From: the_dojang-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com To: the_dojang-digest@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Subject: The_Dojang-Digest V6 #151 Reply-To: the_dojang@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Errors-To: the_dojang-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Precedence: The_Dojang-Digest Mon, 15 March 1999 Vol 06 : Num 151 In this issue: the_dojang: Re: Sparring the_dojang: Re: The_Dojang-Digest V6 #150 the_dojang: Challenges at the Dojang the_dojang: Challenges at the Dojang the_dojang: Re: Timid Fighter. the_dojang: Re: lower belts - black belts the_dojang: Sharing the Info the_dojang: Re: Book about females the_dojang: Just Like A Woman the_dojang: Re: V6 #150: TSD sparring and SD the_dojang: Re: V6 #149: MA and SD the_dojang: . ......................................................................... The_Dojang, serving the Internet since June 1994. ~800 members strong! Copyright 1994-99: Ray Terry, California Taekwondo, Martial Arts Resource Replying to this message will NOT unsubscribe you. To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe the_dojang-digest" (no quotes) in the body of an e-mail (top line, left justified) addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com To send e-mail to this list use the_dojang@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com See the Korean Martial Arts (KMA) FAQ and online search the last two years worth of digest issues at http://www.MartialArtsResource.com Pil Seung! Ray Terry, PO Box 110841, Campbell, CA 95011 KMA@MartialArtsResource.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 22:13:28 EST Subject: the_dojang: Re: Sparring > My question is how do you get a person that is that afraid of fighting to > spar, or you just try and work with that person until they overcome that > fear. Any and all suggestions will be welcome, except maybe feed her to the Tang Soo! Ken- Why is it so important for this girl to spar? Most of the people on this digest know that I am very anti-sparring...for me. What is so wrong with a martial artist who would rather not spar? Personally, my instructors know that I do not like to spar, and they do not ever ask me to spar anymore. Maybe, secretly they hope they will change my mind but if this is the case-they have not pressured me at all. So, she has a fear of being hurt? Can you blame her? Every one I know fears being hurt! (except for all the macho men who feel no pain). Is she afraid of hurting someone? I can relate to that too. She sounds like a peaceful person. What is so wrong with that? Allison 4th Gup/International Tang Soo Do MBS Karate, Newburgh, NY ------------------------------ From: Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 23:16:53 EST Subject: the_dojang: Re: The_Dojang-Digest V6 #150 My first martial arts teacher was a Catholic and an arch conservative -- a very arch conservative. He believed a woman's place was in the home and all that. He also taught everyone that martial arts in general and fencing in particular is based on skill, not brute strength, so women are equal to men. From time to time, a female friend of his who happened to be on the women's Olympic team would drop by and happily prove his point, so to speak. Well, if nothing else the men sparring women thread has inspired another graph or two for the white belt handbook. JB ------------------------------ From: "John Bennett" Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 22:16:55 -0600 Subject: the_dojang: Challenges at the Dojang Jamaica Power wrote: >But what would you do if a gang came to your school to visit >unexpectedly and perhaps challenged your class? Ask them to leave and call the cops if the won't!!! Seriously, this is a no-brainer. A martial arts class, even if full of black-belts, is no place for a gang fight. Think of the legal liabilities alone! If the school owner accepted the challenge he would probably be sued by one of his students or one of the gang members. Regarding personal challenges, standard rules are: - - both participants put up money ($200 - $700 depending on your location). - - both participants agree to the rules, or lack thereof (e.g. no eye attacks, win by submission ok, doesn't have to be a KO, etc.) - - the match is videotaped to avoid excuse-making & lies afterwards. - - winner keeps the videotape and the money. I've offered this deal to several of the MA wannabes that I occasionally run across. You know the guy, comes in talking about his "Ki", his one-punch knock-out, has all the back issues of Black Belt magazine, "knows" northern white crane gung-fu, tells you how TKD is a silly dancing