Haidong Gumdo Practicality?

Discussion in 'Weapons' started by Bgajdor1, Sep 26, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bruce W Sims

    Bruce W Sims Banned Banned

    Sorry, L....... unfortunately part of what you are experiencing proceeds from a decision I made a couple of years ago to stop "dumbing down" my responses or going into painful and unnecessary detail. No offense intended but I now work to communicate with folks with the understanding that they have a command of the technical and historical background to their respective practice. The downside is that sometimes folks have difficulty like when the Japanese folks start talking concepts and methods and I get left behind. I think its necessary to keep or raise the level of discourse. FWIW.

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
     
  2. Bruce W Sims

    Bruce W Sims Banned Banned

    Where did you get the idea that Korean swordsmanship "died out"..

    Who told you that?

    Regards.
     
  3. Chris Parker

    Chris Parker Valued Member

    Intelligent answers and discussion are great, but you don't answer the questions, instead talking about barely related other topics, which is why there is trouble following you.
     
  4. ludde

    ludde Valued Member

    It is a nightmare for me reading Chris's posts. He has like a wall of text, but what he writs is plain and understandable regardless if I agree or not. It is difficult reading from you cause I don't understand what to grab and comment on, and what it has to do with the discussion.
     
  5. Chris Parker

    Chris Parker Valued Member

    Ha, sorry about those longer ones, Ludde....
     
  6. Polar Bear

    Polar Bear Moved on

    Oh did the Japanese 35 year occupation not happen then. Where they systematically destroyed almost all swords, armour and banned all practice.

    The Bear.
     
  7. Bruce W Sims

    Bruce W Sims Banned Banned

    This is "classic" and EXACTLY what I am talking about.

    You didn't name your source but you automatically went to the commonly-held beliefs that hold for some.....but not all....Korean material.

    Lets get your facts straight.

    a.) The Japanese Occupation DID happen. The authority of the Consul General applied to security within the precincts of Seoul (initiated in 1904 and formalized in 1907-1910) and a few other metropolitan centers. The countryside was, for the most part, unpoliced unless there was a disturbance. Otherwise policing was left to the 22,000 collaborating Koreans who formed the police force overseen by the Japanese. In her book, UNDER THE BLACK UMBRELLA, the author reports that for the most part, excepting notable historical events, she, along with most Koreans in the countryside, never noticed the Occupation. It was, for the most part, an Urban experience.

    b.) Swords and armor were collected in the cities, but so were many other metal items including pots, pans, bowls, bells and jewelry. Since the Korean Police Force regularly competed with the Japanese in KENDO the use of swords could not have been banned, nor is there any actual record of banning of MA in Korea. My own sword teacher was, himself, one of a number of individuals who trained at the first public Korean Sword school in Seoul. Choson Chaeyukhoe (Choson Athletics Association) was established in 1919, and a year later, 1920, Mr. Kang Nak-won opened Choson Mudogwan. In that case, my teacher's teacher, Mr. Kang, taught Japanese material during the day and evenings and in "off-hours" taught Korean methods. Now...Maybe you have some resource that documents such a MA ban? Lotta people have looked for this "holy grail" over the years and have been unable to locate it. Pretty strange since the Japanese arts, Korean Ssireum, Archery and SIB PAL GI all continued to be practiced.

    c.) Conservative elements withdrew to the rural areas of Korea especial in the extreme northwest following the failure of the TONG HAK Movement and Rebellion of the 1880-s and 90-s. In those locations training in traditional practices and Neo-Confucian Thought continued, by-passed by WW II and even most of the Korean War. The current single best resource for authetic Korean sword who later taught Dr. CHOI Bok-kyu, was one of a number of students who benefitted from training in these areas.

    I'd love to tell you what I am thinking right this minute, but I don't need any more hassle from the Mods on this Forum. Just get your facts straight and quit throwing around those misconceptions.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  8. Chris Parker

    Chris Parker Valued Member

    Bruce, can you answer any of the questions from the thread? If you can't, just say so. But at the moment, it's not really possible to have any real understanding of where you're coming from.
     
  9. Bgajdor1

    Bgajdor1 Valued Member

    I'm just using this to quote your long post Chris, haha.

