacies.

Click here to go directly to part 4

Taekwondo Kwan history part 2: Yun Kwae Byung and the Ji Do Kwan

2025-07-01T05:03:00.003+02:00

This is the second blog post that is based upon a history part of the introduction in my mysterious book project. I challenged myself to keep each Kwan history brief because while a little relevant, the focus on the book lies within a single Kwan, so I wanted to give a general overview and then in a seperate section go deep and wide into that particular Kwan´s history. Since we starte part 1 with Chun Sang Sup and his Yun Mu Kwan Kong Su Do Bu, I feel that it is only right to continue with Yun Kwae Byung and his Ji Do Kwan which came from the Yun Mu Kwan. When Chun Sang Sup dissapeared during the Korean war (1950-53) it was Yun Kwae Byung who picked up the pieces and reopened the school under the new name Ji Do Kwan. Like Chun, Yun Kwae Byung is also often overlooked in modern Taekwondo history, which I feel is a shame because he is a very interesting figure to research. I think some of the reason for his absence in modern taekwondo history is due to his work along with Hwang Kee in the Su Bahk Do Association, an association which gave the early Korean Taekwondo Association (KTA) strong competition for several years. The blog post might be brief, but the information within it is hopefully great :-)

"Yun Kwae Byung and Ji Do Kwan

Yun Kwae Byung was born in 1922, making him slightly younger than Chun Sang Sup. Like Chun, he traveled to Japan to pursue his education, first studying Shito Ryu Karate under Kenwa Mabuni while attending Osaka Secondary School. He later began studying Shudokan Karate under Toyama Kanken at Nihon University, where he earned instructor certification — making him at least a 4th dan in Shudokan at the time.

Teaching and operating school in Japan!

In 1945, Yun helped establish a sister school to Toyama’s Shudokan called the Kanbukan, which would later be renamed the Renbukan in 1950. The Kanbukan was notable for offering training to both Korean and Japanese students and quickly became a hub for innovation in sparring methods. It was one of the earliest schools to experiment with protective equipment and continuous sparring — a tradition the later Ji Do Kwan would also become known for.

Notable figures who trained at the Kanbukan include Masutatsu Oyama, founder of Kyokushin Karate (who earned his 4th dan there), So Nei Chu, his Goju Ryu instructor, and the respected Karate historian Richard Kim.

Return home

Yun returned to Korea in 1948 and assisted Chun Sang Sup in teaching at the Yun Mu Kwan. Following the Korean War, in 1953, he reopened the Yun Mu Kwan under a new name: Ji Do Kwan (지도관, 智道館) — meaning "Wisdom Way School."

He would go on to work closely with another major figure, Hwang Kee, in the postwar martial arts revival. However, after 1966, Yun gradually stepped back from active teaching and turned his attention toward business. His passing in 2000 went largely unnoticed in the wider Taekwondo community, despite his foundational contributions to the art." End quote.

I do hope you enjoy this walk through the history of the early schools of Taekwondo. I tried keeping this brief, but if I ever get around to making a book specifically on something Ji Do Kwan I will expand a lot on this :-) Right now my research focus lies a little elsewhere ;-)

Click here to go directly to part 3

Taekwondo Kwan history part 1; Chun Sang Sup and Yun Mu Kwan

2025-06-25T13:38:00.003+02:00

While waiting for an oppertunity to retake photos and take new photos for new material for my upcoming ABCs of Practical Poomsae applications I kinda started with a smaller book project which is also coming along nicely. I will keep the cards tight to my chest for the time being, but I am working a different way on this one, writing it from scratch and trying to format it and polish it as I go rather than the way I did with the ABCs of Practical Poomsae applications which has grown to about 125 pages manuscript but has yet to be formatted. Anyhow, as part of this smaller book project which is veeeeeeeery niche and I doubt it will see much, I decided that for the introduction part I needed to mention and give a brief overview on each of the major Kwan or schools that opened up from 1944-1950s. It was grueling work because I needed to re-evaluate what I know, new sources has been made available and in some cases I really had to change what I believed. This post which focuses on Chun Sang Sup is a very good example of this since I was told and read that he trained in Shotokan Karate under Gichin Funakoshi, that he taught Shotokan Kata, and that Yun Kwae Byung when he reopened it as Ji Do Kwan continued teaching the Shotokan forms despite him not being of Shotokan lineage. Modern Ji Do Kwan schools do in some cases teach Shotokan Kata as their heirloom forms, but the few people I that I reached out to who actually answered admitted that they read the same as I did, and went out and learned Shotokan Kata and taught them as Ji Do Kwan Hyeong. This is what happens when we make assumptions about history, and I am betting that all this info about Chun practising Shotokan comes from one work which has influenced writers all over the place.

The other thing that made this difficult was that I decided to keep each Kwan history brief, and if you know anything about me, making me write or talk about Taekwondo history is to open up the flood gates. I never shut up or stop writing:-P So if this has intrigued you click the read more button to read a short summary of Chun Sang Sup´s history and the founding of the Yun Mu Kwan Kong Su Do Bu.

The following quote is directly from the introduction to my super secret book project:

"Chun Sang Sup and Yun Mu Kwan

Chun Sang Sup (c. 1920–c. 1950) was born into an affluent Korean family. As a young man, he studied Judo in Korea, a martial art formally introduced alongside Kendo in 1922 during the Japanese occupation. Seeking to further his education, he traveled to Japan in 1930 and enrolled at Takushoku University.

There is scholarly disagreement over which Karate style Chun studied. According to Park Chul Hee and Lee Chong Woo, he trained in Shito-Ryu under Kenwa Mabuni. However, Lee Ho Sung (author of Korean Martial Arts Conquer the American Continent), Kim Young Seon, and Yi Gyo Yun assert that he studied Shudokan and Goju-Ryu under Toyama Kanken and Chojun Miyagi. While Miyagi is not known to have resided permanently in mainland Japan, he did travel there periodically to teach, including at universities in the region where Chun studied.

Chun returned to Korea near the end of World War II and began practicing Judo at Yun Mu Kwan. In 1946, he was invited to teach Karate at the school and established the Yun Mu Kwan Kong Su Do Bu (윤무관 공수도부, 潤武館空手道部), meaning “Karate division of Yun Mu Kwan.” Tragically, Chun disappeared during the Korean War (1950–1953) and was never heard from again.

Despite his disappearance, Yun Mu Kwan played a pivotal role in the development of Taekwondo. It later gave rise to two influential Kwans: Ji Do Kwan and Han Mu Kwan." End quote.

Chun Sang Sup has intrigued me for decades, seeing as I have a direct link back to the Ji Do Kwan (and therefore Yun Mu Kwan) through one of my teachers. He founded a Kwan, yet we know so very little. Kang & Lee in their Modern History Of Taekwondo mentions he was an intellectual who almost always wore suits, they also mention a tight bond and friendship between him and Yun Byung In. Still we can read much on all the other Kwan founders, yet there is so little on Chun that I am starting to suspect that there might be a reason for the little material we have on him. Seeing as I have no evidence of my suspicions I will keep them to my self, but I will say that when topics or people are almost actively "silenced" about in Korean culture there is often a reason for it.

Anyway, what I originally learned about Chun studying Shotokan is almost certainly false information, so I thought I could open up with this one and see if I could rectify the situation. This version here also neatly explains the trio of Chun, Yun and Yun working together as they all likely practised with Toyama Kanken and or Kenwa Mabuni. Having studied in the same area under the same teacher(s) it is not a coincidence that Yun Byung In helped teach at the Yun Mu Kwan, nor his close friendship with Chun, nor is it strange that Yun Kwae Byung took over the mantle as Kwanjang and reopened the school as Ji Do Kwan after the Korean war. It also explains why the Ji Do Kwan version of the old Taegeuk Hyeong (NOT POOMSAE) was so different to Shotokan´s Taikyoku Kata when if Chun did practise at Shotokan you would believe it would be identical or at least very similar to Shotokan Taikyoku Kata. I now believe that the forms practised in Yun Mu Kwan and later in Ji Do Kwan might have been much closer to Shito Ryu Kata or Shudokan Kata than Shotokan. This might not matter to many, but for someone trying to research the roots of Taekwondo and maybe get a sense of what was practised in the older Kwan it matters greatly.

Click here to go directly to part 2

Enjoy my work and blog? You’ll love my Patreon

2025-06-06T07:10:00.005+02:00

If you enjoy the work I’m doing here at Traditional Taekwondo Ramblings — the historical deep dives, translations, and practical applications — and you’d like to support it, I’ve now created a Patreon page.

This isn’t a pitch or a hard ask. The blog will always remain free and open. But if you find value in the material I’m sharing, and feel it’s worth supporting, it would mean a lot.

Your support helps cover the costs involved in doing this work — including research equipment, computer upkeep, licenses, access to books and historical documents, and of course the many hours spent reading, translating, editing, and writing. It’s a quiet but steady effort — and if it’s helping you in your training or teaching, then I’m grateful.

I’ll also try to give back through Patreon by offering quality content for supporters. Currently available are:

A 14-page translation and commentary on a previously untranslated paragraph from Choi Hong Hi’s 1959 Taekwondo textbook
A 42-page early draft of my upcoming book The ABCs of Practical Poomsae Application
And more to come.

If you’d like to take part in that journey and help keep it going, you can visit the Patreon page here:

👉 www.patreon.com/traditionaltaekwondoramblings

Thank you for reading — and for being part of this journey and community 🙏🙇🏻

Chon-Ji Tul/Hyung's Karate roots

2025-06-06T05:00:00.007+02:00

In modern ITF Taekwon-Do the karate roots of Taekwondo is often overlooked, or downplayed. I think this is also true for most schools of Taekwondo, and I think that is a mistake, because we need to have a good grasp of where we came from to see where we should continue to go. Without a proper setting off point, how can we determine the route or destination? Some "Taekwon-Do rebels" such as Paul O'Leary has written for many years on the Karate roots of different Chang Hon Ryu forms, noting how Won-Hyo Hyung is a composite of two different Pinan/Heian Karate Kata. There are several forms in Chang Hon Ryu who lifts whole sequences of Karate Kata move for move or with very small tweaks. There is nothing wrong with that, and I truly enjoy practising them, because Choi and his team really has in my opinion taken their Karate roots and infused them with a Korean identity by repackeging them, lifting sequences from Karate kata, but also expanding upon them and so on. I find great value in them in other words. One form that few people if any have noticed is also largely a repackaged Karate Kata is Chon-Ji Hyung or Tul. In this post I want to shed some light on the roots of Chon-Ji Hyung, and how it is repackaged. I have previously written about how the technical makeup of Chon-Ji Hyung is brilliant, and closely linked to philosophy, I will try to do it justice here as well. If however you want to check out a deep dive into Chon-Ji Hyung as a philosophical-Physical link you can click here for that. For the Karate roots of Chon-Ji Hyung please click to read on on this post :-)

The technical makeup of Chon-Ji Hyung

The technical makeup of Chon-Ji Hyung is simple. It consists of 2 or perhaps 3 parts.

