Tang soo do and Shotokan

[OneKickWonder]

Hi all.

According to a Tang soo do book online have, the art is 'uniquely Korean'. But when I ordered a book by Gichin Funakoshi, which was originally written much earlier than the Tang soo do book, I quickly realised they were pretty much one and the same.

I'd like to point out, I don't care about the politics.

But as someone very interested in finding the roots of what I learn, do we think it's worth switching to a shotokan class for a while? Would I be right in my conclusion that they're the same style but with different branding, or are they really different?

[sensei8]

Semantics are alive in the MA.

The techniques of Tang Soo Do combine elements of shotokan karate, subak, taekkyon, and kung fu. But I believe that Hwang Kee, as with most founders of their "unique" style of the MA, did all that he could do to make sure that his newly found Korean Karate, Tang Soo Do, didn't look like anything else. But guess what, imho, the similarities are quite striking, after all, just how many different ways can one kick and punch??

Whether you switch to shotokan or not, will be up to you!! And if you don't care about the politics whatsoever, then cross training in either might be what you're looking for; nothing ventured, nothing gained. After a few layers are peeled away, they'll both look and feel the same.

Good luck, and please let us know about your findings!!

[bushido_man96]

I agree with sensei8. Tang Soo Do is derived from Shotokan, and depending on the style your in, you'll find the forms to be very similar. With that said, it you will probably find differences in how the classes of each are done, what they focus on in class, etc. But this is true with a lot of Martial Arts schools of same or similar styles.

Like sensei8 mentions, checking out the other style might be worth while. Some instructors tend to get hinky about their students training at other schools, so just be aware of this. If yours is not this way, then great. If you choose to do this, please let us know what kind of similarities and differences you come up with.

[sensei8]

I had blinking training, which is to say, 2 weeks of Tang Soo Do, before I trained for a year in TKD, while I was a JBB in Shindokan. To be frank and honest, I couldn't tell the differences between the three. Only difference that stands out between the three is that TSD and TKD kicks were much higher than Shindokan kicks, which are waist down.

All three had nearly the same techniques; I couldn't tell if I was in a TSD or a TKD or a Shindokan dojo/dojang from the surface.

[Spartacus Maximus]

It could hardly be called cross training if one trains in two systems of nearly the same thing. Would that not defeat the purpose of cross training if, a person simultaneously trained in two or more styles of karate instead of two completely different things such as karate and judo?

[MatsuShinshii]

It could hardly be called cross training if one trains in two systems of nearly the same thing. Would that not defeat the purpose of cross training if, a person simultaneously trained in two or more styles of karate instead of two completely different things such as karate and judo?

I have to agree. I was studying one art and started taking another art which I knew was Okinawan but thought it would differ and found many similarities. To me if you're learning the exact same thing under a different name, why not stay with your original art.

Having said that if OneKickWonder is looking for historical significance for personal research, it makes sense to take this art. Understanding the history of the art leads to an understanding of the techniques and where they come from. If you know where they come from you can research and understand the meaning behind them. This will lead to a deeper understanding of the art you are learning.

Pretty much like Okinawan practitioners studying the Chinese arts that influenced their art. You find that there is a reason why you do this or that and it also gives you insight into the mind of the founder and what they were possibly thinking and how they constructed the art.

I say, if you want to try it, try it. Who knows you might learn something that makes the experience well worth the time. If your studying the arts, any art, it's not wasted time IMHO.

[sensei8]

It could hardly be called cross training if one trains in two systems of nearly the same thing. Would that not defeat the purpose of cross training if, a person simultaneously trained in two or more styles of karate instead of two completely different things such as karate and judo?

Solid post!!

[singularity6]

Yeah, I wouldn't call it cross training... If the techniques are executed similarly, I'd call it more practice. But if there's enough of a distinction between the two styles, they might be off just enough to cause confusion.

If I wanted to branch out where I live, my only other choice is Uechi Ryu Karate. I think that might be different enough from my school to not be too confusing... But I do not have the time nor the money to be doing that now.

[sensei8]

Yeah, I wouldn't call it cross training... If the techniques are executed similarly, I'd call it more practice. But if there's enough of a distinction between the two styles, they might be off just enough to cause confusion.

If I wanted to branch out where I live, my only other choice is Uechi Ryu Karate. I think that might be different enough from my school to not be too confusing... But I do not have the time nor the money to be doing that now.

Uechi ryu, huh, you mustn't like your big toes anymore!!

[singularity6]

Well, there isn't much choice here.