Yul Gok

Discussion in 'Taekwondo Patterns' started by Finlay, Jun 17, 2014.

  1. Finlay

    Finlay Active Member

    Years ago when i learnt Yul Gok we practiced the first movement with a semi circular step as you performent the sitting stance. In video that I have seen recently it seems people are moving directly to the side.
    Has this been offically changed or is it one of the details that have been erroded over time?
     
  2. Gnarlie

    Gnarlie Well-Known Member

    Or, maybe, when it was taught years ago, it had been misunderstood. The information sharing age means there is a trend towards clarification rather than erosion of details.

    It was certainly the case with Kukki TKD that until the advent of the internet and a tranche of seminars to promote the standard, people were doing all kinds of weird and wonderful variations of movements in the patterns due to the 'telephone game' effect. It's still the case in some places, through their own choice. It seems some people prefer to choose to remain ignorant of the standard if it means they will have to change what they are doing and learn something new.

    I step directly to the side, as no extra special movement is described in the Encyclopedia other than step to the side. I'd be interested to see what others do and why.
     
  3. Ivor

    Ivor Member

    i think gnarlie is right in his answer above that it is not in the encyclopedia, but if i visualise the move, i can see that it could be much more aesthetically pleasing than a straightforward step to the side - i'll give it a try tonight (much the same as i do for the last step in Toi Gye when i perform a right waving kick from the walking stance into the sitting stance)
     
  4. Finlay

    Finlay Active Member

    Thanks guys

    I'll ask my old instuctor where the movement came from at that time his teachers were, Jim Scott and Rhee Ki Ha it is hard to think that either of these gentlemen were teaching something incorrectly. I may have picked it up wrong or it could have been added later
     
  5. Finlay

    Finlay Active Member

    Thanks guys

    I'll ask my old instuctor where the movement came from at that time his teachers were, Jim Scott and Rhee Ki Ha it is hard to think that either of these gentlemen were teaching something incorrectly. I may have picked it up wrong or it could have been added later
     
  6. Gnarlie

    Gnarlie Well-Known Member

    I didn't mean to imply that they (or you) might have misunderstood.

    What might have happened is a deliberate 'in our school we do it like this' decision at any point between the pattern author and the instructor who taught it to you. TKD has always been fragmented, regardless of organisation or pattern set, due to the individual schools within it's structure. Sometimes those schools want to stamp a signature on what they do, so that it's clear who taught their students. The more steps away from the source you are, the more potential misunderstandings and personal 'signature stamps' you might see in a form.

    All it takes is one instructor, even a guest instructor at a seminar, to insist on something, then it's in there for good unless you or your instructor periodically reviews the textbook. I know of instances where this has even come from students seeing something in a video online and copying it into their performance of a form. If that then catches on with the other students, then you've got one of these little form-memes. For ages we had some students doing a really incorrect hand-bursting motion in Taegeuk Chil Jang after the covered fist. Turned out one of them had been watching the black belts do Koryo, had seen the bursting movement, and in her confusion had adopted it as part of Chil Jang. Took ages to stamp that out, just when we thought we'd eliminated it, there it would be again, because not all of the students are there all of the time.

    In the age of the internet and information sharing, we can see what was originally intended. If the information hadn't been documented and shared, we would have all been none the wiser.
     
  7. Finlay

    Finlay Active Member

    Hi

    Sorry, i didn;t mean to come off sounding =defensive just trying to explain where the movement came from.

    This ties in with the other thread about wrong movements.

    If i was teaching this form again i would have to make the decision about that step, I have an application based on the semi circle foot movement. so would i keep it the foot movement and the application or keep it standard. Teaching both seems a little inefficient for time.

    I guess thissi the same question that the developers of the patterns had to address, and many before them
     
  8. Gnarlie

    Gnarlie Well-Known Member

    I would standardise the form but keep the application, as I don't change performance in the form to meet application needs. This is because every movement can have more than one application.
    Movements in forms are pretty heavily stylised anyway, and have to be altered quite a bit to make them work under pressure. Changing the path of a step is a minor example of that.
     
  9. Chris J

    Chris J Active Member

    Keep in mind the patterns or tuls are designed to show power, certain short cuts have to be employed in practical application. I once blocked an overhead attack with a rising block. The finish was flawless, the execution leading up was modified to get there first!
     

Share This Page