The first part is comprised with Low section block in front stance (apkoobi), followed with a step forward and middle section punch in front stance.

The second part is comprised with outward middle block using the thumb side of the forearm (or momtong an palmok bakkat makki in modern Kukki Taekwondo terminology) performed in back stance (or dwitkoobi) followed by a step forward into a middle section punch in front stance (or apkoobi)

The third part consists of the punches at the end of the form, 3-4 punches depending on how you divide the parts up, and some stepping forward and some steping backward.

The Karate root

Now much has been written about the karate roots of other forms but I can not remember anyone else making the link between Chon-Ji Hyung and Karate Kata, but here it is: I see Chon-Ji Hyung as a reformatting (and even improvement upon) the Shotokan Taikyoku Kata series. The reason I think this link is overlooked is simply that the Taikyoku Kata of Shotokan does not seem to get much attention. In fact many Shotokan Dojo has simply stopped practising and teaching them, which I find incredible seeing as how this is a Kata series developed by Funakoshi and or by his son with his fathers blessing.

Choi Hong Hi learned Shotokan Karate in Japan before returning to Korea. In Korea he established Oh Do Kwan within the military and he surrounded himself with several top people from the Chung Do Kwan which also was a school with strong shotokan roots. Choi was an honorary director of the Chung Do Kwan too at some point. The reason I say this is that it is highly likely that they trained and taught the Taikyoku Kata series at the Oh Do Kwan at least as late as 1959, seeing as how Choi Hong Hi included the three forms in that book at that time. They were however seemingly gone from the curriculum by 1965 when he published the first book on Taekwondo in english. That book still retained several Karate Kata, but the Taegeuk were nowhere to be seen. We can speculate why they were dropped by that time and not the rest, but I think the reason lies within how Chon-Ji is structured, eliminating the need for the Taegeuk to be in active use within Oh Do Kwan once Chon-Ji was introduced.

The technical makeup of Taegeuk 1/Taikyoku 1:

This form has a different floor pattern than Chon-Ji, but it mainly consists of sequences of Low section block in front stance (apkoobi), followed with a step forward and middle section punch in front stance. Theres a short sequence repeated where the performer does one front stance and low block, followed with walking forward 3 times while walking in front stance and doing middle section punches, with a Kihap on the third one. So even in this short deviation from Chon-Ji's technical makeup, we are still working with the same concept of low block into a walking forward middle punch. This is very much the technical makeup identical to Chon-Ji's first half.

The technical makeup of Taegeuk 3/Taikyoku 3

This form shares identical floor pattern with Taegeuk 1 (and 2), but it deviates a little by introducing back stance (or dwit koobi) and an palmok bakkat makki (middle outward thumb side of forearm block). In fact most of the form consists of the performer doing the outward block in back stance, followed by walking forward into a long front walking stance and middle section punch. This is the exact combination that you see in the second half of Chon-Ji.

Why did I skip Taegeuk 2/Taikyoku 2?

Honestly it is the same form (in essence) as Taegeuk 1/Taikyoku 1, except that all punches are delivered to high section. That is also an almost direct quote from Choi's 1959 book on Taegeuk 2 where the only documentation of that specific form consists of the heading "Taegeuk 2 Hyung" followed with a single sentece (which I paraphrased). This suggests to me at least that Taegeuk 2 was not really focused upon, as it was seen as "just a variation on 1", while the third one was documented thouroughly with both descriptions and images.

Conclusion?

Several Chang Hon Ryu forms seems to be a repackaging of two (or more) karate kata with small differences and elaborations. The opening of Won-Hyo Hyung for instance has a 3 count combination that you will find in the older Pyongahn/Heian/Pinan series (Pyungahn/Heian 2, Pinan 1). The difference is that the second count makes use of a knife hand hand-formation, while the "original" uses a closed fist throughout. Won-Hyo Hyung's 4th count is a side kick to the front of the starting point, while Heian and Pyungahn often uses a sidekick (sometimes front kick depending on style and school) to the back of the starting point. Won-Hyo Hyung can likewise be traced back move for move back to the Pyungahn-Heian series and the only uniqueness is the ending back stance, forearm guarding blocks on both sides.

Chon-Ji Hyung likewise has a different floorplan to the Taegeuk Hyung, but in essence you have in part 1 a repackaging of Taegeuk 1, in its second part you have a repackaging of Taegeuk 3, the only "uniqueness" comes at the end when you have both forward and backward stepping punches.

Choi Hong Hi and his team in my opinion managed to draw out the essence of 3 Taegeuk forms and make a concentrated form still containing much of the lessons of three forms into that one form. That is remarkable. If you read my blog post on Chon-Ji and philosophy that I linked to in the beginning of this post you will also see that he brilliantly packed the form to the brink of symbolism and linked its physical performance into its philosophical component in a far better way than what the Taegeuk Hyung did (again in my opinion).

What "everyone" is wondering now: Are there practical applications for Chon-Ji and Taegeuk Hyung?

The individual techniques, and even the combinations of techniques are drawn from older Hyung so in a manner of speaking Yes there are. On the other hand I do not think the Taegeuk or Chon-Ji Hyung was made with practical application in mind. I see them personally as pure movement training. This is also supported by the writings of Gichin Funakoshi on the Taikyoku Kata and by Choi Hong Hi's introduction text on the Taegeuk Hyung from his 1959 book). Chon-Ji Hyung in particular I see as something that works brilliantly along with Saju-Jireugi and Saju-Makki excersises. You learn the Saju as an excersise drill where the point is to train and incorporate hip twist into basic techniques, you then learn (and continue to train) Chon-Ji Hyung as a "hip twist" masterclass (that is the way I see it, and I have to thank the writings of Master Stuart A. Anslow for sharing his insights). I honestly think that "practical" applications starts with Dan-Gun Hyung in the Chang Hon Ryu, but that might be another post:-)

Keeping up with the Taegeuks (Oh Do Kwan versions and not Taegeuk poomsae)

2025-05-29T23:15:00.000+02:00

Not sure if the headline makes sense. I have worked on Taegeuk 1-3 as documented in "Better Karate for Boys" by Sihak Henry Cho in 1970 and published them little by little over May 2025. I thought it was important to get them out there because I was sitting on what might be the only verifiable Ji Do Kwan Hyung as practised in Ji Do Kwan in the Kwan era. I was actually afraid something would happen to me so I could not finish and then the forms would have died out. Now I know at least two people will keep training and teaching them :-) But working with the Taegeuk Hyung of Ji Do Kwan made me very curious about the Oh Do Kwan variations.

You see in the 1965 book on Taekwondo which Choi Hong Hi published they are not mentioned nor included in the text, despite many of the Karate Kata still being included at that point. When looking at the older forms of the Oh Do Kwan most people gravitate toward the 1965 book simply because it is easy to get, and because it is written in english. The 1959 book which Choi Hong Hi also wrote but in Korean is also a great resource, but since it is in Korean most people who get to it look at the pictures but dont really take a deep dive into it. It might come as a surprise to those reading the 65 book that the 59 book does contain instructions (and illustrations) on the three taegeuk forms, but this time it is obviously the Oh Do Kwan versions of the forms. Were they copied directly from Shotokan? Did Choi Hong Hi and his team at Oh Do Kwan change them in any way? Read on if you want to learn the Oh Do Kwan versions or simply get an idea of how Taegeuk Hyung 1-3 were practised in different Kwan.

Disclaimer (I am not fluent speaker and I am not a professional translator)

I want to come with a few disclaimers when it comes to me working on Korean text. I am a Norwegian born and rised citizen, so I speak norwegian. I learned english (and german) in school. I lived in Korea for 1 year and I have also done about 15 trips to Korea for a few weeks to a month at a time. I therefore know basic Korean but I am in no way fluent in it. I have worked on this text to the best of my ability, and on my own time, since I am doing this "for fun". Therefore if there is any mistakes made I am responsible, and it is my fault. That being said I have checked and double checked to the point I was seeing flashing hangul infront of my eyes when trying to sleep :-P

The Taegeuk forms (Hyung, not poomsae)

The Taegeuk forms are documented in Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book on page 132-139 (Taegeuk 1), 139-140 (taegeuk 2) and 140-143 (taegeuk 3). Now when we see different Kwan using different Taegeuk forms you understand why the first Poomsae set by the KTA were called Palgwe and not Taegeuk? :-P

I asked around a little and the general consensus was not a literal translation, but a short and sweet translation or summary/simpliefied was what was wanted. If there is any demand for a sentence for sentence translation I am up for the task now, but below you will find the instructions for Taegeuk 1. What is missing is most often comments on the importance of keeping you balance and structure while turning etc. The picture with the diagram is used for all 3 taegeuk forms and shows the directions we are heading in. I have carefully read through the original Korean text, movement for movement to verify that this is as accurate representation of the Oh Do Kwan Taegeuk 1 according to the 1959 book we can get. I have kept the references to the directional points A, B, C, D, E, F.

Introduction to the Taegeuk forms from page 127:

Orginal Korean text from the book:

第1절 태극형 (太極型)

태극형에는 一형, 二형, 三형이 있다.

이는 초심자에게 적합한 형으로서

태권의 기본이 되는 찌르기와 막기로서 혼합 구성된 것이므로

이를 완전히 습득한다면 몸의 균형을 이루며

사지의 활동을 민활하게 할 수 있다.

Translation to English, paranthesis is text added by me):

«There exists 3 Taegeuk Hyung, Taegeuk 1, Taegeuk 2 and Taegeuk 3. These forms are suited for beginners, and (they are) comprised of basic thrusting (striking/punching) and defensive techniques that make up the foundation for taekwon (Note the original text does not make use of the full name taekwondo here). If these forms are mastered they will achieve bodily balance and speedy/agile limbs.» - Choi Hong Hi 1959 Taekwondo book page 127.

