Talk:Tang Soo Do

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Map of Korea This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a project to build and improve articles related to Korea. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Please help us improve this article.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
Martial arts Portal
This page is part of the Wikipedia Martial arts Project.

Please use these guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article
if you think something is missing, please help us improve them!

You may also wish to read the project's Notability guide.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Clean Up

This article is full of unsubstantiated opinion, and vanity advertising for various Tang Soo Do organizations. I am going to attempt to clean this article up, and maintain it in a neutral fashion. Don't get your feelings hurt if I remove references to your organization while doing so. This article is about Tang Soo Do, not which Federation is claiming to be the largest and greatest this week. Start a separate article for your organization, if you feel it is important enough. Tsdsahbum --- 31 July 2007

[edit] Philosophy

While we are talking about Tang Soo Do, has anyone thought to mention anything other than "lineage," say for example, combat philosophy, code of conduct, or any similar (and more relevant) topics? I cannot for the life of me see what makes Tang Soo Do different from other martial arts, so can someone please get to the meat and potatoes? This lineage stuff is boring and not very informative. --18:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)~


[edit] Time to Add a Soo Bahk Do Article

With the addition of the Yuk Rho and Chil Sun forms, it would be nice if we were to pull these out... JWLuiza 20:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, since Tang Soo Do isn't all Moo Duk Kwan, maybe we should filter out some info and create larger Kwan pages? JWLuiza 20:28 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tang Soo Do versus Soo Bahk Do

Tang Soo Do is a general name for several styles of karate practiced in Korea in the post-war era. Moo Duk Kwan Tang Soo Do was among the most popular. MDK TSD became Soo Bahk Do, so genealogically speaking, SBD would be an offshoot or substyle of TSD. However, the significant changes of SBD make it very dissimilar in terms of basics and forms (Chil Sun, Hwa Sun, and Yuk Ro, vs. the Shudokan/Shotokan style forms).JWLuiza 22:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)John

As far as I'm aware (but I'm only 10th Gup) Tang So Do is not officially recognized as part of the Moo Duk Kwan. Seems that Tang Soo Do is more of an offshoot than Soo Bahk Do. So shouldn't this article be called "Soo Bahk Do"? I'll check with my Sa Bom Nim, but he's at "moment with the masters" for a week, and the Kyo Sa Nim in my studio is also gone. In the meantime, can anyone comment? MrBeck 04:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC), Gup # H114182


I am a cho dan in soo bahk do, and its true Tang Soo Do is not part of the Moo Duk Kwan, Tang Soo Do is the former name of Soo Bahk Do. And it is true, it is an old offshoot of Soo Bahk Do, if you look at both arts you can see the similiar roots.

Thanks. I actually have had a chance to talk at length with one of the Dans in my studio, and I got a lot more info on the history. I think I'll get some of the books on the subject, then maybe help improve this article. MrBeck 00:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monastaries

Are there any monastic institutions that practice tang so do (presumably they would be in korea)?? or is it mainly practiced in do jangs worldwide?

No. Monasteries do sometimes practice martial arts in Korea, but never Tangsoodo, Taekwondo, Hapkido, or any other modern martial art there. Edededed 05:27, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Tangsoodo vs. Tang Soo Do

I'm considering moving this page to Tang Soo Do, because, as far as I can tell, this is the more common spelling. I've had contact with a number of UK TSD groups, plus a US one, and I've never seen it written without the spaces. Additionally, a Google search for "tang soo do" shows up about 142,000 results, compared to only 8,490 for "tangsoodo". Please raise any objections below. (above comment by User:Meand)

Sounds good to me. -- Visviva 8 July 2005 06:17 (UTC)
Sorry, forgot to sign. Thanks for adding it in for me. --me_and 9 July 2005 00:16 (UTC)

Erm, oops. I just tried to move it, and hit Enter too early. I'm going to try to fix it now, but I'm not sure if it'll let me... --me_and 20:48, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Okay. It's back to Tangsoodo, but it now won't let me move it to Tang Soo Do, so I've had to put in a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. My bad. Oops. --me_and 20:59, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Fixed. violet/riga (t) 19:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Given that "it is generally accepted that Tang Soo Do was originally a Koreanized version of Japanese Karate", my karatedo (tangsoodo in korean) reference is obviously relevant here (i.e. section titled Name) unless someone is playing Korean identity politics where every association to Japanese culture get purged. If TSD, by combining KungFu or Takeyon, later developed to become something else, good for them. FWBOarticle

Your info concerning Funakoshi, and his manipulation of the Kanji for Karate-Do (to purge chinese reference) is not relevant to this article. This is a Tang Soo Do article. Tang Soo Do would not exist without Karate, but it isn't Karate. Karate-Do has it's own entry, where if I'm not mistaken, the info you insist upon placing here, is already stated.

