DWx

So since Brian posted his video, I have a few of me around this time last year doing the ITF 3rd dan ones. By far not the best performance you will see as we were just running through these but you get the idea. Choi Yong is pretty awful with regards to the side kicks as I'm not very flexible. Yoo Sin 06/02/14: http://youtu.be/M-8nMZo_i2k Choi Yong 06/02/14: http://youtu.be/9Vi0Pz0FTXY Sam Il 06/02/14: http://youtu.be/h6js5zGJFyU Yoo Sin was my choice for competition so will try to upload something videoed at a tournament. And I totally agree Brian with regards to the kicking segments, I hate that bit! Just about ok with my right leg but my left really sucks.

Thanks for posting Brian Looks pretty strong. So I can't speak for the other forms but in Chon Ji I think you are right in the stance width causing the shift off the mark. The width of your front stance is similar to the length of your L-stance so you are gaining half a stance on the two turns to the front and back and not regaining this ground with your L-stance. To get back on the mark you would either have to narrow your front stance or increase the length of your L-stance. I hope this is okay? (I will take it down if you like) but maybe this will help demonstrate: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6nuE0F8dpfXM0JZdmh3dk80M3M/view?usp=sharing The red pair of lines and blue pair of lines are the same distance apart on each photo. The red pair is the width I would normally teach a front stance to be (inline with your shoulder sockets), the blue pair is the actual width of your front stance. As you can see the blue pair actually matches the length of your L-stance. Whereas I would typically suggest an L-stance is 1.5 times whatever your stance width is in a front stance. You are effectively crab walking yourself half a stance to your left every time you turn to face the front or back. To make up for this and get back on the mark, you either need to pull the front stance width in to the red lines OR make your L-stance 1.5x the blue length. Hope that makes sense?

The bold above is exactly the point. We are lucky in that in this day and age we have easy access to so much material, in print or online, and that nowadays it is easier than ever to get in touch with people from different styles and backgrounds to share information. If you wanted a professional boxer to come do a seminar it's now much easier to find and get in touch with one. Lots of seminars are now open to anyone and widely advertised too so there's always choice. You don't have to just invite someone to your dojo because you know them through a friend of a friend or because they happened to turn up on your door asking. You now get the choice of what it is and who you think will benefit you and your students the most. Time is a commodity and with greater networks and knowledge we get to be more discerning customers. It's not "we don't need you", it's what are you going to teach me? Maybe it's just my experience but it seems like there is a seminar or workshop on nearly every other weekend I could attend. And I have done so and have trained with boxers, other MA, police self defense courses and of course plenty of great TKDer's... But with so many things going on and easily accessed you have to make informed choices about what you want to spend your time doing. That's why there's the question of what it is someone (like Bob) is bringing to the table when offering to conduct a seminar. Maybe it is because I have my work head on (I work in sales) but I see it as you are selling yourself as a product when offering to conduct a seminar for a school and in order to convince people to train under you they should know what your unique selling point is not just the fact that you want to do a seminar. Kusotare said earlier "In order for me to buy you as a service therefore, I would need to see you in action.". And you are selling a service as such. That's not to say you can't learn something from every instructor, you can, and I'm sure we would all learn a lot from Bob, but why is it wrong for the earlier TKD instructor to decline a seminar if he personally did not see a benefit?