The headline uses the Hanja for Shaolin style, and the excerpt I shared here begins with section 1, Taegeuk Hyung. So It seems like Choi Hong Hi used to divide forms into three groups in this book, Shaolin (Sorimryu), Suryungryu and Changhonryu. I think the contents and classification of forms in the 1959 book warrants a post on its own seeing as how we are looking at the Taegeuk forms specifically for now :-)

Taegeuk il hyung

Ready posture: Begin in ready stance (joonbi) in point D (facing C)

Movement 1:

Move the left foot to point A, assume a left front stance and perform a low block with the left fist. (A left front stance implies the left leg is forward, the right leg is backward)

Movement 2:
Step forward with the right foot to point A, assume a right front stance, and punch to the middle section with the right fist. (right front stance implies the right leg is forward)

Movement 3:

Pivot on the left leg, turn to face B, assume a right front stance, and perform a low block with the right fist.

Movement 4:

Step forward with the left foot to point B, assume a left front stance, and punch to the middle section with the left fist.

Movement 5:

Pivot on the right leg, moving the left foot to point C, assume a left front stance and perform a low block with the left fist.

Movement 6:

Step forward with the right foot to point C, assume a right front stance, and punch to the middle section with the right fist.

Movement 7:

Step forward with the left foot to point C, assume a left front stance, and punch to the middle section with the left fist.

Movement 8:

Step forward with the right foot to point C, assume a right front stance and punch to the middle section with the right fist, with a KIHAP.

Movement 9:

Pivot on the right foot to face point F, assume a left front stance and perform a low block with left fist.

Movement 10:

Step forward with right leg to point F, assume a right front stance and punch to the middle section with the right fist.

Movement 11:

Pivot 180 degrees on the left leg, move the right leg to face E, assume a right front stance and do a low block with right fist.

Movement 12:

Step forward with left leg toward E, assume a left front stance and punch to middle section with left fist.

Movement 13:

Pivot on the right leg, move left foot and face D, assume left front stance and do a low block with left fist.

Movement 14:

Move right foot toward D, assume a right front stance, and do a middle section punch with right fist.

Movement 15:

Move left foot toward D, assume left front stance and do a middle section punch with left fist.

Movement 16:

Move right leg forward toward D, assume right front stance and do a middle section punch with right fist, with KIHAP.

Movement 17:

Pivot on the right leg (270 degrees), and move the left leg to face A and assume a left front stance, and do a low block with left fist.

Movement 18:

Move the right foot forward toward A and assume a right front stance, and do a middle section punch with right fist.

Movement 19:

Pivot on the left leg, move the right foot 180 degrees to face B, assume a right front stance and do a low block with right fist.

Movement 20:

Move the left leg forward toward B, assume a left front stance and do a middle section punch with left fist.

Closing instructions:
At the command "Geuman" ("stop"), keep the right foot in place, and move the left foot beside it, and return to the ready position. At the command "Swi-eo" ("At ease") the form concludes.

Image from Choi Hong Hi’s 1959 Taekwondo textbook, used for historical reference.

Taegeuk i hyung

As for the second taegeuk form, Choi Hong Hi does not provide any illustrations, and the only instructions we get is a sentence telling us that Taegeuk 2 is the same as Taegeuk 1, except all punches are delivered to high section.

This saved him a ton of space in the book, and as pictures and page count are factors in making a book more expensive to make it seems like a good idea to do it this way. I have therefore not included a seperate list for Taegeuk 2 move for move, keeping in spirit of the 1959 book :-) Just do Taegeuk 1 but have all punches to the high section and you are good :-)

Taegeuk sam hyung

This form shares the same structure with the earlier ones, but it does introduce some new things. In the horizontal lines of the floor pattern you do a back stance (Dwitkoobi in modern terminology) and a middle block. If the text says right back stance it implies that the right leg is back and the left leg is forward. The original 1959 book simply says middle block for move 1, 3 and the other instances it appears. This is confusing for modern readers. I have chosen to stick with the original text, but i confirm here and now that the technique refered to as middle block is in modern taekwondo terminology the an palmok bakkat makki, or the outward middle block using the thumb side of the forearm. Same technique you see in the second half of Chon-Ji Tul or the first movement of Jitae Poomsae.

Image from Choi Hong Hi’s 1959 Taekwondo textbook, used for historical reference.

Ready posture: Begin in ready stance (joonbi) in point D (facing C)

Movement 1:

Move the left foot to point A, assume a right back stance and perform a middle block with the left fist. (A right back stance implies the right leg is backward, the left leg is forward)

Movement 2:
Step forward with the right foot to point A, assume a right front stance, and punch to the middle section with the right fist. (right front stance implies the right leg is forward)

Movement 3:

Pivot on the left leg, turn to face B, assume a left back stance, and perform a middle block with the right fist.

Movement 4:

Step forward with the left foot to point B, assume a left front stance, and punch to the middle section with the left fist.

Movement 5:

Pivot on the right leg, turn 90 degrees to your left, moving the left foot to point C, assume a left front stance and perform a low block with the left fist.

Movement 6:

Step forward with the right foot to point C, assume a right front stance, and punch to the high section with the right fist.

Movement 7:

Step forward with the left foot to point C, assume a left front stance, and punch to the high section with the left fist.

Movement 8:

Step forward with the right foot to point C, assume a right front stance and punch to the high section with the right fist, with a KIHAP.

Movement 9:

Pivot on the right foot to face point F, turning 270 degrees, assume a right back stance and perform a middle block with left fist.

Movement 10:

Step forward with right leg to point F, assume a right front stance and punch to the middle section with the right fist.

Movement 11:

Pivot 180 degrees on the left leg, move the right leg to face E, assume a left back stance and do a middle block with right fist.

Movement 12:

Step forward with left leg toward E, assume a left front stance and punch to middle section with left fist.

Movement 13:

Pivot on the right leg, move left foot and face D, turning 90 degrees, assume left front stance and do a low block with left fist.

Movement 14:

Move right foot toward D, assume a right front stance, and do a high section punch with right fist.

Movement 15:

Move left foot toward D, assume left front stance and do a high section punch with left fist.

Movement 16:

Move right leg forward toward D, assume right front stance and do a high section punch with right fist, with KIHAP.

Movement 17:

Pivot on the right leg (270 degrees), and move the left leg to face A and assume a right back stance, and do a middle block with left fist.

Movement 18:

Move the right foot forward toward A and assume a right front stance, and do a middle section punch with right fist.

Movement 19:

Pivot on the left leg, move the right foot 180 degrees to face B, assume a left back stance and do a middle block with right fist.

Movement 20:

Move the left leg forward toward B, assume a left front stance and do a middle section punch with left fist.

Ending notes:

Choi Hong Hi learned Shotokan Karate in Japan, and according to sources he even taught Karate in Japan before moving back to Korea. The source for this is a comment by George Vitale, a phd taekwondo historian. Gichin Funakoshi and or Yoshitaka "Gigo" Funakoshi introduced the Taikyoku Kata in the 1930s. I have seen 1938 as one suggestion for wen they were introduced but we do not know exactly when. Funakoshi's 1935 book does not contain them. The first time they appear in a book as far as I know is 1958, which is the year after Funakoshi died. This Japanese book is the source where the most readily available Karate Do Kyohan english language translation is from. We do not know exactly who Choi Hong Hi's instructor was, but what I can say is that these three Taegeuk forms are the same (and identical) to Shotokan's Taikyoku Kata. There is no variation here. I have no idea if this holds true going forward with the other Karate forms in the 1959 book, but I am looking forward to find out. I do know there is some variations in the 1965 book karate kata with the Karate Do Kyohan counterpoints. If this is because there always were differences between Oh Do Kwan karate kata and the JKA Shotokan Karate or if they evolved slightly in Korea until 1965 I do not know.

Special thanks

Special thanks for all those who have (tried) teaching me Korean, Taekwondo and martial arts in general. Without that knowledge and the historical/cultural context doing any translation from a Korean book from 1950s will be if not impossible then at least a great undertaking. Thanks to Master Christian Bjørnsrud who encouraged me in this work, and I also need to thank Master Nathan Doggett (WT) who made the rare gem of a book (Choi's 1959 book) available for everyone, George Vitale who made sure it was easily found online and to Master Nick Campbell who made the physical copy I am reading from a reality. Any work in the Martial Arts is a chain in a long link of people, going both back in time and outward in space (distance). I think we all need to do a lot more thanking in our lives :-)

Part 3: The lost Ji Do Kwan Taegeuk Hyung (not the modern taegeuk poomsae)

2025-05-21T13:12:00.000+02:00

This is a series on the original taegeuk forms or Taikyouku Kata that were practised in the Kwan era. More specifically the version practised in Ji Do Kwan. I strongly suggest you click here for part 1 and start the series there as I will asume you already have the knowledge shared within part 1 and 2 :-)

So now that we have seen how the first Tae Keuk (or tageuk) form in Ji Do Kwan was identical to Shotokan (this is common across most styles practising variations on the forms), the 2nd form was very unique and completly different from Shotokan version (its actually closer to Shito Ryu) how is the 3rd form performed? Well the third form introduces

Back stance (dwitkoobi seogi)
Outward middle block which is called inside block in shotokan or anpalmok bakkat makki in Kukki Taekwondo terminology

other than that we still do low block (arae makki) and lunge punches. In this the 3rd form we do both middle section and high section.

The instructions from "Better Karate for boys" page 52-54:

Starting position for Tae Keuk Hyung (identical to Shotokan Yoi but in modern times Gibon Chumbi Seogi can be used)
Step to the left in back stance (dwit koobi) and perform outward middle block (anpalmok bakkat makki)
Step forward with the right foot and execute middle target punch
Turning through the right side on the right foot, make an outward middle block in back stance in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot and make a middle target punch.
Moving the left foot a half turn through the left side, perform a low block.
Stepping forward three times, execute three high target punches with the right, left and right hands. On that last punch, make a "kee-up".
Turn through your rear, moving the left foot to the right, and execute an outward middle block in back stance. You are now at a right angle to your previous position.
Step forward on your right foot with a middle target punch.
Turning on your right side with the right foot, execute an outward middle block in back stance in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot, perform a middle target punch.
Moving the left foot a half turn through the left side, perform a low block.
Step forward three times, execute high target punches with the right, left and right hands. On the last punch, make a "kee-up".
Turn through your rear, moving the left foot to the right, and execute an outward middle block in back stance
Step forward on the right foot and make a middle target punch
Turning on your right side with the right foot, execute an outward middle blockin back stance in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot, perform a middle target punch.
Turning on your left side with the left foot, come back to your original starting position.