    I see what you're saying about swordsmanship being a more serious endeavor and many attacks in Haidong Gumdo as "an invitation to be killed". I don't understand what you meant by PC approach, since I'm unfamiliar with what P.C. actually stands for?

    My approach is pretty liberal when applying techniques from martial arts, I admit that. But it seems to be I tend to take that approach or believe all martial arts are useless but the very best. I guess I tend to alternate each extreme of the spectrum unfortunately. Despite my liberal approach, I find it hard to believe that Haidong Gumdo doesn't have something to offer. For example, a skilled HDGD practicioner would and should be able to cut better than someone off the street that's never picked up a sword. I realize this is extremely liberal and "candy-coating" the issue at hand. But I'm just trying to convey that HDGD is a better sword art than no sword art at all in terms of defense and application.

    By the way, I appreciate you defense of Taekwondo, and your kindness in sharing your deepest, darkest secret with me. *bows*

    ~ Ben

    Edit: Just watched the video you linked from Martial Arts planet. I honestly thought the guy was trying to troll. That is one of the most terrible training videos I have ever seen. Someone with no fighting skill probably would destroy someone in that style. I understand your concerns with HDGD a bit more now. I guess what I'm having trouble believing is that it's that bad. HDGD has its fair share of criticisms, but is it honestly so terrible that it will degrade your skill with the a sword and make you even worse as a martial artist? Maybe I'm missing something, as I've done a little Iaido/Kenjutsu and don't find HDGD curriculum deviates tremendously from the japanese sword methods I've experienced.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  10. Bruce W Sims

    Bruce W Sims Banned Banned

    Excuse me...but you were quiet on this thread for a couple of days and then came back on here and broadsided me with a huge post.

    Now you want to know why I "can't" answer.

    I would say any reasonable person would know that for the set-up that it is. You're playing to the audience, Chris, and I think everyone here can sense that. All the same I am putting together you answers.

    Regards.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  11. Polar Bear

    Polar Bear Moved on

    Japanese occupation of Korea (1910 AD to 1945 AD)

    Korean swords are very scarce today, since most surviving examples were confiscated and destroyed during the colonial period. A systematic attempt was made to collect and destroy all Korean swords, coats of armour, and all Korean martial arts equipment. The entire history of Korean swords and armour was almost lost forever, along with much of Korea's culture and traditions, because of Japanese colonial policies.

    Interwar (1945 AD to 1950 AD) and postwar (1953 AD to date) periods

    After the liberation of Korea in 1945, ceremonial swords were once again manufactured both in southern and northern Korea, and by the 1960s, sword-making was a vibrant and increasingly secure industry; however, due to the depredations and systematic destruction by the Japanese during the Japanese occupation of Korea, many traditions and techniques lost and were either completely unrecoverable or had yet to be recovered.

    Only by the mid-1990s did Korean swordmaking come back to expert levels comparable to the Joseon era.

    Sword ownership in Korea is currently restricted (private weapons ownership was culturally frowned upon and largely restricted during other times in Korean history, particularly during the Joseon era and the Japanese occupation period - albeit for different reasons in either period), and there are very few traditional sword collectors in Korea today. General/flag-grade officers are given dress swords upon assuming command in the Republic of Korea (ROK) army. Despite restrictions on sword ownership and a lingering social preference against armed martial arts (dating at least to the Joseon era), practical sword fighting is enjoying a small revival amongst elite military regiments, and fencing is once again attracting interest in Korean universities. The Republic of Korea currently fields a strong Olympic fencing team.


    Harmon, R. B. (2007): 5,000 years of Korean martial arts: The heritage of the Hermit Kingdom warriors Indianapolis: Dog Ear

    Hong Wontack 1994 Paekchae of Korea and the origin of Yamato Japan, Seoul Kadura International

    Coval, Dr John Carter and Alan, 1984, "Korean impact on Japanese culture: Japan's hidden History" Hollym International Corp., Elizabeth, New Jersey


    The Bear.
     
  12. Polar Bear

    Polar Bear Moved on

    No we sense that you are avoiding the hard questions by posting irrelevant nonsense.

    The Bear.
     
  13. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member

    Could you please clarify what you mean by formally addressing a person?
     