My motivations were not malicious!! My goals were not malicious!! To spread knowledge across the great divide!! Why are seminars done to begin with?? Well, my intents are always good, and not bad, and I can't speak towards their reason(s) intelligently. No disrespect, but why should I pick you to do a seminar? Sure, you demonstrate a reasonable knowledge of Martial Arts on this board, but again, with the greatest respect, to an extent a lot of that information can be found in books, magazines and the web - as long as you know where to look. Practical ability and knowledge is another thing entirely. In order for me to buy you as a service therefore, I would need to see you in action. There are a lot of excellent martial artists out there that do seminars (some of my friends teach globally). But our time (and my dojo time) is precious, so we need to know we are investing our time wisely. K. The OP was a general post to engage a conversation. After all, this is what KF is here for; discussions. I used an example, about a TKD school to speak towards something that I've experienced, and THEY CONTACTED me, and they've contacted me many times, but they're not willing when I approach them. I'm fine with that; it's their choice!! Pick me...don't pick me...it's your choice! I'm fine with that!! I can only present what Shindokan has to offer, then the decision is up to you. If you approach me, then it's my choice to accept or decline; it's my choice. KF is here so that members can discuss in a calm manner! So, I shrug my shoulders when I'm told that my knowledge is basic, and it can be gained by uncouth means; akin to a slap in my face. I've nothing to prove to anyone, except to my students!! I allow the floor to decide!! Think what you might, and that's you're right! Believe, don't believe, but I've been on the floor for over 50 years and it hasn't been as an on-looker/audience!! In that, if you saw me on the floor, you'd see that I possess the ability as well as the knowledge. The final approval would be yours if I approach you!! Respectfully!! I think what Kusotare is getting at (correct me if I'm wrong), is what is it that you, Bob Mitcham, are offering that is different from other people who conduct seminars or that can't be obtained elsewhere? What's your unique selling point? And why should a dojo invite you to conduct a seminar? I don't think it is a question of your knowledge or skill but what is it about you and your teaching that should make the previously mentioned TKD instructor (or anyone else for that matter) allocate time, and presumably money, to you. Is it in their students best interests to give up time to train with you? What would you be adding to the TKD training for example.

Congratulations devil dog

To add to this, Korean styles use a similar terminology in "kwan" 관. Not only does this mean "building" or "hall" but it refers to those who follow a particular branch or lineage. Whilst there is some sharing among groups, the kwan you are from or lineage can be very important and some especially find it important to keep the original teachings as untainted as possible. With regards to the OP, to play devil's advocate, what were your motivations for wanting to teach a seminar Bob? What would it have been on and what were your goals? Whilst I don't doubt your knowledge (that much is evident) maybe the school in question was suspicious of your goals. Was it to draw students away to Shindokan (an important question for a commercial school)? How would the school's instructors look compared to you? Would their knowledge and ability stack up? Maybe they didn't understand the value-add in having someone non-TKD teach something a little bit different. At the end of the day it's their loss but I guess in this day and age someone offering to do a seminar for the sake of it may be received with suspicion.

In truth WTF should maybe call theirs a front stance as "ap" 앞 translates as front. Not sure what "gunnun" means exactly, but pretty sure that doesn't mean "walking". I had a book somewhere on the Korean language and terminology, will see if I can dig it out. If you feel comfortable sharing maybe post a video?

Happy Birthday Devin, hope you have a great day!

That's a good point. This happened within ITF Taekwondo. On Gen. Choi's passing in 2002, three groups emerged each claiming to be the true - ITF. Just over 10 years later they still haven't come to an agreement and there are even more splinter groups popping up every year each claiming to preserve the General's teachings.

Sounds a little bit like Imposter Syndrome: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome Most likely you're fine. don't worry too much and just do your best. Good luck!

Great review Heidi. At my last grading I actually got asked a about nutrition and what my thoughts were about its role in martial arts. As I said to the examiner "you wouldn't fuel your premium Ferrari on economy unleaded gas". Nutrition is just as important as physical training.

I agree with this 100%. To further safe guard children and in fact to also protect the instructor, care should to make sure that parents know what is going at all times. A viewing room is ideal as it let's parents watch but also keeps them from distracting and interfering. Instructors should also make sure any physical contact is minimal and strictly kosher. That is to say that physical contact should be strictly for martial arts correction and personally I make it obvious I'm keeping my distance and only touching the hand to move it etc. Instructors should also consider making sure that they are never 1:1 with a child. Better to have someone else present, even if it's just on the periphery as a witness rather than run the risk of false accusations.