Hello nameless. I hope you still agree that kara te=tang hand=tang soo is relevant in the section titled "Name" given that "Tang Soo Do was originally a Koreanized version of Japanese Karate". Consequently, Tang Hand chaged to Empty Hand is relevant too. However, I will delete Zen and Japanese identity politics part. I thought it was relevant but hey, I'm fine both way. FWBOarticle

Tang So Do is exactly Karate Do, with a Korean twist. The name change by Funakoshi is very important to any discussion of Tang Soo Do history, as it places it's migration to Korea from Japan in correct time frame context. Tang Soo Do could have easily been called Kong Soo Do, the "Empty" version of Karate if Won Kuk Lee had been a later student of Funakoshi, or, trained at a different university other than Chou. Chung Do Kwan, Song Moo Kwan and Moo Duk Kwan all used "Tang Soo Do", as Jidokwan and Chang Moo Kwan used Kong Soo Do, and in that order. --Bigzilla 19:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


Tang Soo Do was formerly named Hwa Soo Do, which translates to the art of the flowering hand, this name was not favored by the public very well, it didn't sound like a martial art that involved to much actual fighting. So Hwang Kee decided to change the name to Tang Soo Do, because of the chinese influence in korea he believed the name would go over with the public well. This was later changed to Soo Bahk Do in 1945 when the Moo Yei Do Bo Tong Ji was founded. Hwang Kee changed the name to Soo Bahk Do because he wanted to create a traditional Korean martial art, and in the pages of the Moo Yei Do Bo Tong Ji were descriptions of warriors that trained in an art called Soo Bahk Ki.

[edit] Style

The arts that give origin to Soo Bahk Do are hence; Hwang Kee learned Taekyun while in Korea, by the age of 21 he was considered by the locals of his town as a master in this style. Hwang Kee viewed the style of Taekyun as 'crude, and lacking hand technique'. As the only available forms at the time were modified Okinawan forms, he took a number of these and changed them to a more internal focus. Hwang Kee spent a fair amount of time in Manchuria after this period, and he learned Yang Style Tai Chi Chuan, Piguazhang, and Shaolin Long Fist. This, coupled with the knowledge and forms he learned from the Moo Yei Do Bo Tong Ji, Hwang Kee had a complete technique base.

                   Where did you come up with that? Can you reference any writings or accounts of his comments on Taekkyun? Also, where did the information about the Chinese arts that Hwang Kee studied come from? It is under dispute by the Yang family that the teacher Hwang Kee trained under in Taijiquan even existed (a bit of trouble translating a name back into recognizable Chinese), but most sources assert that it is unknown what arts Hwang Kee learned in Manchuria, since he simply referred to them in Korean, with names such as "Fist Method," etc.

68.216.83.89 15:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)Phil

According to every living Taekkyon practitioner in Korea, they keep excellent records and Hwang is not in them anywhere. Also, Hwang can not remember the name of his teacher, which is very weird in Korean, Japanese or Chinese martial arts as your teacher is like your father. not only do we remember our teachers FULL name, we also remember the full names of those we just took a seminar with. In addition, all the Kwan seniors despute all claims that any of the Kwan founders practiced Taekkyon. --Bigzilla 19:24, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


Hwang Kee did a dominant part of his training when it was forbidden for anyone in korea to practice martial arts, he was a very popular man in the community though so he secretly traveled to china via train routes and trained privately with a master. Hwang Kee had also worked on railroads when he was younger, so he knew many people in the business. There were also many martial arts that Hwang Kee never got a chance to train in but studied thoroughly in literature.

[edit] Tang Soo Do a koreanized version of karate?!

i thought karate was formulated in the 18th/19th century

how is this possible if tang soo do was founded in the 8th century

Is it possible that Karate is a Nipponized version of Tang Soo Do?

There are no records of the use of the Tang Soo Do name in Korea until Won Kuk Lee started using it in 1944. So so-called historians in Korea, and elsewhere attempt to use Tang Soo Do, Taekkyon, and Soo Bhak Do interchangably, when if fact there is no evidence of it at all.