  14. Bruce W Sims

    Bruce W Sims Banned Banned

    a.) Answers to the many questions posed, Bruce. Any evidence of any Korean swordsmanship that shows any trait of knowledge of the sword (used combatively or historically) that is found in current forms. Those are the two main things. You really seem to be answering questions that you haven't been asked, and thinking that just by putting words down on the screen you are answering. It's not quite that simple.

    b.) See post #90 for two such examples.

    a.) You're kidding, yeah? Firstly, there was nothing in my post that was "looking down my nose" at anything. I said that, when looking at cutting drills, the fact that a very sharp sword goes through a soft target doesn't really indicate any skill, and that applies equally to Japanese cutting as any other form. Believe me, I've seen plenty of Japanese sword practitioners who seem to think that just cutting through the target is the aim in and of itself as well... and my post was in response to a poster who was saying he was going to do more cutting in order to gain more feedback on his progress... so I gave advice which is universal... only you seem to have even seen any reference to different cultures approaches in it. I honestly challenge you to actually point out any reference to Japanese or Korean cutting, or Japanese versus Korean cutting. The closest is referencing two poor examples already seen in this thread, both of which happened to be Korean. I really think you should try reading what is written without assuming you know where I'm coming from... because you haven't been right about that at all yet.

    b.) No…I’m not kidding…and I believe that your posts fairly “drip” with arrogance and self-absorbtion. If you are what Japanese sword produces I would not recommend Japanese sword to anyone. Fortunate I have crossed paths with other JS practitioners and the truly accomplished one are actually quite civil, well-informed and interesting. You on the other hand…… Now…I don’t exactly know where the question is in this, but lets mush on.

    a.) Oh dear lord... "validation cutting"? I gotta ask, what on earth is that? What does it "validate"? And how does it "validate" anything? But other than that, get over the use of terminology, as Dean said, he's just using the terminology that he naturally thinks in, and as for myself, I have tended to use English simplifications for convenience... did you see anyone call you out for using the term "begi" (which, for some reason, you wrote entirely in capitals) earlier in the thread?

    b.) This confirms my suspicions that you have not actually been reading my posts. Here are your answers.
    Post #12 “In HWA RANG GEUM BEOP we try to address these issues (EG “a.) Those foundations have been corrupted by the introduction of Japanese materials and methods associated with the two-handed sabre and b.) the introduction of acrobatic movements and arcane practices (see: KI CHEON) that have little practical application in combat or CQ events.) in two ways. One is the use of "validation cutting" (K. BEGI) which requires that each method and/or technique be able to reduce a variety of materials. The second method for addressing efficacy is the use of one-man Forms (K: HYUNG) and two-man encounters (K. KUN).
    Post #23 “In the matter of cutting, may I also say that I am unimpressed with what passes for BEGI in most of the clips. Anyone with a year or so of steady study will be able to perform a Straight Descending cut and any of the angular cuts to one side or the other. But those are only 5 of 12 cuts and four thrusts. and I have NEVER seen cutting that uses recombintant techniques such as cuts inter-spersed with parries or deflections. In short----IMHO--- what one sees in most HDGD clips is KMA "theatre" rather than training to use the Korean sword as a weapon.
    c.)Post #76 “To answer your question, depending on who one studies with there are some 12 cuts, four thrusts, and about 6 motions. Korean Swordsmanship is about inter-relating these aspects to fit the circumstances, simultaneous using the sword effectively. While Japanese style cutting likes its straight lines, Koreans train for what is loosely termed "universal" or "360 degree Awareness". Having to address multiple partners is something that Japanese sword does as a rapid series of 1:1 engagements. In Korean and Chinese sword a person might need to address an attacker behind or to one side--- maybe wielding something other than a sword-- without formally addressing that person. The way to demonstrate prowess in this strategy is to cut a series of targets located at varying distances, heights and size or material.”


    a.) Without getting into the gaps in a lot of what is being said here, I'd point out that this doesn't seem to actually answer the question. The question is "What are you looking for when performing cutting exercises?", not "How do you do your cutting exercises?" So, if you could answer the question there Bruce... What are you looking for? Is it just that the sword goes through the target? Is it something else? Are there a range of criteria for it to be "good", or just one or two? What are they?