I don't know much about tournaments for the three ITFs...is it already the case that if you're in one ITF you're allowed to compete in tournaments for one of the other ITFs? Also, does this Accord with the WTF apply to only one of the ITFs? It depends. On a national level they tend to be open tournaments that anyone can compete at as long as you follow the rules of the organisation hosting. So certainly in the UK and I know elsewhere in Europe all the ITFers compete in each others tournaments. We also get some WTFers and other TKD styles come to compete in sparring and breaking. There are some minor rule differences and technical differences across the 3 groups that you have to bear in mind though if you wanted to switch between them all. On a continental and world level? To my knowledge the rules forbid this as the criteria for participation is that you are a member of a relevant NGB and hold a valid blackbelt certificate number. You can only realistically be a member of one group so does prevent others from competing. You can transfer and move groups but at any one time you'd only be able to compete at one tournament. This restriction also means WTFers couldn't compete unless they were ranked in ITF too. One of the ITF groups is also holding an open World Cup which any of the groups can attend. Does look like quite a good tournament.

I'm surprised at Chon Ji being off. It is symmetrical so even if there were a difference in the dimensions of your walking stance vs L stance, this should be canceled out as whatever you do to the left you do to the right. How about the turns? Are you gaining or losing distance here? For contrast, in ITF, a walking stance is: * one and a half shoulder widths long measured from big toe to big toe * one shoulder width wide measured from the centres of the feet * weight adjusted so that it falls through the centre of the stance and the front knee should be directly over the ankle so the shin is perpendicular to the floor * toes of the front foot point forward and back foot is out by 25 degrees. Not such a big deal in Chon Ji as it's symmetrical (as long as you remain consistent) but in higher grade patterns, if the ratio is off compared to the other stances you won't get back on your mark.

Thanks Brian can't get full splits. Far from it actually. I can get only around 90-100 degrees on a side split. Front splits are a little better but I have really tights quads so not at full splits with either leg. So even if you're not so flexible there's hope! It's the twisting kick side of mine that I'm not happy with and that is a flexibility issue.

This is really taboo and unprofessional. It's up to you but I would really recommend not pursuing a relationship further and to be very clear up front about this. Personally I would also be very uncomfortable continuing to train there. If you wanted to you could report this to his senior or the association he is a member of. Whilst relationships sometimes do happen to approach you in such a way is really not professional.

Don't have kids but from seeing other people do the same, I would say 9/10 it is better to find a different person to teach your kids. Either you're too easy on them because they're your kid, too hard on them because they're your kid or other students think you're treating them differently because they're you're kid. There's also potential animosity or ill feeling when either yourself or your child cannot separate what happens in the dojo from what happens at home.

A new addition to my library: Martial Arts Instruction: Applying Educational Theory and Communication Techniques In the Dojo by Lawrence A. Kane http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/159439024X/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B00HTC8LGC/ If you teach, or if you have any interest at all in communication skills, this is a must have for your library. I received this book shortly after Christmas and it has quickly become one of my favourite martial arts related books. I think most of us know of Kane from his other books such as as The Little Black Book of Violence however Kane is extremely knowledgeable on communication techniques and how to make sure that you take your martial art knowledge and present it in such a way that others can understand. He also explains how everyone has different learning preferences and how you can tailor your teaching to make sure your lesson is accessible by all of your students. Chapters include: Understanding Learning Style Differences Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Tool to Understand Student Predilections Applications of the Six Teaching Styles to Martial Arts Fostering a Positive Learning Environment Developing and Implementing Lesson Plans for the Dojo Conclusion/Stages of Teaching

It's tough for sure and not my favourite group to teach. The key thing I think is you have to be more engaging and more interesting than anything else in the room. So be upbeat and high energy. Also switch it up every so often as the attention span of a child is pretty short. Change up the activity every 15 mins or so and don't expect them to sit there and listen to you lecture. You can plan a lesson on one topic or theme, say a particular kata or even technique but make sure you have 4 or 5 different ways of teaching it.

