Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 03:03:08 -0800 From: the_dojang-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: The_Dojang digest, Vol 11 #502 - 7 msgs X-Mailer: Mailman v2.0.13.cisto1 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Errors-To: the_dojang-admin@martialartsresource.net X-BeenThere: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13.cisto1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net X-Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net X-Subscribed-Address: kma@martialartsresource.com List-Id: The Internet's premier discussion forum on Korean Martial Arts. List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on behemoth2.host4u.net X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Level: Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: Send The_Dojang mailing list submissions to the_dojang@martialartsresource.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/the_dojang or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to the_dojang-request@martialartsresource.net You can reach the person managing the list at the_dojang-admin@martialartsresource.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of The_Dojang digest..." <<------------------ The_Dojang mailing list ------------------>> Serving the Internet since June 1994. Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource The Internet's premier discussion forum devoted to Korean Martial Arts. 1800 members. See the Korean Martial Arts (KMA) FAQ and the online search engine for back issues of The_Dojang at http://MartialArtsResource.com Pil Seung! Today's Topics: 1. Re: Common Terminology (Bruce Sims) 2. Re: TSD Dan Bons (Dana Vaillancourt) 3. RE: Re: Common Terminology (Kip McCormick) 4. Re: Re: Common Terminology (Ray Terry) 5. Re: The_Dojang digest, 2nd dan testing; no thank you :-D (TKDgalSamm@aol.com) 6. Common Terminology (Bernard Maginnity) 7. re: minimum standards (Alejandro Martinez) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:13:22 -0800 (PST) From: Bruce Sims To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: Common Terminology Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Dear Folks: OK. Maybe I am going at this all wrong. Somehow or another the point just does not seem to be coming across. Let me try again. 1.) If people are to have a technical discussion about how we do what we do in Hapkido I suspect that we would all want to be talking the same language.This is pretty much taken care of since we are speaking English here, but there IS the consideration of Korean practitioners who might want to contribute. 2.) I likewise assume that we would all be using the same term within that language to identify a specific thing. I hear people saying they would like to use medical terms. I didn't raise this option since I already get enough flack about being a tad too "erudite" for most peoples tastes. Fine. Someone else suggested it so maybe that makes it OK. I simply point out that we need to agree on a label to identify things so we are not spending half a post defining what we are saying. 3.) I used the descriptions that I did so that people would know what I was talking about. There are 10 items. Call them whatever you want to call them, just so long as we all agree that, say, an "armbar" is an "armbar", "off-balancing" is "off-balancing", and we are in agreement if a "pin" is different from a "lock" and a "projection" is different from a "throw".(They are in MY case; I have no idea about yours.) This is no different from electricians having their own terminology, carpenters having their own terminology and florists having their own terminology. Nobody said anything about testing, requirements, politics or anything else. Now are folks interested in being able to speak to each other intelligently about similarities that we share or would you rather keep making sure that the Hapkido community continues to stay divided into their respective camps. You have every right to say that you are not interested. Thoughts? Comments? Best Wishes, Bruce --__--__-- Message: 2 From: "Dana Vaillancourt" To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:59:20 +0000 Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: TSD Dan Bons Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Ray Terry wrote: "Speaking of old time MDKers, is Dale T. Droullard still active? Or still alive? Seems like his number was in the 700s somewhere. I guess that would make him the senior most American.?.?." Ray. Visit Bernard's website and you'd see that in "1957, Dale Drouilard becomes 1st American serviceman to achieve Dan(#757)." His association is the First American Moo Duk Kwan. I'd be curious to know if he is still actively teaching as well and who his instructor is. I'm also curious as to who the most senior dan bon still actively teaching/involved in an organization is? Dana --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "Kip McCormick" To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: RE: [The_Dojang] Re: Common Terminology Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:15:56 -0800 Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Bruce wrote: >Now are folks interested in being able to speak to >each other intelligently about similarities that we >share or would you rather keep making sure that the >Hapkido community continues to stay divided into their >respective camps. You have every right to say that you >are not interested. Thoughts? Comments? Bruce- I'm not interested. I teach what I think is important to know in hapkido, but what I think is important may be a 180 out from what you or someone else may think is important or basic as a hapkido player. I incorporate a lot of stuff from many styles but I also teach a lot of what my hapkido instructors taught me. Why do we need yet another person or organization out there who proclaims expertise to say "here are the basics, now let's be united"? See my previous posts about the BS with the Kukkiwon. I think we're getting way too wrapped around the axle about organizations and standardization. And if I don't teach what is standardized, will the great hapkido players in the world form a line and do an about face as I walk out of the dojang, forever shaming me to the grand poobah? You never pass rules/regulations/standards you can't enforce. Instead of talking similarities in techniques, let's talk similarities in quality martial arts instructors:solid techniques; practicality; good people of character who care about others. There will always be idiots teaching martial arts for as long as martial arts are around. But there will always be heroes teaching it, too. While I applaud your effort, I feel we should spend more energy out on the mat training in good martial arts -- that's how we keep hapkido from being divided into its respective