This was done to give Taekwondo a seperate identity from Karate, to seperate the two during the big push to get Taekwondo in the Olympics. A common identity would have cause a huge obsticle for Taekwondo, so it needed a line from "ancient" Korean arts, like Taekkyon. This is all according to Un yong Kim's book "The Best Olympics" from Baden Baden to Seoul. --Bigzilla 19:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bigzilla - As far as I know, Tang Soo Do is normally called "Karate" because it has in common several characteristics of Karate, such as hard style forms, dress and traditions, not because of any particular lineage. Even though Tang Soo Do is deeply influenced from China and Korea, it would be misleading to call it a form of Kung Fu, which is typically much softer, with different dress and traditions.

Most Tang Soo Do schools use the "Pyung Ahn" forms as the first set of forms leaned after basic movements are learned. These forms are nearly identical to the Peinan forms used by Shotokan Karate, with some stylistic differences. I would not say that every Karate school teaches Pyung Ahn forms, but every school that starts out with them could rightly be called a Karate school. I did read some where that you can tell which schools that taught Pyung Ahn were descended from Shotokan, and which were descended from Okinawa, by which order the first two were taught in; they are reversed. From this measure, it looks like TSD took them from Shotokan, and this makes sense. Japan occupied Korea for most of the first half of the century.


Hope this helps. Thomas (Tang Soo!) --Howethomas 15:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

See also the Talk page (and its archives) at Taekwondo, where there are several references listed that discuss how TKD and TSD evolved from Shotokan. JJL (talk) 04:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Tang soo do founder learned Chinese martial arts(some modified by japanese) 'karate'. it was fact. but it is not mean Tang soo do is karate. Tang soo do borowed grade system from karate. However, Many techniques are Based on korean traditional martial arts. and little bit mixed karate elment. It must be noted, that contemporary Tang soo do is technically very different from karate (e.g. relies much more on legs than hands, involves high kicks on the heels, more jumps, etc.). it cleary derived from Tekkyon and other. Manacpowers (talk) 04:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
It's true that it's changed considerably from its Karate and Chinese origins, but not because of the effectively extinct taekkyon. That's just Korean nationalism speaking; see the references at the Taekwondo Talk page, e.g. those by Capener, Burdick, and Dohrwend. JJL (talk) 05:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, everyone.
JJL is Japanese Pushing POV user. He find 'one sentence' from one matial arts paper book. and claimed that "TKD originally from Karate!".(actually, that book written by karate teacher. page cover is karate(空手), too[1]) I really sick and tired of this Japanese Pushing POV user. most important thing is FACT. but JJL is not FACT. He picked from unclerar and unreadable source. and He edited like this "All taught Japanese-influenced systems."[2] ALL Japanese taught? I pointed out THIS IS LIE and extreme POV.Manacpowers (talk) 05:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
JJL your cliam is totally baseless.
You did not prove any readable source. first of all, Fighting style is very different. as i know, only 17% TKD techniques similar with karate. 13% are kung-fu. other are original technique.(derived from Song Duk-ki, the tekkyon master) mainly derived from tekkyon's kicking technic. so 'heavily influenced from foreign' sentence is nonsense word.
and Karate is not Japanese made. It is invented by china. karate was carbon copy of chinese Tang arts. even karate learned korean never say karate is orgin from japan.(they called as "Tang soo do". They did not called as "空"手. They called as "唐"手.) they say it's originate from chinese "Tang" dynasty martial arts. it's not japan's.
also chinese encyclopedia said,
" 空手道,是由距今五百年前的古老格斗术和中国传入日本的拳法揉合而成的。那时，在硫球上层阶级间，暗中参考中国的拳法创出了独特 的唐手，即最初的'空手道'。"
they say it's originate from Chinese Tang dynasty arts.
Chinese and Korean same said like that.
origin of 空手道(karate) name.
"から：汉字为"空"；这个字的解释有二：一为空,空手,手无寸铁;Kara亦可解释做"唐"的意思,唐者,唐朝也,唐代中国进 入盛势,唐人即是中国人.故karate亦可解做唐手,即中国的手技也.但因子十年前日本统一Karate为空手,故其汉字(k anji)亦废用唐手此名. "(from chinese encyclopedia)
Chinese and 唐手道 learned korean say that karate originally from chinese Tang dynasty martial arts. They did not say, it is invented by Japan. do not mistake. Check korean researched academic source. [3](Korean) They did not say it is invented by japan. Karate is Chinese martial arts(some modified by japanese). Manacpowers (talk) 20:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
'TKD originally from Karate?' I think that you are not constructive editor. you are Japanese POV pushing user. Your only source is one karate teacher's book.(also can't readable to other. and did not authorized from TKD)
but i admit, TKD accepted Grade system (Dan), practice suit(道服) from karate. (borrowd some 'system') but karate originally from Chinese. Manacpowers (talk) 05:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
he did not prove any sources. He did not prove sources in my discussion topic. [4] (other topics are not relation with me)
JJL's source is unclear. because, we can't read whole relation article. Who know? is it made by his brain? and He omitted other aticle. We need guess the meaning of a word from the context. JJL edit is unclear source. JJL edit is from an unauthorized history. and unreadable.(omiited other article. He picked a 'one sentence' only. -funny- Wikipedia:Content forking)my source is clear and fact.
His only source is karate book.(written by karate teacher. page cover is karate(空手), too[5])
1. even if his source writed like that, David Mitchell book is 'nonsense'. He is a karate teacher. and his book is almost karate book. originally karate-pov book. also he can't represent to TKD. It is not trustworthy source.
All taught Japanese-influenced systems? first of all, Fighting style is very different. as i know, only 17% TKD techniques similar with karate. 13% are kung-fu. other are original technique.(derived from Song Duk-ki, the tekkyon master) mainly derived from tekkyon's kicking technique.
2. Kukkiwon is world TKD headquarter. Which one is the more trust worthy? 1. one karate teacher's(neither scholar nor Do not work for TKD) karate POV book 2. official TKD headquarter. millions of kukkiwon dojang and TKD teachers
3. Please, away David Mitchell's paperbook from TKD article. David Mitchell is not TKD scholar. David Mitchell do not work for TKD. and David Mitchell claim did not authorized from TKD organization. That book is a martial arts paper book, it can't be a reliable source. if that book is reliable, then 'ninja training'[6] book is historical FACT and reliable source, too? nonsense.
4. also His edit is violated wikipedia policy. Wikipedia:Content forking and we did not confirm from whole article. His source is unclear. but my source is clear.
5. if He keep David Mitchell's stupid claim(i still doubt it is real or not), it will be must actionable to attach 'hoax' tag.
I encourage anyone with sufficient time and patience to peruse them.[7]Manacpowers (talk) 05:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Geez Manacpowers... you really aren't an expert in TSD. It's pretty reliable info the HUGE influence JMA had in all the original post-war kwans. In fact, Hwang Kee admitted to learning the Pinan's from a Japanese karate book he found while working in China. Yes, Soo Bahk Do NOW has a much more Chinese influence, but classical TSD is mearly a repackaged Shotokan. In fact all of the original kwans were just personal spins of Japanese karate brought back by Korean Nationals.JWLuiza (talk) 05:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Current State