sport and his stuff is "the real deal". None of them have ever accepted. They always say "Oh, my style is too deadly!". I say, "I'll sign a waiver, I have one right here". They say, "no, I would never be able to live with myself!" Pu'lEEEase!! [This post was received 14 times. Only once please... Ray] ------------------------------ From: John Bennett Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 23:18:22 -0600 Subject: the_dojang: Challenges at the Dojang Jamaica Power wrote: >But what would you do if a gang came to your school to visit >unexpectedly and perhaps challenged your class? Ask them to leave and call the cops if they won't!!! Seriously, this is a no-brainer. A martial arts class, even if full of black-belts, is no place for a gang fight. Think of the legal liabilities alone! If the school owner accepted the challenge he would almost certainly wind up getting sued by one of his students or one of the gang members. Regarding personal challenges, standard rules are: - - both participants put up money ($200 - $700 depending on your location). - - both participants agree to the rules, or lack thereof (e.g. no eye attacks, win by submission ok, doesn't have to be a KO, etc.) - - the match is videotaped to avoid excuse-making & lies afterwards. - - winner keeps the videotape and the money. I've offered this deal to several of the MA wannabes that I occasionally run across. You know the guy, comes in talking about his "Ki", his one-punch knock-out, has all the back issues of Black Belt magazine, "knows" northern white crane gung-fu, tells you how TKD is a silly dancing sport and his stuff is "the real deal". None of them have ever accepted. They always say "Oh, my style is too deadly!". I say, "I'll sign a waiver, I have one right here". They say, "no, I would never be able to live with myself!" Pu'lEEEase!! ------------------------------ From: Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 00:34:55 EST Subject: the_dojang: Re: Timid Fighter. In resonse to Ken Legendre's questions about timid fighters. I feel that people will open up when they are ready. If a timid fighter gets hit badly by one of the more advanced students then they can develop a fear of that person. I this situation I believe that the old saying about getting right back on the horse applies. With the addition of having the more advanced fighter tone down a bit. I the Dojang we are all friends (or should be) and are there to help each other. I a person measures themselves against how many people they can beat up, then that person is taking the Arts for the wrong reason. Jonathan Jozokos 1st Red Tae Kwon Do ------------------------------ From: Piotr Bernat Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 22:47:59 +0100 Subject: the_dojang: Re: lower belts - black belts >I have been instructed at certain tournaments that when getting to the >Grand prize trophy or black belt competitions that if a competitor >is a red belt or red with stripe, or lower that that even if they >excelled over and above the black belts they were not to be awarded any >trophies. I was instructed it was out of respect for the black belts. >Jamaica >jamaica_power@hotmail.com Hi Jamaica, I`ve experienced the same problem. I remember a tournament where the Chief Umpire told me: "The basic score for coloured belts is 6.5 points and for black belts is 7.0". I answered "But sir, they are in the same category..." and received a response very similar to the mentioned above. There are still some people giving more points in forms only for the fact that the competitor is a black belt, or he is from a Korean master`s school. To me it`s rubbish and has nothing to do with respect, it`s simply a way to support mediocre or poor quality black belts against good coloured belts students. - -- Piotr Bernat dantkd@polbox.com ------------------------------ From: John Hancock <4karate@bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:42:59 -0600 Subject: the_dojang: Sharing the Info Posted ByD.Segarra on February 27, 1999 at 01:51:16: Rebuttal to the “Quest for the truth” Recently an article was published in Black Belt magazine entitled “ Quest for the truth“ with the blurb “the twisted history of Tang Soo Do forms”. What amazes me most is that it would take the author 12 years to figure out something that most of us did in minutes. The gist of the article was Mr. Hancocks “quest” for the “true” history of the pyong ahn forms. This article was filled with personal bias, ridiculous rumors and personal attacks that had nothing to do with the history of the pyong ahn forms. Mr. Hancock vented about a “Confrontation” he had with Master H.C Hwang