Taegeuk Oh (5) Jang Question

Discussion in 'Taekwondo Patterns' started by Oerjan, May 24, 2013.

  1. Oerjan

    Oerjan Active Member

    One of my passions in Taekwondo studdies is Poomsae Boonseok (Pattern analisys) to find practical applications or meaning in the movements in our forms. In Taegeuk Oh (5) Jang there is a technique which follows a knife hand outer block in middle section where you do an elbow strike where the hand is supported by the other hand (I am NOT talking about the elbow target strike that follows the side kick/ hammerfist strike combo by the way).

    Now usually when we do the round elbow strike in basic technique training we do is with the non striking arm pulled back at our hip, but in Taegeuk Oh (5) Jang we have the non striking hand placed on the striking arms fist.

    The question is: What is the purpose for this placement of the non striking arm? Do anyone have any idea or have you ever really even wondered about this? I have an application for the move, but I am very curious as to what other people think about the move.
  2. John McNally

    John McNally Active Member

    It reinforces the technique in the direction of use.
  3. Gnarlie

    Gnarlie Well-Known Member

    Several options...or combinations thereof:

    1) it pulls the striking arm's fist in closer to the body late in the technique, increasing elbow velocity through conservation of angular momentum

    2) it pulls the fist in tight making the elbow a nice sharp point to strike with

    3) it follows an open hand technique which lends itself to a wrist grab. Performed to the closed side (right arm to right arm), this would imply either a wrist grab followed by an elbow strike to the back of the elbow to jar the joint, or followed by an elbow lock control.

    4) if the grab were applied higher up the opponents arm (above the elbow joint)during the step forward, this would allow for an elbow strike to the face or shoulder whilst controlling the opponents elbow with the non striking hand. This places us safely on the closed side behind the elbow, out of reach of the opponent's free hand.

    Because the technique is followed by a turn in both instances, I'm open to the idea of it being a control through the turn. That said, there's no indication of a finishing blow or choke after the turn, so for my own purposes the idea of a KO blow to the jaw or temple appeals more than a control or joint destruction.
    Oerjan likes this.
  4. Oerjan

    Oerjan Active Member

    That was one great reply Gnarlie! I hope the other members of the forum can keep em comming though. My primary application to the move is actually your number 3 as it fits the "complete movement" the best.

    One other application I got from one of my fellow students was that the supporting hand was there so you could turn the turning elbow strike into or follow up imidiatly with a supported sideways elbow thrust. The follow up elbow thrust was therefore in his eyes implied but not done in the form.

    In my own opinion the forms will not always show the finishing movement, the joint lock or break (depending on how you look at it) will position the attacker in a very bad way so there is a lot of different follow ups available. The side kick-hammerfist strike followed by a target elbow strike is a great way to follow up from the lock if you deliver the side kick low, on the side of the knee joint of the opponent for instance. The forms were created for fighters by fighters so sometimes the forms can take some knowledge for granted, in this case: "This is how you get the opponent into a very bad position for himself. Follow up with any appropriate attack to finnish".
  5. Master Dan

    Master Dan New Member

    First in application which you will not find on any Dart Fish or other publication if the hand is to the elbow it is a strike to PP points Jaw Temple ect. when it is a hand grabing the elbow at 90 degrees it is grabing the person's head from behind and driving the nose or nose bones into the frontal lobe of the brain perriod. there are no defensive block only offensive attacks to PP in all PoomSe Period anything else is uninformed myth
  6. Mark 42

    Mark 42 Member

    I always guessed that it originated from using the other hand to force the elbow into the target harder
    (using both arms to thrust the elbow into the opponent).
    I have some written instructions that referred to as an augmented elbow thrust or something like that. I can't find a link to where I got those instructions, but I thought they were from WTF or Kukkiwon, IIRC.
    If I find the link I'll add it here.
  7. Oerjan

    Oerjan Active Member

    Thanks for your input Master Dan and Mark 42.
    I guess you could very well end the fight with elbowing someone in the head, but I would in no way base my self defense techniques on shoving the bones in the nose into the brain. There are many doctors who dismiss this as a myth. There actually is not much bone in the nose at all to begin with, some might have more than others and maybe you can shove their "nose bones" into the brain, but the majority does not have that much bone in their noses. http://fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=511
  8. Gnarlie

    Gnarlie Well-Known Member

    Behind and above the nose is a cavity topped with thick bone. Even striking upward, the bony part of the bridge of the nose is too short to reach the frontal lobe, and would meet with the bony process above the sinus area.


    Undoubtedly a strike to the nose with a target elbow would do some serious damage.

    Here's something to consider: to KO someone, you have to shake the brain. So why hold the head steady for the elbow? The answer in my view is that the target hand neither holds nor pulls, but it is just that: a target. It helps you to locate your target by proprioceptive feel in addition to visual acquisition. Actually holding the head steady for the strike would be deterimental to its effectiveness as a KO technique, in exchange for an increase in damage caused eg broken facial bones, teeth, scarring.

    Just thoughts. Use of this technique would be pretty brutal anyway, it is potentially lethal under some applications, and IMO absolutely would overstep the bounds of a balanced and reasonable response except in the most extreme of circumstances.
    John McNally likes this.
  9. Master Dan

    Master Dan New Member

    First which one of you have used all of the above win loose or other? I find trail and error with all body types and instruction from those whe where pioneers and fought for king and country some even trained by war criminals to be effective? talk is cheap paper is just paper what matters is the ability to adapt to fluid situations when some person because of nerve damage or drugs dose not respond you better have a back up plan beyond hey it says here it supposed to work? Guns bottles knives guys with arms twice yoru leg size 4 people comming beyond the person your dealing with try it some time?
  10. John McNally

    John McNally Active Member

    Fluidity will come from well versed in practice training, so ultimately the situation that presents itself will be solved with effective technique, every movement can be discounted if thought of as the only way that move can be utilized and if only in one situation.
    Knock a raging bull out with one punch .... No .... but i may break its leg..... so i'm safe as it cannot chase me.....
    Side kick an ant .......... No...... pick it up and move it...... then i can continue with out causing harm.......

    Metaphors, so before you say a word, i have not yet had to try to break a bull's leg :)
    Sabomnim Dan likes this.

Share This Page