So is this identical to any Karate Kata? It is very close to Shotokan version of the 3rd form, but with a small difference. On the way back with the 3 punches it seems as if Shotokan does 3 middle section punches, while Ji Do Kwan version punches high section punches both on the forward 3 punch combination, and the second "back" 3 punch combination. But I will freely admit that this might be different in other Shotokan Dojo, as I only have youtube tutorial from shotokan on this. In conclusion I'd say its 95% identical to Shotokans 3rd form, but this kinda underlines how we can't simply reintroduce Shotokan forms into training and calling that Ji Do Kwan forms, because even when they are very similar there are sometimes differences.

Video tutorial on Taegeuk Hyung #3

Below you can see me in all "my glory" doing a short tutorial on the form since it is not identical to Shotokan, and it is very different from the third Shito Ryu form.

Video showcasing Shito Ryu's version of Taikyoku (Taegeuk) 1-3

Below Shito-Ryu Karate version 1-3 is demonstrated. None of them fit 100% with Ji Do Kwan version, but one is similar to Ji Do Kwan's second form.

Video tutorial of Shotokan's Taikyoku (Taegeuk) Kata 1-3

Below is a video tutorial of all 3 Shotokan karate Taikyoku kata or taegeuk hyung. Note that the first one is identical, the second form is complelty different from Ji Do Kwan version, and the 3rd one is almost identical.

Will you implement the Ji Do Kwan Taegeuk Hyung into your practise?

I for one spoiled this in the second blog post. For me personally fully embracing Oh Do Kwan I will not continue practising these, simply because there is such a thing as too many forms. I practise the Chang Hon Ryu forms in their 1960s versions (so no sinewave is probably the biggest difference to modern ITF forms), I practise the Taegeuk Poomsae and I practise the Kukkiwon Judanja Poomsae. I specify Kukkiwon simply because the WT competition versions are starting to change the original martial arts poomsae into something really different. The standard between WT competition poomsae and kukkiwon martial arts poomsae are growing apart from each other but that is another post :-) With all those forms plus Naihanchi/Chulgi 1-2 and Ban Wol Hyung I have more than enought forms to practise. I often find myself having to chose which forms to practise when I am practising since doing all Kukki Taekwondo Poomsae from taegeuk il jang to hansoo poomsae is pretty much a practise session by itself if you factor in the other elements that go into a training session. Likewise Chon-Ji to Gae-Baek Hyung are also a great workout.

But if I still pursued my Ji Do Kwan roots, or graded within Ji Do Kwan I would wholeheartedly implement these three as foundation as well as heirloom forms directly from the Kwan. It should not be a hot take that someone really fronting their Kwan roots should know the Kwan philosophy/creed and or a few heirloom forms if the Kwan roots are important enough to front. The Kwan all support the Kukkiwon (which is why I am still practising the Poomsae eventhough I am currently graded in Oh Do Kwan) and when I started practising for that grading I was asked to learn a few of the Oh Do Kwan forms to respect the past, but the grading itself was Poomsae including Taebaek and only Gae-Baek Hyung was required on that grading to represent the Chang Hon Ryu. Naturally I deep dived and learned all forms up to and including Gae-Baek Hyung but having your Kwan's forms preserved and documented is a luxory not all have. Mu Duk Kwan can go look at Hwang Kee's writings, Oh Do Kwan can look at Choi Hong Hi's writings, Chung Do Kwan can look at Son Duk Sung's writings but what of Song Mu Kwan? What of Ji Do Kwan? The Taegeuk Hyung are therefore a treasure and a unique view into Ji Do Kwan history and the unique eclectic forms that they had. Not simply Shotokan, not simply Shito Ryu, not simply Shudokan, but simply Ji Do Kwan.

The philosophy of Ji Do Kwan has survived, or at least the creed has survived, but now we actually have a few forms so we have something physical to tie into our training if we desire.

Part 2: The lost Ji Do Kwan Taegeuk Hyung (not the modern taegeuk poomsae)

2025-05-16T00:00:00.010+02:00

This is Part 2 of a series. I strongly suggest you click here for part 1 and start there, as I will assume you know the information contained within that part.

In part 2 I will continue documenting the original tae keuk hyung of Ji Do Kwan, not to be confused with the modern taegeuk poomsae series. Tae Keuk Hyung is a series of three forms, all following the same floor pattern (an inverted "H-shape") and all consisting of fairly basic stances and attacks. The first form in the series which we covered in part 1 is identical to Shotokan's Taikyoku Shodan (1) Kata, move for move, and even the Kihap points. Its when we come to the 2nd and 3rd form we see differences. When I first stumbled across these I looked at the first form which was illustrated (the 2nd and 3rd were text only) and I recognised the form as Shotokan's Taikyoku Kata 1. I therefore assumed given Chun Sang Sup's background in Shotokan that the Tae Keuk forms were simply shotokan copies. Years later when revisiting them since I thought it was a tragedy that the Ji Do Kwan forms were lost (or at least it does seem like they were) I was hoping that there might be something different about them and it was. So without further adu let us look at how the 2nd form of the Tae Keuk Hyung were performed.

Text move for move from "Better Karate for Boys" by Sihak Henry Cho published 1970 page 52-55

Starting position for Tae Keuk Hyung (identical to Shotokan Yoi but in modern times Gibon Chumbi Seogi can be used)
Step to the left in forward stance (ap koobi) and perform rising block (eulgeul makki)
Step forward with the right foot and execute middle target punch
Turning through the right side on the right foot, make a rising block in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot and make a middle target punch.
Moving the left foot a half turn through the left side, perform a low block.
Stepping forward three times, execute three middle section spear hand thrusts with the right, left and right hands. On that last spearhand thrust, make a "kee-up". (NOTE: They are done like the 2nd and 4th movement of Taegeuk Sa Jang Poomsae that is to say spear hand thrust same foot forward same arm, other hand under the elbow)
Turn through your rear, moving the left foot to the right, and execute a rising block. You are now at a right angle to your previous position.
Step forward on your right foot with a middle target punch.
Turning on your right side with the right foot, execute a rising block in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot, perform a middle target punch.
Moving the left foot a half turn through the left side, perform a low block.
Step forward three times, execute low target punches with the right, left and right hands. On the last punch, make a "kee-up".
Turn through your rear, moving the left foot to the right, and execute a rising block
Step forward on the right foot and make a middle target punch
Turning on your right side with the right foot, execute a rising block in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot, perform a middle target punch.
Turning on your left side with the left foot, come back to your original starting position.

So how does this compare to the Shotokan version? Well there are no spear hands, no low level punches (in this one at least) and no high blocks. In Shito-Ryu version I have seen where the 1st is identical to Shotokan the 2nd have high blocks but no spear hands, nor low punches. Likewise Mu Duk Kwan's Kicho Hyung where the first one is identical to Shotokan's version the 2nd one does not fit in with Ji Do Kwan's version either. These two Kwans were organised under the Su Bahk Do Association until 1966 so I was curious if they shared the same forms under different names (Kicho/Tae Keuk).

Ji Do Kwan Tae Keuk Hyung 2 is a lot more "advanced" in its techniques than what many other versions do. I have checked out Korean versions, kyokushin, shotokan, Goju-Kai, Shito Ryu and none of them uses spear hands in their basic forms. The closest fit we have with the Ji Do Kwan version is the Shito-Ryu version I have seen. There might be other assication of Shito Ryu that have changed their Kata to reflect their goals so I should maybe not be so sure when I say that the Ji Do Kwan version is unique, but it is rare.

Below I have attempted to make a video of the Ji Do Kwan version as a tutorial akeen to the Shotokan version of form 1 I shared in part 1. I had to make it myself since I could not find the 2nd form anywhere done as in the Ji Do Kwan, but then again the whole premise of this series is that it is worth it to preserve the Ji Do Kwan versions since they are rather unique or at least rare :-) As for the performance of the basic techniques I checked with another book of Sihak Henry Cho publised in 1968 where he shows how to do the different basics and I can say that the high blocks or rising blocks are identical to modern Kukki-Taekwondo (other Kwan chamber this on the inside, but not Ji Do Kwan) and the spear hands are done as in Taegeuk Sa Jang movement 2 and 4 so theyre the same as in Kukki-Taekwondo. The low blocks are also demonstrated like modern Kukki-Taekwondo in that book, so doing the Tae Keuk Hyung in "Kukki-Taekwondo style" is the same as Ji Do Kwan style for the most part (the Ji Do Kwan stances were a little deeper and it seems as if they move their feet in a crescent shape when stepping forward or backward in long front walking stance). I just did the form with Kukki-Taekwondo standard. If you are interested in looking at techniques as done in Ji Do Kwan I can certainly try to find out if you contact me or give me a comment on the blog.

Video Tutorial of Tae Keuk 2 Hyung

In the clip below I give a quick overview of the form, talk a little about the source and what makes this unique, then I teach it from the front and from the back :-) all in all it should be easy to learn if you have a little experience with Taegeuk 1-4 Jang Poomsae :-)

Part 1: The lost Ji Do Kwan Taegeuk Hyung (not the modern taegeuk poomsae)

2025-05-09T00:00:00.003+02:00

In my last post I walked you through a short history of the Ji Do Kwan and the issues we have when it comes to lineage, which is why I believe that we have lost all the original Ji Do Kwan Hyung as they were practised in the Kwan-era (in Ji Do Kwan's case 1946-1966 since they adopted Palgwae and then Taegeuk forms). The students focused very much on the practical applications of the basic techniques as used in sparring and the school became legendary for its fierce fighters. Later they joined the Korean Taekwondo movement fullheartedly in 1966, and got to have their own representatives in the poomse comitte who made the Taegeuk poomse series of 8 forms and the new Koryo poomse which replaced the older Koryo Hyung made by the orignal comitte. Why they left the rest of the Judanja poomse largely in peace I do not know. This focus on the sparring applications, and then the fullhearted joining of what was to become modern Kukki-Taekwondo unfortunatly came at a steep (in my opinion) price; The loss of the original Ji Do Kwan Hyung as practised in the Kwan-era. The school originally had instructors comming with dan ranks from Shotokan (most possibly), Shudokan Karate and Shito-Ryu Karate, or in other words their knowledgepool flowed from Gichin Funakoshi, Kenwa Mabuni and Toyama Kanken. All Karate legends, and this wide array of "knowledge rivers" is rather unique in Kwan terms. Therefore the loss of their forms is truly a tragedy. When going over some of the more obscure books in my collection I revisited Sihak Henry Cho's book called Better Karate for Boys". It is a short and simple book covering some stances and basic techniques and basic facts like what to expect from a class, how to fold your training uniform, how to tie your belt etc. One of the things that he also covered were three "Tae Keuk Hyung" or taegeuk hyung which is how we would have spelled it today.

