|
|
Post by Koos Fockens on Nov 5, 2010 6:45:07 GMT
Recently I obtained a copy of the 1965 Taekwon-Do book by Choi Hong Hi. It is great to read through and appreciate the evolution Taekwon-Do has made over the years, as well as changes to the art by general Choi.
One of the most intriguing is the fact that this book mentions two other 'schools' of japanese origin, and their patterns, namely the Sho-Rin and Sho-Rei schools. I am intrigued to find out why these patterns were later omitted from the curriculum of Gen Choi's Taekwon-Do, sticking with the 24 patterns from his own Chang Hon style, and which became the foundation of the ITF curriculum.
Does anyone know more about this part of TKD's history? I would love to see an article about that too. :-) Thank you and Taekwon!
|
|
Stuart Anslow (Editor)
Administrator 
Never compromise? Not even in the face of Armageddon - Rorschach
Posts: 247
|
Post by Stuart Anslow (Editor) on Nov 5, 2010 20:03:19 GMT
AFAIA, they were not Japanese systems, but Okinawan. Choi used them to formulate the TKD tul. As they were taught to him by the Japanese (Koreas hated nemisis), it stands to reason he wanted to get rid of them. Also, I believe they were split into hard and soft styles and Choi felt he was combining the two. And of course the General wanted something he felt was Korean, hence trying to iradicate any Japanese influence, that in his mind, obviously, though incorrectly, being a biggie! Stuart Recently I obtained a copy of the 1965 Taekwon-Do book by Choi Hong Hi. It is great to read through and appreciate the evolution Taekwon-Do has made over the years, as well as changes to the art by general Choi. One of the most intriguing is the fact that this book mentions two other 'schools' of japanese origin, and their patterns, namely the Sho-Rin and Sho-Rei schools. I am intrigued to find out why these patterns were later omitted from the curriculum of Gen Choi's Taekwon-Do, sticking with the 24 patterns from his own Chang Hon style, and which became the foundation of the ITF curriculum. Does anyone know more about this part of TKD's history? I would love to see an article about that too. :-) Thank you and Taekwon! |
|
|
|
Post by Koos Fockens on Nov 6, 2010 2:14:18 GMT
Thanks Stuart, I did suspect such reasons, but was still surprised to see that they actually made it into the book to begin with :-)
They are indeed soft and hard styles respectively. Anyway, a very interesting read indeed.
Cheers, Koos
|
|
|
|
Post by jungshin on Nov 11, 2010 0:07:26 GMT
they would have made it into the first daft of the book because tkd was using the patterns at that time and for a period afterwards until the 24 patterns were developed as a stand alone syllabus.
also the karate that was practiced in korea and shotokan that was taught to choi hong hi would have been more okinawan in style that what later became known as JKA shotokan and the international norm.
|
|
joe
White Belt
Posts: 8
|
Post by joe on Jan 7, 2011 19:10:28 GMT
Is there any reference for these patterns on internet from where i could learn to do them ? I'd like to try  |
|
Stuart Anslow (Editor)
Administrator
Never compromise? Not even in the face of Armageddon - Rorschach
Posts: 247
|
Post by Stuart Anslow (Editor) on Jan 8, 2011 14:35:41 GMT
Is there any reference for these patterns on internet from where i could learn to do them ? I'd like to try They are Shotokans katas - if you look at the back of the book, theres a reference for their correct/modern names. Stuart |
|
Stuart Anslow (Editor)
Administrator
Never compromise? Not even in the face of Armageddon - Rorschach
Posts: 247
|
Post by Stuart Anslow (Editor) on Jan 21, 2011 20:49:10 GMT
Is there any reference for these patterns on internet from where i could learn to do them ? I'd like to try They are Shotokans katas - if you look at the back of the book, theres a reference for their correct/modern names. Stuart Apologies, wrong forum.. I got confused. The book i refer to is my own (sorry). I thought we was on here changhonhaesul.proboards.com/index.cgi?Stuart |
|