whom he claimed politely hung up on him after he (Mr. Hancock) was rude. I would hardly call that a confrontation. Master Hwang simply understood the question as the pyong ahn forms originating in China, which they did. If you asked him who created them he would have gave Mr. Idos (Itosu) the full credit he deserves. On page 372 of Grand Masters book it states: “Originally this form was called “Jae-Nam”. Approximately 100 years ago an Okinawan master, Mr. Idos, reorganized the Jae-Nam form into a form closely resembling the present Pyong Ahn forms….Mr. Idos can be considered the creator of the Pyong Ahn forms…Place of creation: Hwa Nam area of China (note: believed to be where the Jae Nam form originated. D.S)” I never knew who Mr Idos was until I read Grandmasters book nor did I know the background of the Pyong Ahn forms. After reading Grand Masters book, I picked up a copy of Mr. Funokoshi’s (the Master that founded Shoto Kan) biography I had and learned more about Mr. Idos (Itosu in Mr. FunoKoshi’s book). I did not have to get out my magnifying glass and go on a “Sherlock Holmes” crusade. All of this and I was still a teenager (ah the good old days) and it didn’t take twelve years and a nasty phone call. Mr. Hancock then goes on ridiculing the application of the first sequence of Pyong Ahn Ee Dan (Pyong Ahn #2 or 1 depending on your style) and goes on to give his interpretation of what they “more likely are” I don’t know how much ability or experience Mr. Hancock has. I agree a double block against two people Is a challenging technique to do successfully, but I, and once and a while one of my students pull one off in good old rough and tumble free sparring. That’s when the conditions are right. We don’t force it, if it happens it happens. Like an “eagle” in golf or a full court shot in basketball. In other words just because Mr. Hancock can’t do them does not mean they can’t be done and should be ridiculed. I could just as easily point out how ineffective his applications COULD be. That does not mean they won’t work, they could. But if done wrong they could bomb just as bad as any other technique. There is a time and a place for everything. Lets put this into perspective. If Mr. Hancock reorganized the Pyong Ahn Forms into one large form and called it “Big Pyong Ahn” for arguments sake. Then taught it to his students, where would it have originated? Who actually created it? Where was it actually created? And would there be some great conspiracy if any of the above three questions were given as the only answers? And finally why are we wasting our time on this? We should be practicing the Pyong Ahn forms. Grandmaster painstakingly wrote all he knew about them. He gave credit to the “Okinawan Master Idos” he was one of the few to put in print the fact that the were derived from another form. And he was the only author to name the other form “Jae Nam”. He even named the original area where the originated from! And there are a few lost souls who complain that Grandmaster did not specifically say that they came from Okinawa. I say you can’t blame Grandmaster for your lack of common sense. I think Mr. Hancock has potential as a writer if he can put his ego aside. He can at times write well. I believe he has been the victim of many instructors’ inaccurate historical knowledge. Which simply could have been corrected with some valid research, cross-referencing and polite and diplomatic conversations with knowledgeable sources. I hope he continues to write, with education, not ego-gratification as his goal. And then maybe he can enjoy some “peaceful confidence”. D.Segarra - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted Bygeorge Broyles on February 24, 1999 at 17:32:13: I've just finished reading an article by a John Hancock(?) entitled "Quest for Truth: The Origin of Tang Soo Do's Forms" in the April 1999 issue of 'BLACK BELT'. I find the article disturbing due to it's somewhat negative and accusatory tone with regards to Kwan Ja Nim and Tang Soo Do (Soo Bahk Do)....I find it interesting that after all the 'dialog' about scholarly research that the author professes to have pursued, he contritely adds a caveat at the end of his article about information found in Grandmaster Hwang Kee's "The History of the Moo Duk Kwan"(1995)....I have recently read "The History..." and I find the information provided to be consistent and clearly presented....I feel that the article in "BLACK BELT" is misleading and filled with personal bias...I would welcome any follow up discussion involving the article, if fellow SooBahkDo practitioners feel it is even worth further commenting on! Respectfully