Last time I read through this part I looked at the illustrations for the first form and its description and came to the conclusion that it was the first Taikoyuki form (Taikoyuki is the Japanese reading of the characters for Tai Chi or Taegeuk in Chinese and Korean respectivly). This is a series of 3 forms made by either Gichin or his son Yoshitaka "Gigo" Funakoshi depending on who you will believe. No matter who of them invented them, Gichin Funakoshi liked them so much that he included them in his teaching, and he adviced advanced students to return to these basic forms again and again as this was the essense of Karate-Do. The first Taeguk Hyung as presented by Henry Cho is identical to the Shotokan version and so I believed it to be a word for word identical rendition of the Shotokan Taikouku Kata. I have never practised these so I went on my phone and looked at it on youtube to confirm and yes it was identical. I then read the comments and someone there complained that he had learned the other two in a different way with high blocks in the 2nd one etc. He had one answer to his comment that Shito-Ryu Karate practised those versions. This made me curious because when reading the book I had noticed that the 2nd form did make use of high block but I thought (wrongly) that that was the Shotokan version as well. I therefore checked the Shito Ryu version of the three forms and compared it to the book by Henry Cho and lo and behold they were not identical to the Shito Ryu version either. They were certainly much closer to Shito Ryu than Shotokan, but at the same time a little different.

So I tried to find as many different styles who made use of these forms the main or biggest ones being Shotokan, Shito Ryu and Kyokushin. None of them matched perfectly with the book by Henry Cho. So I can only conclude that while the Shito Ryu version is the closest one, the forms as presented in the book is the way Ji Do Kwan in particular did these forms.

This also rises a few questions, because if the Taegeuk Hyung (not to be confused with the modern poomsae) did conform closer to Shito Ryu than Shotokan; what does this mean for the rest of the forms they were practising? The few who try to recreate Ji Do Kwan by looking to Shotokan might in fact be looking toward the wrong source.... Also since the basic three beginning forms do not conform 100% to the Shito Ryu version, what other ways did the forms practised at Ji Do Kwan if indeed they were close to Shito Ryu differ from their source?

Fun Fact: The reason why the first poomse that were being produced by the KTA forms comitte were being called Palgwae was that they allready had forms called taegeuk (the ones I will present in this series). They therefore used the name and term Palgwae (Meaning the 8 trigrams) because they did not want them to be confused with the other forms (the karate kata). In Kim Dae Shik's book on Taekwondo from 1971 he includes a list of "Official forms of the Korean Tae Kwon Do Association". This list in its entirety will form a future article in itself, but for this series I wanted to include the first 10 forms: Form 1 and 2 is listed as Tae Keuk Hyung 1 and Tae Keuk Hyung 2 before he continues his list with the 8 palgwae forms. So in 1971 before the introduction of the new Taegeuk series, the first two forms (in some shape we do not know exactly which versions they used) were still in the official curriculum. When the new Taegeuk poomsae series were introduced the year after, it is understandable that they dropped the first two tae keuk hyung (the karate kata) sharing the name from their list. It would look kinda strange with taegeuk 1 taegeuk 2 taegeuk 1 taegeuk 2 taegeuk 3 and so on on the list.

Video tutorial for the first Tae Keuk Hyung (Shotokan video used as is identical with Ji Do Kwan version)

The first form as documented by Sihak Henry Cho fits the Shotokan version so closely (they being identical) that I thought I would save myself the work of making illustrations, video etc and just post the Shotokan version of their form number 1 below. The way Ji Do Kwan performed their low block was the same as in Shotokan (I checked another of Sihak Henry Cho's books to confirm this). The middle section punch is performed as in Shotokan. So if this video used Korean words it could just as well be for all intents and purposes Tae Keuk Hyung 1 from the Ji Do Kwan.

The Kihap points are the same as prescribed in the Korean Ji Do Kwan version. The performance lines of the three forms are identical and it is an inverted "H-shape". There are two stances in the form; the ready stance of Chumbi Seogi, and the long front walking stance or the ap koobi seogi. There are likewise only two techniques in this form; the low block or arae makki, and the middle section punch or momtong jireugi. To the sides the combinations are low block-walk forward-middle punch. Forward and back in the center line its one low block, and then three middle punches walking forward for each technique and Kihap to the end.

It is a very basic form, and variations are still practised in Shotokan, Shito Ryu and Kyokushin Karate, as well as in many Tang Su Do schools and Su Bahk Do schools under the name Kicho Hyung. Another Korean name for them are Gibon Hyung 1-3. Kicho and Gibon means fundemental and basic.

The instructions from Better Karate for boys page 52-54:

Starting position for Tae Keuk Hyung (identical to Shotokan Yoi but in modern times Gibon Chumbi Seogi can be used)
Step to the left in forward stance (ap koobi) and perform low block (arae makki)
Step forward with the right foot and execute middle target punch
Turning through the right side on the right foot, make a low block inthe opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot and make a middle target punch.
Moving the left foot a half turn through the left side, perform a low block.
Stepping forward three times, execute three middle target punches with the right, left and right hands. On that last punch, make a "kee-up".
Turn through your rear, moving the left foot to the right, and execute a low block. You are now at a right angle to your previous position.
Step forward on your right foot with a middle target punch.
Turning on your right side with the right foot, execute a low block in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot, perform a middle target punch.
Moving the left foot a half turn through the left side, perform a low block.
Step forward three times, execute middle target punches with the right, left and right hands. On the last punch, make a "kee-up".
Turn through your rear, moving the left foot to the right, and execute a low block
Step forward on the right foot and make a middle target punch
Turning on your right side with the right foot, execute a low block in the opposite direction.
Step forward on the left foot, perform a middle target punch.
Turning on your left side with the left foot, come back to your original starting position.

I personally will not be practising these after I am finished with this series, as I am currently going in an Oh Do Kwan direction which does not make use of these three and I have more than enough with the Chang Hon Ryu, supplemented by Taegeuk and Judanja Poomsae. As a side note Choi Hong Hi did include them in his 1959 book but later dropped the three forms in his 1965 book while retaining the other Karate Kata.

I find the three forms interesting though, and if I was still pursuing the Ji Do Kwan roots I would include them in my training simply because these are the three Hyung that defintitly were practised in the Ji Do Kwan in this manner and version. I do hope that people within the Ji Do Kwan comunity pick these three forms up (when I am finished with this series so all three are available) because if you are fronting that you are Ji Do Kwan I think having something that ties you directly back to the school is prudent. It is too easy in my mind to say I am Ji Do Kwan and then not teach any of the Ji Do Kwan philosophy, creed or forms. These three forms are however a fundemental part of the Ji Do Kwan original curriculum (which is why they were preserved in the book) and they are a direct physical link back to the Kwan. You can still practise the Taegeuk and Judanja poomsae, and then have these three included in your training as supplemental heritage forms.

I hope you find this interesting, and I also hope you understand how special it is that people interested in Ji Do Kwan now get the chance to train actual Ji Do Kwan forms again :-) I call these a treasure, and I am happy to give them away to the Ji Do Kwan comunity instead of hoarding the knowledge for myself.

Click here to go directly to part 2 which goes into detail on the second form

The tragedy of Ji Do Kwan

2025-05-01T00:00:00.001+02:00

I have often written about the roots of Ji Do Kwan, and I have "talked them up" because I am biased when it comes to Ji Do Kwan coming fra a Ji Do Kwan background myself through one of my first primary teachers in Taekwondo; Grandmaster Cho Woon Sup. In this post I will try to give a more balanced view and talk a little about the link in the lineage problem. I might do another post where I discuss this more thouroughly because this is not only a Ji Do Kwan problem, but I am going to gift Ji Do Kwan practisioners with a small treasure (in my view) that I happened to come across in my research, but before gifting it, I want to give a little perspective so people can appreciate what I am giving.

The establishment of what was to become Ji Do Kwan

Ji Do Kwan did not start out as Ji Do Kwan. It did not even start out as a school teaching kicking, punching and blocking. It actually started out as a school teaching Judo (or Yudo which is how Koreans pronounce it and often writes it). The school was called Yun Mu Kwan, but a man named Chun Sang Sup who had studied Karate (or Kong Su Do as it was called in Korean meaning empty hand and was the Korean way of pronouncing the characters for Karate in Japanese) in Japan was hired to teach Kong Su Do at Yun Mu Kwan. The class proved popular so they moved into a new building and named themselves Yun Mu Kwan Kong Su Do Bu, where Bu means roughly translated department, so it was not a new school or Kwan, it was simply the Karate branch of Yun Mu Kwan. I have a little conflicting information regarding Chun Sang Sup's martial arts background. Most sources say he studied Shotokan Karate, but he had a close relationship with Yun Byung In and Yun Kwae Byung who both had studied Shudokan Karate (Toyama Kanken's Karate). Noted Taekwondo historian George Vitale told med Chun Sang Sup studied Shudokan Karate, but no matter what he did study he would have a link to Shudokan through his close friendship with Yun Byung In. In fact both Yun Byung In and Yun Kwae Byung taught at Yun Mu Kwan, but Yun Byung In went on to found what was to become Chang Mu Kwan after a while. Yun Mu Kwan Kong Su Do Bu was established around 1946, so it got to operate for four years before having to close down in 1950 due to the outbreak of the Korean war which obviously lead to the closure of all Kwan. Unfortunatly Chun Sang Sup dissapeared sometime during the Korean war, so he only got to teach his students for four years before he disapeared from the martial arts scene. We can "talk up" Chun Sang Sup all we want, but four years is not a long time to truly teach a martial art. In Korea traditionally they believed that to truly master somtehing you would do intensive training or learning for 3 years as a minimum, so looking at it from that perspective 4 years is not bad.

Yun Kwae Byung takes over, Ji Do Kwan comes into its own

Yun Kwae Byung is one of the most interesting taekwondo pioneers in my opinion due to his diverse roots. He did not study with Gichin Funakoshi in Shotokan, he studied with both Kenwa Mabuni the founder of Shito Ryu (This will be very relevant considering the "gift" I will give in a near future post) and he studied with Toyama Kanken the founder of Shudokan. Both Karate pioneers and legends. Another thing that sits him apart from many of the Kwan founders and first generation korean martial arts pioneers is that he achieved a very high dan rank and formal instructor status. He also published a Karate book while in Japan and he also made his own staff form which only survives in Grandmaster Kim Soo's Chayon Ryu today.