When I did TKD this was the highest form...once 2nd Dan we did Gae Bek, Choong Jang, and Se Jong. I'd put it at or near the top for difficulty in the ITF forms set. I'd have to agree. Very tough. Between that one and Jook Am, I'm not sure I will survive 2nd dan forms practice! Ignoring the possible political motivations behind the Kodang to Juche change (easy to find more on this through Google), one of the reasons I was told that this is for 2nd dans is that 2nd dan tends to be the physical peak for a lot of students; you get a lot of mid-20s 2nd dans who ought to be at their best physical peak. Idea was that the General really wanted to test those moving from 1st to 2nd dan and Kodang wasn't and enough. To confuse the issue though, the ITF group run under the General's son, GM Choi Jung Hwa, have reverted to the old name "Kodang" for the Juche form. So nowadays you get original-Kodang, Juche and Kodang 2.0 which is really Juche in disguise. Though I don't have a video of me doing the whole thing (you wouldn't want to watch it!), I do have a video of me doing the split kick from Juche: http://youtu.be/bdeM2XhIACY Not quite high enough or as much extension on the legs as I should but it's a start

I don't think there is an official order. Just that you have to learn all 3 before you grade. In the Encyclopedia it gives the order as Kwang Gae, Po Eun then Ge Baek but we generally don't follow this order. Usually we tend to do Kwang Gae first as it's nice and symmetrical, then Ge Baek, then Po Eun. I wouldn't spend months getting it down, I think it's better to just learn the diagram then work on the technicalities of all three together as there is a lot of crossover. The other consideration we have, is that in ITF pattern competition you typically perform a choice form (chosen from the 3 from your grade) then get designated one which can be anything up to and including your grade. So if you want to compete you gave to at least be able to get through the pattern.

This is just kind of discouraging, and whenever I see points made about TKD like this, I find myself sighing and rolling my eyes. The cat is pretty much out of the bag when it comes to TKD's history, so there isn't much point in continuing with the older versions. Other than that, though, it sounds like the book would be an interesting read, if not for the compare and contrast of East and West. Thanks for the review! In my mind this really impacted on the credibility of some of the arguments. I'd rather Sprague had stuck to her own experience and pulled from that but it seems as though she wants to validate every argument with examples from numerous martial arts. I suppose this is also why I got a little bored in places because she'd explained the same point 3 or 4 times. Well worth a read though.

Great research truejim! Having competed at the equivalent level in ITF, and having friends that also do, if we've ever wanted to make the Olympic team we had to swap styles. For London 2012 Team GB ran a programme to take ITF fighters (and kick boxers etc.), train them up, give them a blackbelt and put them on the squad. I had a few friends go through the process. Think they're doing the same for Rio next year.