Hope nobody minds - I added a blurb about where Song moo kwan is at nowadays. Whistle if you want to discuss. --Dan 17:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Deleted, should create a new wiki page "Song Moo Kwan", article should remain in a netreal POV

I deleted the Song Moo Kwan blurb also/again. It needs its own article. For the reader, it arrives in the article as a complete non sequitur. If we put blurbs for every shade of Tang Soo Do in this article, it will be thousands of pages long, which would not serve a general reader.

I also removed the weasel sentence about Tang Soo Do "emerging from Tae Kwon Do's shadow" in the past two decades. This suggests that Tang Soo Do was in Tae Kwon Do's "shadow" in the first place, a claim that is simply unfounded. In terms of popularity among the general public, it may have gained in popularity east of the Mississippi, but this does not mean it was ever in another art's shadow. Such a claim is also in contradiction to the ancestral history section of the article.

Grumpy complaints 1) None of you zealous deleters signed. 2) Songmookwan is one of the 5 original kwans, so you won't have thousands of pages if you restrict the article to those five. 3) Please clarify the NPOV complaint. --Dan 22:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Song Moo Kwan deserves mention but it's good that it has it's own article in wikipedia User5802 04:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link Farm

Wikipedia is not a link farm - best is 2 or 3, less than 10 definately. Can someone who knows a bit more of the subject do some triming. External links should add info rather than advertise schools.Peter Rehse 01:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted all links, except those organization that are headed by a notable grandmaster. should you see any new links, edit according to this critera,

1 - is the website an official site of established organisation

2 - Headed by a Named and notable Grandmaster, whos personal history is given

3 - Does the site offer actual information, and not just advert for an organisation/club


I've done a clean up of the links section, per these standards. --- Tsdsahbum --- 31 July 2007

I'm doing another clean up, removing some of the smaller groups.JWLuiza (talk) 05:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] No weapons?

That's completely wrong.


Whens the last time you were carrying a katana when you went out to eat?