In 1953 after the Korean war was finally over he reopened Yun Mu Kwan under the name Ji Do Kwan (meaning Wisdom Way School). Apparantly he taught a very traditional karate style to his students, but the students seemed more interested in the application of what they learned through live free sparring than other things. Ji Do Kwan became very famous for their sparring, and they won a lot of victories against other Kwan in competition. Due to martial arts political turmoul Yun Kwae Byung allied himself with Hwang Ki and was organised in the Su Bahk Do Association, creating some tension since the students who was interested in sparring and wanted to stress competition felt they might be better served in the Korean Taekwondo Association. In 1966 a pretty large part of Mu Duk Kwan (Hwang Kee's school) and Ji Do Kwan broke away and joined the Korean Taekwondo Association and was from then on out focused on the sportive application of Taekwondo and what was to become the Kukki Taekwondo style, having representatives on the second forms comitte who made Taegeuk and a new Koryo poomsae. Some say that the focus of Ap Seogi or short walking stance in the first three Taegeuk Poomsae is a direct result of Ji Do Kwan influence since that stance most closely reflect an upright sparring stance.

After the break out in 1966 Su Bahk Do Assosiation went downhill in Korea and Hwang Kee would eventually move to the USA reestablishing himself there. Yun Kwae Byung lost political power within the martial arts and vanished from the martial arts scene in the 1970s. When he died in 2000 there was little to no notice in the martial arts comunity in Korea. Yun Kwae Byung got to teach from 1953-1966 when many students left him to join the Taekwondo comunity, (he still taught for a few years after that but his taekwondo influence if we call it that ends in 1966). That is respectable 13 years, and in my opinion if you follow a teacher closely for 13 years you should have gained quite much "depth". Unfortunatly like I said, most of his students lived for and breathed for sparring in a competition format, so how much of his martial arts legacy that continued and took root can be debated, and this is where the "tragedy" part of the title in this post comes into play.

The tragedy of Ji Do Kwan

We have a founder who disapeared after only four years of teaching, and another who lost most of his influence due to his students wanting to focus much more on competition sparring than focusing on martial art forms, basics and self defense. The tragedy of Ji Do Kwan is that despite impressive roots through Chun Sang Sup, Yun Byung In (who taught for a while) and Yun Kwae Byung, not any of the Hyung or martial heritage flowed on to us. The philosophy is still available (8 paths, the Ji Do Kwan creed etc), so that survived. The way basic techniques were performed in the Ji Do Kwan survived through instructors teaching what they learned to their students (something Kukkiwon has almost stamped out after 2006 when they started having World Championship in Poomsae and started stressing uniformity), and basics and the sparring applications of the basics survive throught Sihak Henry Cho's "Secrets of Korean Karate; Tae Kwon Do" published in 1968. Only what the students were interested in survived (basics and sparring applications), and some remnants of what self defense they learned can be found in Sihak Henry Cho's self defense for women book. But the only widely available book is the sparring applications book. What forms did they teach? How many? What variants of these forms were taught? Was there a strong Shotokan link or was the Shudokan side more pronounced? Did they have their own Ji Do Kwan spin on the forms they taught? Did they teach weapons? So much is lost when it comes to Ji Do Kwan in the martial arts area. My own teacher is from a Ji Do Kwan background and stresses tradition like 1, 2 and 3 step sparring, forms, self defense, sparring, throws, locks etc. But when he introduced additional poomsae to the curriculum he did not start teaching Ji Do Kwan Hyung like their versions of Pyungahn, Chulgi etc, he made his own Poomsae called Soak Am Ryu, forms which he made ground up.

I found a european Ji Do Kwan group years ago who said to practise the original Ji Do Kwan Hyung (forms). I reached out and asked if they had any material on them because I was interested in these forms. The instructor sent me JKA made material for the Heian Kata, JKA being Japan Karate Association, and the material was pure Shotokan Kata, so there is no way of telling if this is indeed what was practised in the Ji Do Kwan, but this instructor had simply come to the conclusion that Chun Sang Sup studied Shotokan Karate so the forms of Ji Do Kwan had to be Shotokan Kata. If you look at material from other Kwan that survives down to us, Chang Mu Kwan to Chayon Ryu through Grandmaster Kim Soo, Mu Duk Kwan which Hwang Kee documented himself, Chung Do Kwan where the secong Kwangjangnim Son Duk Sung documented many of the Hyung in 1968 and a follow up book later) and Oh Do Kwan where Choi Hong Hi documents the Karate forms of Oh Do Kwan in 1959 and 1965 we see that even Kwan that are very closely related (Chung Do Kwan and Oh Do Kwan for instance are both from a Shotokan background and many top instructors in Oh Do Kwan came from Chung Do Kwan) their forms differ. Where Chung Do Kwan most often punch to the middle section in the Pyungahn series, Oh Do Kwan punches face height for instance. Where the Karate Do Kyohan 1958 edition demonstrates the Heian Kata where they do back stance, quite often both Oh Do Kwan and Chung Do Kwan do a forward stance. So eventhough "they all come from Funakoshi" they are still different from Shotokan and as I previously said; each other. The Ji Do Kwan uniqueness which I am sure existed sadly did not flow down to us.

I am sure you are curious as to what "gift" I am going to give in the near future, it is a small peace of this Ji Do Kwan uniqueness that I happened to come across in an unlikely place. The first three Hyung that they taught. They are not completly Shotokan, they are not completly Shito Ryu (but their closer to Shito Ryu than Shotokan) they are simply Ji Do Kwan. And seeing as I do not want them to die out, I can at least share them with those that are interested, and save a small piece of Ji Do Kwan's own Hyung eventhough it is "only" the basic forms. The tragedy of Ji Do Kwan is that while some Kwan are well documented in forms etc (Mu Duk Kwan, Chung Do Kwan, Chang Mu Kwan, Oh Do Kwan for instance) Ji Do Kwan is simply not. Only the sparring applications of basic techniques survived. That a Kwan with such diverse and profound sources lost its Hyung or forms is heartbreaking. If you practise Ji Do Kwan today and you practise Shotokan forms you are most likely practising forms reimported by someone in your lineage to serve as Ji Do Kwan forms, not the forms that were originally taught in the Ji Do Kwan. The reason I say this is that all Kwan differ a little from each other and from Shotokan.

Stay tuned for a blog post series documenting the "original taegeuk hyung" (NOT THE MODERN TAEGEUK POOMSAE)

Part 3: The evolution of Hwarang Hyung/Tul/Poomsae 1950s onward

2025-04-18T08:58:00.002+02:00

If you are reading this series on another webpage other than the traditional taekwondo ramblings blog it has been stolen without my permission. This has happened a lot lately.

I started a little blogpost on Taekwondo's birthday (11th April) looking at the evolution of Hwarang Hyung seeing as this was the first Korean Taekwondo form created. I meant to cover movement 1 and possibly movement 4 within the form, but once I got started and realized that the version I am practising (which I dubbed the 1965 version after Choi Hong Hi's 1965 book) was different from the modern ITF rendition of Hwarang Hyung (or Tul which is ITF's preferred term for form/pattern). I have kept saying this but I will say it again; there is no "best version" unless you define in what context you would measure against. They are simply different, and different lineages and Dojang will have different versions of it. ITF has done a great job curating the creators final versions of his forms (although some ITF orgs has tempered with them after his death), my personal interest in Choi's Chang Hon Ryu forms is as they were done in the Oh Do Kwan before he left South Korea, so my personal "best version" would not be the "latest version", and that is OK for me and should be for anyone else :-) Now with that caveat out of the way, let us look at Hwarang Hyung movement 5 through our sources which in this blog post would be Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book (Korean language only), Choi Hong Hi's 1965 book, an instructional video made under the supervision of Choi Hong Hi in 1968 and Choi Hong Hi's 15 volume Encyclopedia (volume X or 10) from the 1980s.

The 1980s (modern) version of movement 5 in Hwarang Hyung

In the modern version movement 6 is what we in Kukki Taekwondo call Dangkyo Teok Chigi or pulling in chin punch. Its an uppercut movement targeting the chin while the other hand is pulled in front of the opposite shoulder. In Kukki Taekwondo Poomsae we see this movement first in Taegeuk Pal (8) Jang and then again in Poomsae Taebaek. The way Kukki Taekwondo (and earlier Taekwondo books) typically apply this as is a textbook example of what old school boxing might call dirty boxing. Below is the 1980s movement explained from the encyclopedia from page 149:

The ITF version seems to be a little more circular than the Kukkiwon version which can be seen below in this video:

Modern ITF version of Hwarang if you are interested:

There is in other words no reason at all to argue that this movement is not an uppercut to the opponents chin. People might be surprised that this was not the case originally.

1965 (1960s) version of Hwarang Hyung Movement 5:

Looking at the 1965 book where the forms are described mostly in text and almost with no illustrations below you can see an "illustration" of the movement:

Quote Choi's 1965 book page 188: "Execute MS.(middle section) block with L.O (left outward) forearm at the same time pull R.(right) fist in front of L. (left) shoulder. * Keep R.(right) backfist faced downward."

In this version we clearly see that the movement is not at all an uppercut-style strike. It is described as what we in modern Kukki Taekwondo might call a momtong an makki (middle section inward defense) and in so the trajectory goes more or less on the same horizontal plane. This is much closer to the Karate roots, because this sequence (movement 4-6) in Hwarang is clearly taken straight from Pyungahn/Heian 2 or Pinan 1. In Shotokan Karate they perform this very linear, and one textbook application I have seen they have for this exact move is to trap an opponents arm and break his elbow joint. I think it is a very bad application, but still it is underlying the movement as they do it. We do have the instructional video that Choi was involved in which demonstrates this movement from 1968. Below is the clip, it plays at 0.25 speed to emphasise the movements trajectory.

The "blocking" arm is done a little more circular in the chambering of the movement than what I first imagined when reading the 19665 text, but the ending is still very much linear and a very far cry indeed from an uppercut punch.

Was this always the case? The closest text we have on the original version of Hwarang is Choi Hong Hi's first book on Taekwondo from 1959 (the first book about taekwondo using the name taekwondo and including Korean made forms) so let us take a look at what he says.

The 1959 version (the original?)