camps. Eventually the weak will die off. I think I'll just focus on changing my little corner of the hapkido world for the positive. Kip --__--__-- Message: 4 From: Ray Terry Subject: Re: [The_Dojang] Re: Common Terminology To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:46:39 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net On the use of terms I am reminded of the old story of the student that was confused by the many "Swan Move" techniques in the art he was learning from a master hailing from the old country. So he asked the master, "Sir why are so many techniques called The Swan Move?" The instructor was confused. He asked the student to demo a technique. After the student did so, the instructor acclaimed, "Oh! Do mean this one move?", as he demo-ed the techniques properly. (think about it, give it time... :) I'm not sure having a precise technical name for a move is really all that important. I had it when learning Tang Soo Do and Taekwondo. Didn't have it for Hapkido or Eskrima. But that aside, people do learn differently. Some will learn quicker if they can put a "Swan Move" name to a technique. Not sure they will learn it any better, but they may learn it quicker and perhaps remember it better/longer at a cognitive level. Ray "The man of many boring old stories" Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 5 From: TKDgalSamm@aol.com Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:56:27 EST To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Subject: [The_Dojang] Re: The_Dojang digest, 2nd dan testing; no thank you :-D Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net In a message dated 11/23/2004 6:07:58 AM Central Standard Time, the_dojang-request@martialartsresource.net writes: It was my pleasure not being her uki. I got a kick out of this post LOL!!!! Congratulations for the promotion! Loretta --__--__-- Message: 6 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:50:56 +1100 From: "Bernard Maginnity" To: Subject: [The_Dojang] Common Terminology Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Bruce Simple answer on terminology. There isn't one. I did not understand some of your descriptions on grappling because you used terminology that was foreign to me and my practice. The style I practice took all of the weird names out and replaced them with simple terms that English speakers in our region will understand. I know of at least four local organisations that all use different terminology for the same techniques. Some of these organisations came out of each other and should therefore represent a similar lineage, but they have evolved, they've left the nest because they wanted to change, they wanted to grow. I don't know if I am making a clear point here? There is a distinct language barrier in the Martial arts in general. Just yesterday someone posted congratulations to someone for being used as an Uki. To my limited understanding Uki is a Japanese term for a crash test dummy (sorry my language barrier, that's the translation of the translation of the Korean term my style CURRENTLY uses). We used to learn Korean terms in the past. No Koreans could understand what we were saying although we knew what we meant. We translated to English because we wanted to focus on learning techniques rather than a foreign language. What my style calls a Tiger Claw, I know of other clubs/styles calling a Crane something or Eagle Claw. When we translated 'original Korean terminology' into Australian we used terms that fit 'our' culture and out point of reference. The same has obviously happened in the States not to mention Europe and even terminology for the same thing in Korea. My question to you Bruce is: Do you want an International standard terminology or do you just want the States talkin' the same? Before you get a standard for minimum Hapkido, standard Korean terms, standard reference terms, standard grappling or whatever. You need to get a consensus that people actually do WANT to be the same. Mr JC has proved repeatedly that he does not want to be lumped in with other Tang Soo Do practitioners, while at the same time he is very proud of the style he practices and teaches. Mr West puts on a show a couple of time s year in the Southern US, but he doesn't ask everyone to speak Southern, only eat Southern. BTW. Apart from the kicking arts on the list who discuss Hyung, who has technical discussions? My thoughts, I am happy for you to pursue History of arts and so forth, to look into a single defining standard which sets Hapkido apart from other 'stuff'. I, however, do not have the time to do the same myself. I am struggling to spend time with my wife, find enough time to train, lead a scout troop, work and even read the thoughts on the digest. There is nothing personal in this Bruce, I am simply an underling struggling to survive in the world. People have different focus on what they practice as with what they do with that ever more valuable free time. Kind regards Bernie Maginnity --__--__-- Message: 7 From: "Alejandro Martinez" To: Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:21:24 +1000 Subject: [The_Dojang] re: minimum standards Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net Dear all: While Mr. Simms efforts towards achieving a standard for hapkido is commendable (I really enjoyed reading about his historical findings for techniques such as the roundhouse kick), I found this limiting, at least from the point of view of the "Art". Certainly, you cannot use such rigid terms as taxonomy to something as alive, fluid, and formless as an "art". And is it not "art'" the very essence of what is different between what we practice some others form of physical activity? My point is that even if Mr. Simms succeeds (which I very much doubt) in producing a standard of techniques, that standard (his own) can be seen as a limitation to what otherwise should be the exploration and exploitation of an intractable number of possibilities... Having said that, I am not against standards. I personally follow the one established by my instructor (Grandmaster Sang Sung Lee, 9th dan in both hapkido and taekwondo), but I do not feel limited by those standards to modify some of the techniques learned from him, given e.g. individual anatomic-physiological differences. And I am sure there were, are, and will be as many standards as schools and leaders... fwiw. Alejandro Martinez. --__--__-- _______________________________________________ The_Dojang mailing list The_Dojang@martialartsresource.net http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/the_dojang http://the-dojang.net Old digest issues @ ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com/pub/the_dojang Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and http://MartialArtsResource.com Standard disclaimers apply. Remember September 11. End of The_Dojang Digest