I know that we use staffs (Bohngs or however you spell it) at my Tang Soo Do school.

Staffs are a slightly different story, almost anywhere you can find a improvised staff in reach, poolstick, standing lamp, broom. And i'm not sure about tang soo do, i train in Soo Bahk Do and we start using the staff at a higher level but its not required by the federation. You have to realize that a weapon is just an extension of your hands, if your body is your primary weapon you can understand and adapt to a weapon much easier.


In the World Tang Soo Do Ass., we train with Bongs (staff), Dan Gum (knife), and Jang Gum (Sword). We have 3 official and one unofficial bong hyung (forms), one dan gum hyung, and three jang gum hyung.--Eric Dufurrena, Sam Dan

Songmookwan uses staff and manchurian broadsword, in the Chungbong form progression. --Dan 15:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a compromise would be to state that while "Hwang Kee's form of Tang Soo Do did not have any official weapons as part of the standard curriculum, many offshoot organizations have since adopted weapons to their curriculum." From there, one could list examples of weapons taught on an organizational level (ex "For example, the WTSDA and TSDMGK have incorporated a variety of sword forms into their curriculum.) "Are weapons used in Tang Soo Do?" seems like a reasonable question from a reader, and providing this sort of detail seems much more fair than a simple "yes" or "no." This way, you can account for the natural progression and evolution (ryu pa) of the different factions of Tang Soo Do. Does this seem reasonable?-- Tommrkr (talk) 19:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] titles

Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Academic titles for the reason for removal --Nate1481( t/c) 16:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


Ok that's completely insane. We DEFINITELY use weapons. From staffs to arni sticks to sais to swords to nunchucks. However it does differ from studio to studio. Also, it depends on the training backgrounds of the instructors: if some are trained in Japanese martial arts as well, they may very well know sword. Etc....Etc.....

[edit] American Tang Soo Do

Okay. I believe that this entire article and discussion is about traditional Tang Soo Do. I believe a new article should be created for American Tang Soo Do, not replacing this one, just adding more information on the subject.

American Tang Soo Do's forms are different, self defence is different, techniques, everything....Think about it.

[edit] Early History

I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what this phrase is supposed to mean, and therefore am also not sure how to fix it: "Gook Sun" or "Poong Wal" is considered as modern army general, each could have several hundreds to several thousands private armies to protect the country and the region. I also have not seen the Hwarang referred to as the Hwa Rang Dan before, but perhaps I'm missing something. Omnedon 17:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

These need a clear out to the most relevant, don't know much on tang soo do organisations so better if someone else does it. --Nate1481( t/c) 13:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Done,
- keeping World Moo Duk Kwan, Is primary organization created by grandmaster Hwang Kee
- removing United States Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation, Is a child of the World Moo Duk Kwan, which already has a link here
- removing United Tang Soo Do Federation, appears to be more of a company than a martial arts association
- keeping United Kingdom Tang Soo Do Federation, well known grandmaster Kang Uk Lee
- removing Hwa Rang Tang Soo Do Federation, appears to be a small webpage for a school not a large organization
- keeping International Tang Soo Do Federation, well known grandmaster Choong Jae Nim Chun Sik Kim
- keeping World Tang Soo Do Association, well known grandmaster Jae Chul Shin
- keeping Moo Sa Do Kwan - Warrior-Scholar Association and Forums, provides much information and is a notable forum on tang soo do
- keeping tang soo do mi guk kwan: well known grandmaster Charles Ferraro
User5802 17:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

Is there a reason to use the {{Infobox_martial_art_group}} infobox instead of the more appropriate {{Infobox_martial_art}}? - Nmnogueira 10:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I've just been using the martial art group infobox I made for articles that don't already have an infobox. It contains all of the original fields (except "hardness") plus a few other ones I thought may be beneficial. Public may compare the two here and decide for themselves - Template:Infobox_martial_art and Template:Infobox_martial_art_group

User5802 08:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tang soo do is not mean 'karate do'

"In Japanese, these characters mean "karate-do", but in contemporary Japanese karate-do" Who edit like that? if you understanding korean language. it is funny HOAX. no relation with karate. Korean called karate is karate. 'Tang soo do' is NOT mean 'karate do'. also please check Tang soo do homepage.[8] They did not mentioned that it mean 'karate do'. Manacpowers (talk) 03:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, you are wrong. The characters are the exact same. When reading the characters, a Japanese speaker would say "Karate-do" while a Korean would say "Tang Soo Do". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.175.229 (talk) 06:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)