    b.) Post #78 “There is a protocol thats followed---I think I may have mentioned it before--- in which a hierarchy of placements and materials are followed. Roughly the progression follows Paper, Mache' or cardboard, grass, cotton cloth then rope. I know very few practitioners who still follow this, but for those who do there is then a range of cuts of assorted angles and target placements depending on where a person is in their training. For instance the single most basic Introductory cut is a Straight Descending Cut off the Walking Step. This is, in fact the first technique of the BON KUK GEUM BEOP and is followed by the Same Cut executed on the turn utilizing a One-legged stance. So imagine a target of say, Mache for the first cut and paper for the second cut. Why? Because the practitioner has successfully reduced a Paper target on the first cut and is now doing the second level on the first cut, but is only just starting with the second cutting technique. Is any of this making any sense?

    a.) No, again, that's a training progression, not answering the actual question, which was "What are you looking for when performing cutting exercises?" The fact that you seem unable to ascertain what makes a "good" cutting demonstration or a "bad" one, or be able to verbalize any aspects, isn't making this look good for your side of things...

    Can you actually answer it?

    b.)Post 87 “Not in quite that sense. For instance, my teacher would coach me with such things as "move from the center" and "keep you head on the same level" or the constant "erbow closa toda botti, mista sim". But in terms of anatomical alignment I would say no.” K-J asked about “specific mechanics or fundamentals of posture and structure to be followed when cutting”. And he got the answer I gave. He did not ask about the non-anatomical refences which could include but are not limited to
    Cheon ryum { 청렴 ( 淸廉 ) } (Integrity),
    Choong Shim (balance)
    In Neh- (perseverance) among others.


    a.) Right, let's get something straight. Japanese swordsmanship cannot be generalized to the degree of saying there is only one contextual or tactical form applied across the board. A simple cursory look at many Iai forms, whether Seitei Iai (which starts with a kata to an opponent in front, then has a kata with an opponent behind, and later features kata against multiple opponents in various directions), Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu and Muso Shinden Ryu (which have the same, with additional directional kata between the forward and rear forms at the beginning), to Katori Shinto Ryu, which features kata against opponents to your left, right, in front, both front and behind, and more, as well as many, many other systems and approaches, and I don't know what the hell Bruce is on about when he starts talking about the approaches of Japanese sword arts not featuring the idea of opponents all around. I mean, the core concept of most Japanese (at least, all traditional ones) of Zanshin is that you maintain a wide awareness all around yourself in case of secondary attacks, attackers, and so on. Beyond all that, the examples given of Korean sword hyungs which go from one side to another, back and forth, etc etc don't actually seem to show any awareness of opponents at all, nor tactics or tactical applications against a group, but rather a string of almost unrelated movements in imitation of unarmed kata (Karate, TKD forms/poomse/hyungs etc).

    b.) Boy are YOU fulla beans! The Japanese themselves define multiple encounters as a series of rapid but individual encounters even if only fractionally so. To not directly face one’s opponent has been historically dishonorable. Archers were considered blatant cowards and people who wielded a spear were considered little better. This is also why alternate Japanese methods developed among non-Samurai class such as the Business Community and the notorious YAKUZA have always been held in distain. These alternate forms allow for striking and thrusting at attackers without actually turning to face them “man-to-man” as it were. Gees, do YOU need some education.

    a.) Loyalty to Japanese systems really has nothing to do with my take on things. Simply put, nothing shown of Korean swordsmanship shows no evidence of any realistic sword knowledge, experience, or anything similar, to the point that I would say I'm not so much degrading Korean swordsmanship, but saying it doesn't exist based on all evidence.

    b.) Lets see….you don’t practice Korean sword….and you don’t seem to know a lot about it or its development or its history. So much so that when you ask a question you can’t identify the answer in plain sight, literally in black and white, and need someone to tease-out the salient bits to educate you. So we are suppose to care WHAT you believe about Korean sword why again? As far as I can tell, as I (re) answer each of these questions, you won’t be able to understand them any better the second time. I hope I am not suppose to conclude that you are representative of what passes for MA scholarship Down-Unda, are you?
    BTW: Based on your reported awe for an art that still requires KAPPAN….I’m not sure you are the person who should be throwing around a word like “delusional”. Cutting oneself to “prove loyalty” to the group? Puts you right up their with street gangs in LA and Chicago. How proud you must be.