This post was originally published as an article in a dedicated KarateForums.com Articles section, which is no longer online. After the section was closed, this article was most to the most appropriate forum in our community. Disclosure: this book was kindly provided by Tuttle Publishing, through Patrick. Despite its title, this book not only delves into Sun Tzu's famous tome but compares and contrasts his views with those of Carl von Clausewitz, an early 19th century Prussian general and military theorist. It is more than just kessons in The Art of War, it is a discussion on the similarities and differences in Eastern and Western battlefield tactics in addition to how these can be applied to the modern day fighter. About the Author If anyone were to be write a book comparing military strategies and how they can be applied to personal combat, Martina Sprague seems more than qualified. From the book: According to her personal website, Sprague has over 25 years experience in Kenpo karate, competition kickboxing and modern freestyle. Over the course of the chapters listed below, she uses this experience to discuss how the martial arts we practice today train us to fight and how we can apply the theories of Sun Tzu and Clausewitz to each facet of combat. The Nature and Conduct of CombatWhat is Combat? Preparing for Battle Elements of Tactics and Strategy Imposing Your Will Destroying the Enemy Force Strength of the Defensive Position Failure Moral Quality of Courage Securing VictorySun Tzu vs. Clausewitz Prior to picking up Sprague's book, I confess to having never delved too deeply into Sun Tzu's The Art of War. Nowadays Sun Tzu's work is considered by many to be essential to not only the martial artist's library, but also to the modern day businessman as it details strategies and tactics for navigating conflict. Although, like most martial artists I have of course heard of it and in fact do have a copy, I have never spent any serious amount of time analyzing the lessons it contains. Unfortunately, if I understand only a little about Sun Tzu's school of thought, what I know about Carl von Clausewitz can be written on a matchbox. Though Clausewitz is considered to be the father of Western military strategy (as Sun Tzu is considered the father of Eastern), more often than not I would imagine today's martial artists tend to be unaware of his works and instead would gravitate towards works such The Art of War or The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli for a Western perspective. (As an aside, interestingly enough a search for "Clausewitz" on this forum brings up 4 results whereas by comparison if I search for "Sun Tzu," 68 posts are returned. I think that goes to show how well known Sun Tzu's teaching are whereas Clausewitz, not so much). Despite my ignorance, Lessons in The Art of War does a very good job of providing an overview, to the uninitiated, of both schools of thought and discusses them both on a deeper level for those already familiar. Over the course of ten chapters, Sprague discusses how Sun Tzu's and Clausewitz's theories can be applied to all facets of a conflict; from preparing for the fight itself through to victory (and failure). Despite hundreds of years passing between Sun Tzu's The Art of War, Clausewitz's Vom Kriege (On War) and today, many of the strategies promoted by each man still have relevance for the modern fighter. To quote Sprague herself: Even though both strategists are primarily concerned with conflict on a larger scale between armies and nations, Sprague does a very good job in relating the theories to battle on a more personal level. A surprising number of the tactics detailed by both Sun Tzu and Clausewitz can be applied to one-on-one combat and Lessons in The Art of War delves deeply into this, relating the teachings to a wide variety of martial arts from the Octagon to the tatami. Furthermore, she refers to many other great martial artists and fighters from both Eastern and Western backgrounds and contrasts Sun Tzu and Clausewitz's theories to the likes of Miyamoto Musashi, Gichin Funakoshi, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and the Gracies. Sprague does an excellent job of explaining exactly why both Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz held the opinions they had and provides historical and cultural backgrounds for both. They both lived and fought in very different political and cultural climates, and it is clear that this had an impact on their views in how to handle warfare. Likewise, the cultural and political climate also had an impact on the various martial arts which arose in the East and West, and Sprague discusses how this led to differences in Eastern and Western methodologies and tactics. Final Thoughts Whilst incredibly detailed and informative, at times I did find some of the points to be a little labored and repetitive and found myself skipping over sections. It is not a light read for sure, and I would very much consider it to be a serious study on military theory rather than something which can be picked up for a quick read when you have a moment to spare. Furthermore, it may just be a personal gripe of mine, whilst containing hundreds of references, the vast majority of citations are for articles from Black Belt Magazine and similar, especially when it comes to details of martial arts that are outside her repertoire. Whilst I certainly wouldn't expect the author to be greatly knowledgeable in all martial arts, some of her assertions about Taekwondo, for instance, weren't quite on point. For example, she discusses the "ancient origins" and how it "was developed for combat to the death" to make a point about a good offense. Even a cursory glance over the current Taekwondo Wikipedia page shows that this is not necessarily the case. Especially from someone who has a degree in history, I would have expected better sources and this would make me question the validity of some of her other examples. Nevertheless Lessons in the Art of War is incredibly informative and provides insights into different battlefield tactics and strategies from both Sun Tzu and Claus von Clausewitz. The over-arching message of Lessons from The Art of War is best summed up by the author herself: On this Sprague has certainly delivered and I would consider Lessons on The Art of War a valuable addition to any martial artist's library. Buy the book: Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk (KarateForums.com receives a small commission on any sales generated through these links).

Am I mistaken, I was under the impression that it has long been the case that WTF-sanctioned tournaments allow any person - regardless of school affiliation or martial arts style - to compete in WTF events as long as he or she is a member of the WTF Member National Association in his or her nation; this allows essentially anyone to compete in WTF-sanctioned competitions. I mean, you don't even need to be a taekwondo practitioner to compete in a WTF-tournament...literally any martial artist who competes under the WTF rules is allowed to compete. If I'm not mistaken then, the only "new news" here isn't so much that ITF folks can compete in WTF tournaments, it's that finally WTF folks are allowed to compete in ITF tournaments. Yes? I think it's the bolded part above which has changed. Previously ITFers have had to join the WTF association to compete at the Olympics e.g. Aaron Cook It has been a goal of ITF for sometime to get Olympic recognition and these talks have been going on for the best part of a few years now http://www.worldtaekwondofederation.net/news-news/item/1537-world-taekwondo-federation-international-taekwondo-federation-sign-historic-memorandum/1537-world-taekwondo-federation-international-taekwondo-federation-sign-historic-memorandum