I again have to say that my Korean language skills are very basic, I am in no way fluent, so have that in mind when I translate or gleam meaning from this source. I will provide the original text though so you or anyone else can fact check me, and I for one would be very happy to be corrected if I make a mistake here. With that caveat out of the way I will not translate what he says about this movement in Hwarang because I am 100% sure of this one. He is taking us on a quest like he did with the last movement I covered. First he asks us to look at Pyungahn 2 movement 5, he does this on page 172 if you have the original source and still want to check my transating skills. If we follow his directions and go to page 150 to see what he writes he tells us that its the reverse of movement 2. We than have to go to page 149 to see what he writes about movement 2 and reverse it for ourselves.

The text says and I will quote it until we get to the brackets telling us to look at illustration 22.

"Movement 2: Keep the lower body as is, extend left arm, twist the upper body towards the left and use the right hand to do a rising punch toward point A (the left from the starting point) (see illustration 22)

-Choi Hong Hi 1959 page 149

Below is the illustration of this movement (illustration 22) and it is from the next page (150)

I adjusted the photo a little to make it clearer. The illustration matches my translation which is why I quoted him and not just loosely translated it. He includes a special note in his book regarding this illustration that "2) The photo has the righ hand position slightly raised". Its not relevant to our discussion but I wanted to include it since Choi felt this was important. The marked trajectory in the illustration and the description both suggest that it is a sort of uppercut strike or upwards or rising strike while the other hand is pulling in and it matches the modern way of doing this movement. We are not quite done though, as I said earlier I stopped my quoting of page 149 where he tells us to look at photo 22, there is actually more said about this movement in a special point:

"You can also strike sideways to the side with the right fist while feeling as if you are pulling the opponent with your left hand".

Well this changes things... So in going back to the earliest source we have on Hwarang Hyung to determine the starting point of this movement, the original one if I may, we learn that both versions were considered okay and "correct" by Choi Hong Hi to begin with. He then seems to have preferred or stressed the sideways or linear movement which he calls strike in 1959 and block in 1965 but the trajectory is the same. He then changed it again in later, and by 1986 the correct way was the rising punch or uppercut strike. Me personally I am sticking to the 1965 version but that is because I like to stay consistent, and unless my seniors tells me differently that is the version I will practise. ITF has to follow the latest version of their forms as taught by Choi Hong Hi when he passed away. To the rest it seems as if both versions are fine, and both versions were fine from the earliest source we have on this :-) Like I have said repeatedly there is no better or worse version when it comes to these forms, we have to first put it into context and then we can determine the better or worse in that context. For me the 1965 version is great because it represents Oh Do Kwan before Choi Hong Hi left Korea. But that version would be very bad for someone in an ITF organisation trying to do the form with the latest version available.

Its been a jurney :-) I think that we are nearing the end if we are not already there in the evolution of Hwarang since the rest of the form follows quite consistantly. I might cover movement 6 though as the modern ITF versions have us slide into the punch but this was not always the case. It is a minor change though especially when looking at how much the first movement changed from 1959 to modern times, and the twin knife hand block in movement 4 which was changed both in chamber and in the final position, and this movement where the technique has changed between to very different versions back and forth through taekwondo history :-) A sliding movement into a punch seems trivial then.

Part 2: The evolution of Hwarang Hyung/Tul/Poomsae 1950s onward

2025-04-14T09:19:00.002+02:00

On Taekwondo's birthday (11th April) I posted a blogpost discussing the evolution of the very first movement in the very first Korean martial arts form/pattern; Hwarang Hyung. I teased that therewere more changes from the original version which the oldest documentation we have is from 1959, and that a few of these changes might surprise some. Well in this part we will jump ahead to movement 4 in Hwarang Hyung, what was in the 1965 version called the twin forearm block, or in Kukki Taekwondo terminology a momtong keumgang makki (double diamond block perhaps in english?). In the version of Hwarang that I learned this technique is done roughly the same as in Taebaek Poomsae but with the middle block portion of the technique turned outward, so the palm of your blocking hand is turned away from you, not pointed towards you like in Taebaek Poomsae. Was this the original way to do it? How is it done in modern ITF Chang Hon Ryu? I'll make use of the same sources as in Part 1, and I advice you to read that part first if you have not done so :-) Click here to read it

The modern Kukki TKD version of the technique:

A video says more than a thousand words. If you compare this with modern Shotokan Karate you will see that the Kukki Taekwondo version is a little more circular, and that it is really a case of Kukki Taekwondo doing two basic techniques at once, the face block or high section block (eulgul makki) and the middle section thumb side forearm outward block (momtong anpalmok bakkat makki). In Karate as well as older Korean descriptions is seems as if they start at the same point and then shoot more or less straight to their ending position which is identical to the ending position of Kukki Taekwondo version in the video above. My favorite practical application is the one Iain Abernethy often showcases where you move the opponents arm up to clear a way for an uppercut strike to the opponents chin or jaw. In fact the whole sequence in the Karate Hyung/Kata which served as a basis for the sequence in Hwarang and Taebaek could be said as a blueprint to get a strike to the opponents jaw no matter if the obstructive defending limb is high, middle or low. I am unsure when they solidified the Kukki Taekwondo method, but I can say that the first time I learned the move I did it pretty much as in Karate, but I originally learned Taekwondo using what I would label "Kwan-era mechanics". They were hammered out years later at Chosun University in Gwangju South Korea, but thats another story.

1980s Version of the movement (modern version):

To see how modern International Taekwon-Do Federation Chang Hon Ryu does the movement we can look to Choi Hong Hi's Encyclopedia volume X (or 10)

If you look at the above illustration you will see that the technique is gathered in front of you crossing your wrists and then the arms move into the ending positions. Note the middle block portion and how that arm is oriented which is in stark contrast to the Kukki Taekwondo method, and it gave me a headache when I started learning the Chang Hon Ryu as this technique is introduced in the second form Tan-Gun Hyung. Now I train both versions since I am still practising the Poomsae, allthough my focus is on Chang Hon Ryu. The turning of the lower arm, and the way modern ITF chambers make the uppercut strike I mentioned earlier not work anymore. This way of performing this technique is as far as I know a unique way of doing it in Taekwondo when you compare the basic techniques we have with the Karate counterparts. Note also the change from the riding stance (jochum seogi) or what the ITF call sitting stance into back stance. You turn to the right, and very clearly withdraw your right leg toward the left, almost completly back, before moving it forward again to sinc into back stance (Dwit koobi seogi).

1965 Version (intermediate version?):

As usual in Choi Hong Hi's 1965 book (the first ever English language Taekwondo book) there is very little illustration and we have to rely on text:

"4. Execute twin forearm block while forming L.B. stance toward A." - Choi 1965 page 188

So here the text is open for interpretation. Personally when I learned this form, I turned and shifted my weight back into back stance without moving the front foot much, just adjusted the lenght so it was a proper back stance length. If only we had video of someone performing around 1965 to demonstrate how the form was done back then. Wait, we do have one from 1968 produced in Korea for the newly(ish) founded ITF, produced with the help and under the care of Choi Hong Hi himself. Below is a snippet which I have edited so it is played at 0.25 of the normal speed. It demonstrates the chamber of the block (here done more or less as in Karate), the hands moving more or less straight into the ending position as in Karate, but the arm for the middle block is turned outward (but that was also how the single technique was explained in the book from 65 when you looked at the basic technqiue). Note also how what is to become the front foot is merely adjusted here, there is no where near the same withdrawel of it back before moving forwards again as in the modern version. We already see that from the 1960s (the clip is from 1968) theres a lot that has changed when we arrive at the modern version in the 1980s. I do not have the 1972 book so I can not pinpoint where these major changes happened, but the evolution is pretty clear.

1959 Version (original version)

Now I have saved the best part (in my view) to the end :-) In 1959 Choi Hong Hi authored and published the first book ever on Taekwondo (like using the name taekwondo), but the book has never been translated into english, and relatively few have really looked into it as most are interested in the correct way of doing things today, not how it was done back then since that is outdated material. There was no change in technique 2 and 3 which were the same two middle section punches as it is today, which is why I skipped straight to movement 4. When reading books from this era they made a point of not including too many pictures and illustrations since that was both costly and time consuming, so the illustrations are there but not for each and every move. Well below is a picture with the text describing movement 4 in Korean. I will translate it but since I am not fluent I like to include the original text so others can check it and improve upon my translation and or correct any errors I might have done:

Quote from Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book on Taekwondo page 171 (original in the picture above):

"Turn your stance to point B and move into back stance and perform the same movement as Pyungahn i (2) dan 4th movement"

For a long time I thought that in Oh Do Kwan they pretty much retained the Japanese names for the forms. You see in Choi Hong Hi's 1965 english language book he is very consistent in calling the forms that came directly from Karate the Japanese names. Heian 1-5 is called Hei-An 1-5 and not Pyungahn or Pingan as you would see in Korean language books from different schools in the same era. The Karate Kata series Tekki in Japanese are called Tet-Ki and not Kima, Chulgi or Naebojin as you would see in other schools using Korean pronounciation. Han-Getsu in Choi's book is known in Shotokan as Hangetsu, while in Korea it is often translated into Ban Wol which is the name I learned the form under. Here he refers to the Karate form by the Korean name or pronounciation Pyungahn. I am left wondering if he intentionally made the names in his English book Japanese(ish) so that international students of Karate who wanted to change over to Taekwondo could easily recognize them?

I am sorry for that little tangent, lets go back to the technique itself. As you can see by the quote we will not get much wiser from that passage, it is time to check out what Choi says we should do in Pyungahn 2 movement 4.

Below is a picture with the appropriate original Korean text which I will loosely translate:

Quote from Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book page 149: "Movement 4 (Opposite of movement 1)"

Sorry for trolling you guys, but I laughed so hard when I read it because I have a bad sense of humour. But this also underlines the effect of having as few photographs as possible to save expenses and costs which I mentioned earlier in the post. Here instead of explaining and illustrating Hwarang movement 4 Choi directs us to Pyungahn 2 movement 4 which again directs us to Pyungahn movement 1 as movement 4 was ommitted because it was just reverse of movement 1. Below you will get a photo for movement 1 pyungahn 2 page 149:

I will try to translate it as good as I can, but I had a little trouble with this one so I am going to do it loosely, and I hope if I am mistaken someone will correct me. Allthough the illustration is quite clear if you zoom in.

The first line is giving me trouble. I believe he says you can also block with knifehand (Sudo) possibly thinking of the opening movement in pyungahn 4, but I am really not sure. Sudo is what he called knife hand, but my Korean is basic so take the whole first line with a grain of salt.

The next part from the number "2: The body faces point C (the front) and your gaze faces point A (left)" keeping in mind that this must be reversed for Hwarang Hyung move 4.