    a.) Terrible, deep, dark secret time... I have a TKD background. Okay, not so terrible, deep, dark, or even a secret, really. But the thing with TKD is that it is designed for a particular application, and works towards that end. It is application of mechanics that are tested and proven, as well as tactics that are the same. The basis is karate methodology, with a greater emphasis on a wider variety and specialization in skilled kicking methodologies. The distinction here is that the methods found in Haidong Gumdo share none of that pedigree of development through application... instead, it seems more to be what people who have no real exposure to real swordsmanship tactics and realities think it might be, or what they want it to be... which has a larger influence from movies than anything else. Again, though, I'm open to, and patiently awaiting, anything shown to contradict that image.

    b.) Gees, Chris….you don’t know any more about TKD than you do about Korean sword. Who the heck told you that TKD techniques are “proven”. “Proven” to do what? Are you aware of the history of TKD; how it was developed; who developed it and why; what His background was???

    a.) Being wide open has no practical use. It is an invitation to be killed. Overcutting has no practical use. It is an invitation to be killed. Overly muscled cuts have no practical use. It is an invitation to be killed, as well as reducing the effectiveness and precision of your actions, should they hit. Mechanically, a lot of what is seen in Haidong Gumdo is flawed to the point of having no practical use. Tactically a lot of what is seen in Haidong Gumdo is flawed to the point of having no practical use. If the only practical usage you want is that you want to swing a sword around and look cool doing so, fine. But if your aim is to actually be able to use a sword in a way that wouldn't leave you dead, then no, not everything has a practical use.

    When comparing Iai (pretty much regardless of line... in this sense I am only talking about legit historical forms, not some of the modern made-up stuff seen around the place) and Haidong Gumdo, the way you describe things isn't really the case. It's far more a comparison between playing paintball and training in the army. To be blunt.

    b.) Do you have any appreciation that Korean sword was used in the Korean army all the way up until the disbanding of the Korean Army in 1904? Ever heard of the USS Sherman? Korean soldiers who went to fight with the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese war took their swords…..not the items that the Japanese abandoned and then re-acqu8ired in the 1930-s. BTW: If Japanese sword is such a huge part of Japanese Culture and is so highly revered how come the entire country wanted to do away with----DID do away with the KATANA until the Jap. Army decided to give it another go. Sorta missed that little bit of history didn’t ya?

    A1.)See, now, I'd disagree with that. Sure, aspects such as correct body position, balance etc are part of it, but that's not the real thrust of the patterns themselves. What they are really teaching is far more to do with the application of tactics, distancing, angling etc, with a major emphasis on the application of tactics. And, in that sense, while it's not a realistic representation of a fight, it is very much to do with actual combat. To think that it doesn't is to miss entirely the point.
    Quote:
    A2.)Different is fine. The cutting methods of Katori Shinto Ryu are different to those of Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, which are different to MJER/MSR, which are slightly different to Seitei Iai, which is different to Kukishin Ryu, which is different to Yagyu Shingan Ryu, which is different to Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, which is different to Tatsumi Ryu, which is different to Sekiguchi Ryu, which is different to Yakumaru Jigen Ryu, which is different to Tenshinsho Jigen Ryu, which is different to Ono-ha Itto Ryu, which is different to Kashima Shinryu, which is different to Kashima Shinden Jikishinkage Ryu.... but the thing is, none of these contravene the basic idea of not doing things that would get you killed. When we talk about the problems with overcutting, what should be remembered is that the distancing for sword is incredibly tight, as is the timing. What that means is that the cost of overcutting is that, if the opponent evades, even by the slimmest of margins, you cannot recover before they kill you. There isn't an attitude of berating Korean sword methods because they're not Japanese, there's an attitude from the experienced sword practitioners of berating the methods and mechanics seen in Korean sword because they would get you killed... and, in that sense, they are not realistic examples of swordsmanship. They're playing with swords.