submitted, - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted ByD.Segarra on February 25, 1999 at 02:18:20: In Reply to: "BLACK BELT" magazine article: "Quest for the Truth...." posted bygeorge Broyles on February 24, 1999 at 17:32:13: George I could not have said it better myself, (and it probably would have taken me longer). The entire article and 12 year quest could have been avoided with simple common (or not so common) sense. I asked a mother of one of my students to read the pyong ahn background in volume one. She had no problem figuring out that an Okinawan Master created the Pyong Ahn forms from a form that came from China. I don't know why it took Mr. Hancock 12 years. It's another attempt to discredit the Moo Duk Kwan by people that were not even in it for any substantial amount of time. See the mistake he made is there are three seperate questions; Where were the pyong ahn forms (not Jae Nam) created? Where did they originate from? And did where did GrandMaster learn them? And the funny thing is, it doesn't change me in any way. My form is still the same and my ability is still the same. In short So What! People should talk about how the Moo Duk Kwan is changing lives and helping people not wasting their time on what came first the pyong ahn or the egg type mysteries. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted ByD.Segarra on March 03, 1999 at 00:38:18: Recently there has been floating around a question by Mr. John Hancock. Yes, the same John Hancock that wrote the recent article in black belt. It seems attacking Grandmaster is his newest hobby. Basically the letter states that Grandmaster Hwang Kee was a student of Grandmaster Lee Won Kuk. Before I begin I want to state Chung Do Kwon is a fine style, the problem I have is with Mr. Hancocks constant attacks upon Grandmaster, and his help in perpetuating rumors and mistruths. I will endeavor to show how ridiculous the latest rumor is. On page 28 of the 'History of the Moo Duk Kwan" there is a picture of the Moo Duk Kwan's 3rd promotional testing. Seated at this group photo are Yoon, Byong In - Founder of Chang Moo Kwan, Um, Un Kyu - Head of CHUNG DO KWAN, Ko, Jae Chun & Myong, Hyun Jong high ranking instructors in CHUNG DO KWAN. Here it comes- Do you honestly think that the heads of two Kwans would show up to a promotional testing where the "grandmaster was a white belt"? or even better, Junior to them (Chung Do Kwan). Do you honestly think Lee, Won Kuk would allow his top student to go to a defected student's promotional testing? That is ridiculous. They only showed up because of RESPECT. Back then, you could not open a school if you could not hold your own (unlike today). As for Grandmaster being in Chun Do Kwan's records, so what. I can put Bruce Lee, Elvis, Chuck Norris and even you in my records. Back then, since the martial art community was small they may have shared ideas, techniques, and even philosophy. Does that mean that if I shared info with you, I record your name in my school register (as my student). I think not. It does not mean anything. We are talking about 1945, AFTER the Grandmaster came back from training in China. Why do you think the heads of the strongest Kwans respected him? How do you think his Kwan became the largest in Korea? The answer is obvious. It was outstanding. Grandmaster knew Lee, Won Kuk (he was one of the "gentlemen" referred to in the "History of the Moo Duk Kwan") saw that his methodology was popular at that time, and applied the Tang Soo Do (Okinawan art) to the Hwa Soo Do method he was teaching and Bingo he had something unique and they came, and came and came until the Moo Duk Kwan was the largest Kwan in Korea. My advice for people who make taking potshots their hobby instead of training. Practice, you probably need it. I am sorry to say that Black Belt magazine is starting to look like the National Inquirer or the Star. They love to print anything, as long as it sells. Anyone with the least bit of intelligence, a little detective work and a copy of the history of the Moo Duk Kwan can figure out how ridiculous that accusation is. Don't worry my concerned friend, The truth is out there. True scholarly endeavor enlightens those who seek and find it. While those who don't come up short and have to attack others because their motives are not scholarly, their motives are obvious, they are poorly disguised attacks to get the authors and their "cause" some attention and publicity. D. Segarra - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted ByJohn Hancock on March 13, 1999 at 19:39:26: Hello. I was made aware of this bulletin board by Master Daniel Nolan. I took time to read some of the posting...to include MR. Segarra's. I won't take your time up addressing the flames sent my way (I accept that as being a writer), but I do feel you need to know about some disinformation that is being disseminated about me. First...as concerns the article I recently published in Black Belt Magazine...there are several facts that readers need to be aware of. 1. The article was written over 3 years ago. It had to wait in a long line behind a lot of other things to find space for publication. 