"3) Defend against a facial attack from point A with your left wrist and defend against the attack from point C with your right wrist, prepairing for the next attack."

As you can see from the illustration and the translated text we have a clos if not identical technique from Karate where the arms go more or less straight into the ending positions from the opposite hip. I do find it interesting that the hand which is in front is not turned with the palm facing you as in modern Kukki Taekwondo ending position, neither is it turned outward as in the 1965 onwards Chang Hon Ryu Taekwondo version, it is neutral, the pinky finger pointing away from the face. It is also higher than the ending position in modern Kukki Taekwondo, but given that Choi Hong Hi states that the purpose is to block or defend against a facial attack using your wrist it needs to be quite high.

Just for fun let us see Funakoshi founder of Shotokan Karate demonstrating the same movent from the same form in 1935:

Here we can clearly see the Karate influence. The ending position is pretty much identical to Choi Hong Hi's 1959 book and here the fornt arm is also "neutral". When people say that early Taekwondo was Karate we should not feel offended, because it really was just that in the beginning.

Ending remarks

Some people believe that the Chang Hon Ryu of forms were developed and stayed completly consistent from inception to modern day. This I think might be true in some cases, there are some changes in the forms I leared which follow the 1965 versions when compared to the modern encyclopedia but there are some who has no changes that I can see. There has been an evolution in how basic techniques were done, some are very minor and some are larger. If you stick to kick block punch applications they do not really matter at all. As long as they work for you they are good. The changes only matters when analysing the forms for more "indepth" (in lack of a better term) applications akin to those Iain Abernethy and many others have found within Karate Kata. Even looking at original intent of the Taekwondo forms this evolution is interesting, as we now have seen a fairly dramatic change in technique in both movement 1 and 4 (and spoiler move 5 as well when I get to it). Which version is better? None are, they are simply different like I said in part 1. The Dojang's master should stick to a standard, but which standard will depend on the Dojang's lineage and goals.

Part 1: The evolution of Hwarang Hyung/Tul/Poomsae 1950s onward

2025-04-10T22:20:00.001+02:00

Happy birthday Taekwondo (11th April 1955) I was careful to post at this day :-)

I recently got my certificate from the Oh Do Kwan and I am now a proud 3rd dan :-) Oh Do Kwan was one of the Kwan who merged to lay the foundations of Kukki Taekwondo, so I still do Taegeuk and Judanja Poomsae and use Kukkiwon movement standard, but I also picked up Chang Hon Ryu as I was told to do Gaebaek as well as Taebaek Poomsae as part of my grading. Being the kind of man that I am I did not want to pick up a single form without understanding it in context so I started with Chon-Ji Hyung and worked my way up. Hwarang Hyung however I did not need to study much to pick up because I already knew the framework so to speak. You see I am a history nerd (if you have read more than one post of this blog you should not be surprised by that) and Hwarang Hyung was THE FIRST Korean pattern made closely followed by Chung-Mu Hyung, U-Nam Hyung (a form discontinued before the 1965 book by Choi Hong Hi), Ul-Ji Hyung and Sam-Il Hyung (all presented in the very first taekwondo book published in 1959.

Hwarang Hyung being the first and oldest Korean martial arts form (even the 8 Bbontae the Taekkyon forms are recent inventions using older techniques strung together according to my original teacher discussing Taekkyon history) made me look closely at it to understand the process or evolution from what was Karate into what we now call Taekwondo. It is said that Grandmaster Nam Tae Hi helped in the formation of Hwarang Tul (Source; Taekwondo, A Killing Art) which also intruiged me, knowing that he was a war hero who actually had to use his skills to survive. Any form where he had anything to do with would be a good one I thought (and I still do).

There have been many attempts at making Taekwondo something distinct from Karate and making new forms so they have their own instead of Karate Kata was a way many would take. Choi Hong Hi and the Oh Do Kwan were first with their Chang Hon Ryu, Chung Do Kwan made Kuk-Mu forms a little later where Kuk-Mu Hyung 1&2 are in Son Duk Sung and Robert J. Clark's 1968 book "Korean Karate, The Art Of Tae Kwon Do". Palgwae and the black belt forms series (Judanja Poomse) were made even later in 1965-67, and Taegeuk and the modern Koryo Poomsae were introduced even later in 1972.

Many assume that the modern way ITF does their Tul (pattern) is the way it has always been, but looking at the different publications we see some clear changes here and there. Some blame the earlier publications being mistaken or unclear which was later corrected in newer publications, but this is a simplification of the facts. If you look at people doing the Chang Hon Ryu forms who broke away early from Choi Hong Hi you will see them doing things as described in the books and videos from the time they broke off. Videos from earlier times match the older publications showing that the books were largely correct but the forms themselves were changed over time (explaining the opening title of this post).

I think we can look at the very first movement of Hwarang Hyung to illustrate this:

After the ready position you step out with your left foot into jochum seogi riding stance (or sitting stance using ITF terminology) and do a "pushing block" with your left arm. I doubt any Taekwondoin (Taekwondo practisioner) practising Hwarang would argue that. But at what height do we do this "pushing block", in what direction? Since I brought this up you can already guess that something has happened in how we do this movement over the years.

Movement 1 1959 (original? version)

In 1959 the first book written using the word Taekwondo was published the first movement is indeed a pushing block, but it moves inward and stops in front of the chin. The illustration shows this very clearly as do the text:

(Translated by yours truly from Korean, I am not fluent so if anyone would like to do a better job I hope you will comment I have provided the original text in the above illustration for that purpose, take my translation with a grain of salt): "Movement 1: Move the left foot one step in direction A (refering to the forms movement line but it is to the left) into a riding stance (Choi uses the word "Kima" which means horseriding and is still used in Karate today as in Kiba dachi) and do a front/center-stop defensive technique. The hand should be about one foot(length) in front of the chin."

Above you can see the accompanying illustration for that move. Note how the Makki technique clearly moves inward toward the center line as well as forward. In modern Kukki taekwondo we would label this as eulgeul batangson an makki or high section inward palm block. Again the trajectory of the block in the illustration along with the text makes it pretty clear how it is suposed to be done.

Below you can see a far newer rendition of the same movement, but here done from someone whose lineage broke off from Choi Hong Hi at a fairly early stage, therefore keeping the forms like they were at the break out point (more or less, there are differences such as each and every kick is done high etc)

The opening movement is more or less like the 1959 version (or original version if we dare call it that). It is still a forwards, but clearly toward the centerline (it even crosses it) and slightly lower than the 1959 illustration and text says. Many modern practisioners especially from ITF organisations will look at people doing it this way and saying they are inventing different ways to do a form, when in fact they are doing it as it was done when their master first learned it (before he broke away from Choi at some point).

Movement 1 1965 (slightly evolved version)

In 1965 Choi Hong Hi wrote and published the very first English Taekwondo book (it is sad how downplayed he is in Kukki Taekwondo circles because he was an extremly important man when it comes to everything Taekwondo today). The forms in that book are still called "Hyung" (Kata in Japanese) but here the forms are much more text based, with very few illustrations. In Hwarang there are only two illustrations, one showing the scissors block or Gawi Makki near the end of the form and the other showcasing the stepping in and grabbing your hand movement just prior to the wrist release, side kick movement. So we have no illustration for the first movement of the form in the forms section. The text says quote from page 188:

"1. Move L. foot to "B" forming R. stance while executing a M.S. pushing block with the L. palm fist."

So there is no mention of the trajectory, and M.S. does mean middle section but that could be all the way up to and including the neck, so stopping the technique with the fingers in front of and at the height of the chin could be considered "correct" using that era of terminology (there are knife hand strikes to the neck which in this book are said to be middle section strikes, as a modern Kukki Taekwondo student a Middle section block using the palm would be delivered at solar plexus height at default). Each and every technique in the forms section can however be explored in the technique section of the book, so for this articles benefit below you can see all information the book contains on the pushing block.

Looking at the above illustration and especially the riding stance one (the one on the right) it seems as the pushing block is done more or less in a forward manner in this version closer to the modern way but still toward the centerline and at about shoulder height. In the illustration he is pressing the arm away close to the opponents shoulder joint (between the elbow and shoulder). This is as a side note an old Karate way of utilizing "blocks" as even Choki Motobu advises us to redirect the opponent limb further up the arm than what is often seen in later Karate texts and Taekwondo texts.

Movement 1 1980s (modern version)

This version is the best documented version, and it is also how modern ITF organisations will perform the opening movement. The arm is more or less straight and at the shoulder level. The "blocking arm" comes straight out from the shoulder so it is well to the side of the centerline. Below you can see the famous ITF taekwondo master Suska doing the opening movement:

Ending thoughts to part 1:

I do not think any of these versions are better than the others, they are just different. In practical application you would need to adapt your technique to the situation you're in so it would never be perfect textbook example. We do need an exact yardstick on how to perform the movement in the Dojang though, what example or yardstick you'll use depends on what the master chooses. Up until now I have performed the technique like in modern version, but at the centerline, as most kukki taekwondo techniques are performed toward the centerline, that ended up as the natural thing to do for me. After researching this form deeper, and going back to the 1959 book I have been experimenting with a more 1959 version and I like that one too. For me personally since you move your left foot directly out to the side, I think that the technique should be done at centerline or perhaps in the 1959 versions case it might even cross the centerline a little. Doing it straight out from the shoulder it seems to me like you would miss the opponents arm alltogether, but this is my personal preference. One of the things forms teaches us and trains us in is the mind-body link. And the important factor in developing this is to have a set standard that you do each and every time.

What version is the best depends entirely on the metrics you judge the versions againg, and the metrics will depend on what context you are putting the technique in. Is the most original version the best because it is the oldest and most true to the original intent of the creator (older = better context)? Is the most up to date version better because it represents the final evolution of the creators thoughts (newer = better)? What is the better version for defending against a straight punch (practical application context)? What is the most versatile version to use in combat in any matter you will see fit (pure movement and practical application in self defense and free no rules combative scenarios)? Which version is the most the most pleasing to the eyes (prettier is better context)? Which version will ensure you are not deducted points in forms competition (sportive context)? And so on.

This was originally going to be just one blog post, but I think those who are interested in Hwarang Hyung/Tul/Poomsae might enjoy looking at movement 4 and 5 as well since they too have changed over the years. Seeing as there will be a lot of overlap into the Kukki Taekwondo Poomsae form Taebaek in the next two posts in this series I am confident that a few Kukki Taekwondoin will enjoy reading those too :-)