    B1.) Standard Japanese Marketing. “Ya, I see what yer doing ….BUT WE do the real stuff.” Its right up there with the Japanese position that only Japanese Nationals can truly understand BUDO. Everybody else is just fooling around and pretending.
    B2.) More of the same. Kool-aid is still Kool-aid….even if it’s made in Japan.


    a.) This would only hold water if the design of the swords were notably different. But when the sword used by the Korean systems is essentially a copy of the Japanese one, to the point where many Korean systems and practitioners simply use Japanese and Japanese-style blades, that argument disappears pretty quickly.

    b.) Chris, you DO understand that Korean swordsmanship has 6 different sword architectures, right? I mean, you DO know that right? Two of those sword architectures are polearms. You knew that right? I mean, please tell me that we have not been wasting our time trying to educate someone who thinks that Korean sword is all about using a ssangsoodo. Please tell me you are not that uninformed.

    a.) Say's who? Say's the people who's training is based in practical and historical usage of the weapon, those who have developed an understanding of what is correct and useful, whose skills and methods come directly from the stress of battle...

    b.) You’re kidding right? The “stress of battle”? What have you been drinking? The TOKUGAWA Shogunate started in the 17th Century. There had not been a conflict until the Satusuma Rebellion in the 19th Century. Dueling had been out-lawed which is why, IF it happened it had to happen in obscure places outside of anyone’s domain. The Satsuma Clan was subdued by a modern-trained Japanese Army. No sword play. The Japanese tried to use the sword in the Russo-Japanese War and were stunned at how ineffective it was; part of the reason they stopped using it. I’m beginning to think that you have no real idea of what you are talking about and this has been a total waste of my time.

    a.)You've been asked repeatedly to show any other form, Bruce. So far, you have mentioned references in old texts (from the end of the 16th Century), but there has been nothing to suggest that anything done today is even related to the references you've made. Additionally, the way you're reading that text is at odds with most other texts of that time or later, and could very easily be your misinterpretation (as I mentioned earlier). So really, if there is something else that we should be aware of, present it. Otherwise you're basically just saying that we don't know, but expect us to accept that you have some other system which doesn't feature the issues found in all other forms so far presented.

    b.)Yes, there are books. The MUYE JEBO (1610), MUYE SHINBO (1759), MUYE TOBO TONG JI (1795), as well as the BONJO MUYE SIP PAL BAN (1754). There are also documents more than 200 that were reviewed to write the MUYE TOBO TONG JI. There also the “Veritable Annals of the YI”, the official record of the CHOSON Dynasty (1395 – 1910). There are also a line of practitioners who lead up to the present moment and include folks like myself. (see: Post #53 “I can only respond in my own personal experience, and, unfortunately, my experience reinforces exactly what you point up, for the most part. The single most authentic Korean sword that I have seen is that practice proceeding from the KIM Kwang Seok, who began studying SIB PAL KI under YUN Meong Deok in 1951, and opened his SIB PAL KI school in 1969. Between 1987 and 2002, Grandmaster Kim wrote four books on the history and techniques of traditional Korean martial arts seeking to preserve the practices. CHOI Bok-Kyu grew-up to become the foremost advocate for traditional Korean practices by becoming a student of SIB PAL KI master KIM Kwang Seok and devoting both his Masters and Doctorate dissertations to the research of Korean martial traditions. While a number of students of Grandmaster Kim have broken away to start their own groups, Kim's organization has continued to delve ever-deeper into the practice of Korean sword in its own right.”

    a.)Speaking for myself, I have repeatedly stated that I'm open to the idea, and have asked for evidence to be presented. Can you actually do that?
    b.)I just did.
    a.)Zanshin. But that's not something present in the clips shown, I have to say...
    b.)Jan Shim. Its called Jan Shim (lit: “lingering mind” 잔 심 ( 残心 ) but I guess you knew that already. I am also guessing that you probably wouldn’t know it if it came up and bit you. The only thing you seem to know is some "rah-rah" (aka: "cheerleader-speak). Somebody sold you bill of goods one day and now you are stuck with it. You can't use it and you can't bring yourself to throw it away.

    Know what though? I’m really tired of this and when I get tired I get cranky….and that just means I’m gonna wind up down on your level and acting like you.
    Want to know anything else? Read a book.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  15. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member

    If you have a look around you'll find certain koryu do indeed have waza for dealing with an adversary at a number of positions and dealing with them as they came. Face it at the end of the day efficiency is king and you deal with aggression as it comes, otherwise you're bouncing around in your own OODA without getting anywhere.

    Everything from sitting down to walking down the road getting sucker punched/knifed.