2. the article was originally titled: TANG SOO DO SERENDIPITY, THE FORMS OF PEACE AND CONFIDENCE and not Quest for Truth, the Twisted History of Tang Soo Do Forms. The editors of Black Belt changed the title without my knowledge and consent. No...I was not happy about it...but that is the nature of the beast currently in the MA publication industry. 3. only 1/3 of the actual article I wrote made it into publication. This again was done without my knowledge and much to my chagrin as there was a great deal of information concerning my research on the Pyong Ahn forms that did not make it to print. To see some of what was cut...please go to this link: http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Pagoda/9536/pyong_ahn.html Lasly...I need to address the fact that Mr. Segarra has attributed some comments concerning Hwang Kee purportedly training at the Chung Do Kwan to me. I did not make this claim (and I don't appreciate words being put into my mouth). The claims were made by Glenn Uesugi and was sent to me. I forwarded it on to Mr. Segarra for his comments. He, however, never did offer any facts concerning nor disputing this info...but did take time to send me a rather scathing letter to me concerning my research and my person. I don't see that that solved anything...and at any rate...it did nothing to dispell the myth. I say again...MYTH...as it is unproven...and was the point of my making it public and open to scrutiny. I myself have doubts about the claim and suspect the information. Now...a lot has been said about me "attacking" the Moo Duk Kwan and Hwang Kee. I'm sorry you see it that way. I am a historian...and I will write about what I find. Mr. Hwang or his heir apparant, Mr. Hwang Hyun Chul may contact me at anytime and I would be more than happy to include any comments or statements they might have in any future article I write. I might add that my first article some years back on the History of Tang Soo Do didn't bring this much heat on my shoulders...as a matter of fact...I was contacted world wide about it. I even helped the Malaysian contingent of the Moo Duk Kwan reconnect with the Soo Bahk Do Hoi. I sent a letter myself to Mr. Hwang H.C. and received a thank you from him for the referral. I could have taken advantage of the situation that in Malaysia..they were more than willing to accept me as THEIR source for Moo Duk Kwan knowledge and contact. But I didn't. Now do these actions sound like someone who wants to "tear down the MDK?" I have actually been very vocal that the symbols and name MDK belong solely to Hwang Kee and should be used by no one else, including myself, except in journalistic or educational reference (as I have done). I always cite sources....it is unfortunate that Black Belt did not include my references and bibliography. I have been very up front with the Federation about my work and have consistently sent copies to them for their review and comment. I have never heard a single word. If there was a problem....why was I not contacted. It was this lack of forthrightness that was the preciepitory factor in my decision to leave the U.S. Fed. I was no less inquisitive while I was in Korea and training in the Moo Duk Kwan there. I don't recall receiving such defensive responses nor with-holding of information then and there. SO it came as a bit of an irritation to receive it here in the U.S. which is a country founded upon the concepts of freedom of speech and pursuit of truth. Odd don't you think? Nonetheless....I am not out to bash the Grandmaster nor his son nor the Federation. But I will continue to do my research...I will continue to write...and you can either be part of the solution...or part of the problem. I am not the only one writing about the MDK and Mr. Hwang. But if you DO do your research...you will find I do check sources and I don't make wild claims. I have gone to extremes to try to vindicate many statements attributed to the Grandmaster ...but some of them have been debunked by his own text. As for my knowlege of Pyong Ahn...you should read my research before making comment concerning my knowlege and an attributing statements to me out of