    I'd be interesting to hear more on the points you make on archery especially when you consider kyuba no michi......
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2012
  16. ludde

    ludde Valued Member

    b.) Boy are YOU fulla beans! The Japanese themselves define multiple encounters as a series of rapid but individual encounters even if only fractionally so. To not directly face one’s opponent has been historically dishonorable. Archers were considered blatant cowards and people who wielded a spear were considered little better. This is also why alternate Japanese methods developed among non-Samurai class such as the Business Community and the notorious YAKUZA have always been held in distain. These alternate forms allow for striking and thrusting at attackers without actually turning to face them “man-to-man” as it were. Gees, do YOU need some education.

    What!!!!! Where do you get this from Bruce! Are you telling us that the alternate way of dealing with multiple opponent is by thrusting and cutting in some general direction? That the Japanese way of doing it face to face is because it would be dishonorable not to!? It is out of need! Archers are blatant cowards? And those with spears too? I have not heard so much misinformation and myth believing since someone seriously argued that the reason for some kamae with the sword held behind the swordsman facing an opponent was because he protected the sword... with his body...

    Chris... a wall of text please!
     
  17. Bruce W Sims

    Bruce W Sims Banned Banned

    Little known Historical Fact:

    With the destruction of the Korean language through forcing Korean scholarship to use Japanese language, the availability of Korean-language dictionaries was almost nil. To expeditiously produce such dictionaries publishing companies took Japanese dictionaries and "reversed them". Got that little tidbit from Kim Dojunim (YONG SUL KWAN).

    I mention this because we are all aware of the "lazy man's scholarship". I noticed you didn't quote Henthorne or Palais. What did you do; zip over to WIKI for some cut and paste? Just like those Korean publishers you were so much in a hurry to count coup that you didn't even care where you got your info from. Did that same source mention that in the 1970-s there were over 700 identified collaborators still holding positions in South Korea? How about the murder of nearly 10000 Koreans by Sygman Rhee? No, I bet not. You got your material from generic sources that put out sanitized material for general consumption. How very proud you must be.
     
  18. Bruce W Sims

    Bruce W Sims Banned Banned

    Jesus, Dean...really? I mean, ....really, Dean? Do none of you folks EVER do any serious reading? I'm not talking about the monthly glossies; I'm talking actual historical research into what the heck you're doing. Ever? Ever, at all?

    I started in the 1960-s with BLACK BELT Magazine, and went to KICK and a chain of others. Its wasn't that long before I discovered how vapid that crap was so I started grabbing Draeger and a bunch of others. And when those petered-out I started with National Histories. I've been passionate about MA since 1973 and I cannot believe how little you folks know about Martial Arts. Its like someone opened your heads one day and poured some "Idea Concrete" into your head....and when that stuff hardened-up that was the last time you had any flexibility in your thinking. I truly apologize if this offends you...thats not my intention, honestly. Its just that every time I try to have an intelligent discussion about something, I feel like I have to spend half my time getting folks up to speed on the facts. It really wears me down. You folks are getting YOUR needs met by getting a free Education courtesy of my information, sources and experience, but after a while I start wondering what I'M getting out of this. Know what I mean? FWIW.

    (sorry for the rant......its the end of the day and Chris burnt me out.)

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
     
  19. pgsmith

    pgsmith Valued dismemberer

    Bruce,
    You're knowledge of Japanese and samurai history is terrible, so you should refrain from attempting to use it to make points. To begin, the samurai were first and foremost horse archers. Archery was considered the epitome of what it meant to be a warrior, not something shameful. Second, the primary warfare weapon was the bow and the spear. Swords were strictly side arms, and were mainly used in one on one confrontations, not on the battlefield. Third, all of this came about because it was mentioned that the video examples given of Korean sword target cutting were poor examples of proper sword useage. This is abundantly evident from the often mentioned excessive use of force, over use of the upper body, and poor positioning of the sword during and after the act of cutting. These things are universal, whether we are discussing Japanese, European, or Korean swordsmanship. When asked why you would defend those clips and what you would look for, that is when you became terribly defensive and started trying to explain all about Korean sword arts.

    Stop and take a deep breath, and perhaps we can get back to the original question, which regarded the practicality of Haidong Gumdo.

    P.S. Never mind. I just read your rant, and it's obviously not worth attempting to pursue.
     
  20. ludde

    ludde Valued Member

    You are buying in to the fanboyisme crap Bruce. Read a book by Karl Friday. You Bruce should open your mind and do some education.

    http://www.koryu.com/library/kfriday2.html Start with this.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page