context. I may be contacted anytime but I would appreciate it if you could minimize the flames and discuss actual facts. Let's try to keep the character assasination to a minimum. Sincerely, John Hancock - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted ByD.Segarra on March 14, 1999 at 02:05:42: In Reply to: Speaking for Myself posted byJohn Hancock on March 13, 1999 at 19:39:26: Dear Mr. Hancock although I have no personal axe to grind with you, you should not be surprised when many of us respond in such a manner to an article that was filled with bias and innuendo. What concerns me is the future generations will be confused when you publish "rumors" that are not worth your time perpetuating. As for bias you wrote to another instructor who I had a lengthy debate with that "I am (John Hancock) a major pain in the a** for the U.S Soo Bahk Do federation" You may have forgotten that statementbut I did not. Please understand when you put information out there and mix it with rumors it can possibly poison the well from which we both draw knowledge from. I did not "flame" you nor attack you, I simple stated my opinion, and made obvious observations concerning your article, its intonation and it's flaws. I think you have the potential to write some wonderful articles, if you can focus on more valuable and positive information. Why not an article on the value and benefits of the pyong ahn forms instead of the rumors and unnecssary detective work? In addition, I did not claim you created the recent Chung Do Kwon question, I stated you are helping perpetuate it by mass mailing it to many people. This is where you and I my martial friend conflict. If you ran this in a newspaper such as the Times or the Daily News you would be in trouble, and I feel it is irresponsible on your part. Rags like the National Inquirer and the Star are build on rumor and mistruth, Sadly it seems Black Belt Magazine is following that path to sell more magazines. If you truly consider yourself a "historian" then don't slip in the "rumors" and other irrelevant material. Historians pride themselves on "fact" not rumor. Make no mistake I did read your original article and was actually preparing a response to that until I bought the BB magazine. So whether or not it was edited by them is irrelevant. I hope you focus your energies and talents in a more positive and productive way. Sincerely D. Segarra - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted ByJohn Hancock on March 14, 1999 at 11:24:52: In Reply to: Re: Speaking for Myself posted byD.Segarra on March 14, 1999 at 02:05:42: In reference to the comment I made, "I am a major pain in the a** for the U.S Soo Bahk Do federation", it was made in response to numerous jibes about how unpopular my article would be with party-liners in your organization. I made the comment in a humorous tone. But...I'm not surprized you don't see the humor in it. I would be curious to know who this instructor was you had the "lengthy debate with". Care to divulge that information? As to my perpetuating "rumors"....I have always added a statement either qualifying or dis-qualifying such information. If you re-read my work....you will find that is true. As to "poisoning the well"....the well is pre-poisoned. You must remember...it was not 'I' who created the delimna of misinformation surround the Moo Duk Kwan and its founder. It was Mr. Hwang himself whose own statements caused the perplexities to begin. I would like to share a quote with you: "Lacking the correct knowledge of its (Tang Soo So) history can effect your relationship with your master, pupils and the public. Misinformation and misinterpretation can lead only to a physical relationship between master and pupil, rather than create spiritual ties." Know who said it? Hwang Kee. Know who was the translator? Hwang Jin Mon. This was during an interview in 1974. In this same interview Hwang Kee is quoted as saying, "Through family contacts, he had a chance to see and practice the traditional Korean arts -- Soo Bahk Do and Tae Kyun." Here's another one for you: "A recognized expert at age 21 and constantly pressured by the occupying Japanese, he fled to China in 1936 to train without the threat of government intervention." From a 1984 article by Jim Coleman. Source for the information: Hwang Hyun Chul. And here is a keeper from 1990. "Although I trained with various Chinese Masters during the 20 years that I lived in China..." Interview by Bob Liedke. The Interpretor was again, Hwang Hyun Chul. Again..we now know this was not the case according to Hwang Kee's own 1995 book. Well...we know by Hwang Kee's 1996 book that last statement is not true. Maybe THIS is how rumors get started. You know...we have a saying here in the sticks of Kentucky..."People who live in glass houses don't need to be pickin' up no rocks!" I think if you are going to accuse me of spreading rumors....maybe you had best start by cleanin' out your own closet before you come over to my house and tell me my place is a dump. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Posted ByJohn Hancock on March 15, 1999 at 02:33:31: I did not claim you created the recent Chung Do Kwon question, I stated you are helping perpetuate it by mass mailing it to many people. No sir, that is not the impression you gave in the wording of your postings. It is pretty clear you were giving the impression that I made the claims and endorsed them. You know full well that was not the case when I originally sent the information to you for comment. You have become highly aggitatated over what you have percieved as attacks on the Hwang Family and the Moo Duk Kwan, and yet, your own postings on your message board refect no less prejudice on your own part. Sir...I have never attributed a statement to Mr. Hwang nor his son that they themselves have not made. I certainly never did so to you. Your critique and criticisms of my work and that of others has been rather severe and many times you have re-translated work out of context and attacked the meanings you yourself have attached to it. You therefore, have become no less a stumbling block to others and no less a "poisoner of the well". I have read over your comments and while I understand you are in charge of running the web site for the U.S. Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation...I would much prefer is Mr. Hwang or Mr. Hwang H.C. would speak for themselves. If I am to understand what YOU are saying...then Mr. Hwang's answer to my questions were too broad and should have been followed up with a detailed explaination. You have claimed Mr. Hwang meant to imply that the Pyong Ahn forms were an out growth from an ancient Chinese form known as Jae Nam. Well...if this had been what he had said...It would have changed the course of our relationship those many years ago. But that is not what he said...nor did I get the impression that that was what he implied. What Mr. Hwang said to me (I was there remember..you weren't) was, and I quote, "My Father bring back these forms from China." Now you tell me....what does that sound like he meant? When I told him these were not Chinese forms and that they were never practiced in China...that was when Mr. Hwang got flustered and ended the phone call. Are you telling me that the TAC of the Federation, the person who purportedly had the highest level of knowledge about the system really believed his Father learned the Pyong Ahn forms in China? You see...just because Mr. Hwang Hyun Chul is the Grandmaster's son and the 'Appointed' head of the U.S. Fed...that does not mean he is more deserving of factual information any more than any Cho Dan or Ku Gup for that matter. What you folks at the Federation keep missing is that this is a big big big country. It isn't small like South Korea. There just isn't any reasonable way for some folks to travel to New Jersey to talk to Mr. Hwang in person and try to get the straight scoop out of him...much less the problem of finding someone to train with so you might have a shot a going up in rank. I live in Kansas when I first came back to the U.S. Do you know how many recognized Tang Soo Do Dan members there were in Kansas at that time? ONe. Me. I was it. I was required to drive to Broken Arrow Oklahoma to find the nearest certified school of Tang Soo Do under the Federation. I eventually came back to Kentucky. Do you know how many recognized Tang Soo Do/Soo Bahk Do dans there are in Kentucky today? None. ZERO! You people in New Jersey just frost me with how snobbish you are just because you have the Grandmaster's son there. A simple look at your own files will show you how poorly your organization is being/has been managed. Thousands have left the organization...and over and over again very high ranking Dans have pulled out and taken thousands of people with them. You may have heard of some of these people: Carlos Norris, Shin Jae Chul, Kim Jae Joon, Kim Chun Sik....just to name a few. Why even recently your own membership has been crumbling again under the weight of this dues increase. You can say what you want about people hiding their identity when discussing this topic...but the fact is...there is a great many who feel they cannot speak openly for fear of recriminations. After all...if they hope to get their Dan rank promotions approved...they do have to be "members in good standing". You have some gall sir accusing me of stirring up dissention. What I want to know is can Mr. Hwang speak for himself...or does he have his hand someplace working your controls? [ 400+ lines deleted. Do NOT send HTML to the list. Please Please Please..] ------------------------------ From: "Dylan Walsh" Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 12:18:05 -0000 Subject: the_dojang: Re: Book about females >From: "Jamaica Power" >Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 07:48:52 PST >Subject: the_dojang: Book About Females > >There's been some discussion about the uncomfortableness of sparring >with women. For those who are interested in reading there is a book out >called "Just Like A Woman - How Gender Science is Redefining What Makes >A Female" by Dianne Hales. > >Just Like a Woman presents the cutting-edge findings in anthropology, >physiology, psychology, neuroscience, endocrinology, and medicine that >are redefining what a woman is. Are any of you worried that you might not fit the new definition? What then? Will you have to change or be re-categorised? I guess you'll get to spar with the guys a lot more often... :-) Dylan Walsh. ------------------------------ From: "Jamaica Power" Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 06:05:15 PST Subject: the_dojang: Just Like A Woman Wow, complex. I thought they were just the most awesome organisms on the planet... 8?)Paul Rogers ___________________________________ (Big Smile) Totally agree. Jamaica jamaica_power@hotmail.com Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ From: samiller@Bix.Com Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 09:47:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: the_dojang: Re: V6 #150: TSD sparring and SD Yes, I think you are reading it a little too closely. Certainly, some skills that are useful to self defense are enhanced by the refinement of TSD techniques that sparring should produce. I wouldn't classify our sparring quite as an art form in the way that you mean it, but it is excessively formalized to be used "as is" in street self defense. If I am attacked on the street, my initial kick targets are going to be below my attacker's belt, the very same targets that are verboten in TSD sparring. We practice self defense as a specific and separate curriculum item, and it is there that intent and reality in attacks, holds, and escapes are emphasized. To apply this to the thread from which it was taken, would you think it more likely that a male attacking a woman on the street would grab her by the wrists, grab her from behind, or kick her in the chest? >You are sparring to refine TSD techniques, not develop self-defense skills. >Are you then practicing TSD as an art form as distinguished from a martial >art. Sparring should necessarily benefit self-defense skills, if only >because >of aerobic improvement (this is the "default answer"). Am I reading this >too >closely? Tang Soo! Scott A. Miller samiller@bix.com samiller@cyberenet.net ------------------------------ From: samiller@Bix.Com Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 09:47:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: the_dojang: Re: V6 #149: MA and SD Considering the light regard in which the right of self-defense seems to be held by the state of Massachusetts in all contexts, it might be better just to avoid it if possible. >For instance, in Massachusetts, the shod foot is considered a weapon. >Therefore, if you kick a person who tries to punch you, and you have shoes >on, you can be subject to arrested. Tang Soo! Scott A. Miller samiller@bix.com samiller@cyberenet.net ------------------------------ From: Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 07:47:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: the_dojang: . ------------------------------ End of The_Dojang-Digest V6 #151 ******************************** Support the USTU by joining today! US Taekwondo Union, 1 Olympic Plaza, Ste 405, Colorado Spgs, CO 80909 719-578-4632 FAX 719-578-4642 ustutkd1@aol.com http://www.ustu.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this digest, the_dojang-digest, send the command: unsubscribe the_dojang-digest -or- unsubscribe the_dojang-digest your.old@address in the BODY of email (top line, left justified) addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com. Old digest issues are available via ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com, in pub/the_dojang/digests. All digest files have the suffix '.txt' Copyright 1994-99: Ray Terry, Martial Arts Resource, California Taekwondo Standard disclaimers apply.