Talk:Soo Bahk Do

Untitled
The most notable thing about this martial art appears to be the belt colors? Cmon people you can do better than that.Peter Rehse 07:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The art seems to be another name for Tang Soo Do - look at the external links.Peter Rehse 00:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

OK I changed the entire page to a redirect.Peter Rehse 02:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Merging with tang soo do
Not all Tang Soo Do is derived from Moo Duk Kwan. Also, the Moo Duk Kwan as it practices it's basics and alters the way it performs hyungs has differentiated itself from Tang Soo Do. It's about time a new page was created. BTW, I am a TSD practitioner. JWLuiza (talk) 06:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Soo Bahk Do related content should not be merged with any other content. SooBahkDo 05:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) - Tang Soo Do and Soo Bahk Do are two very different systems, despite the similar techniques and training. The late Kwan Jang Nim made his martial art partly as a way to define Korean martial arts away from Japanese influence, Tang Soo Do was largely influenced by the Japanese. Of course, late Grandmaster Hwang Kee undoubtedly had inspiration from the Japanese, but this martial art is a traditional KOREAN martial art, and should not be merged with something that differs largely in history. (History not being the only difference, of course.) I personally have not ever trained under Tang Soo Do, having only ever trained Soo Bahk Do. But take the Yuk Roh forms for example, the Six Roads(Paths). They were created by Hwang Kee to show how Soo Bahk Do is different in application, and to merge this with Tang Soo Do would be a great insult to his memory. Of course, this is only a minor aspect of his legacy (this Wiki page, that is) but it still matters. When people look from the outside, I think that he would prefer to have them notice the difference between Soo Bahk Do and Tang Soo Do, if this were not enforced, why not just call everything 'karate' as many people already do? - Soo Bahk Do and Tang Soo Do should -not- be merged. (This excerpt written by a practitioner of Soo Bahk Do who has currently achieved E Dan rank. The second level of Dan, who are the blue belts. Can be loosely related to black belts of other martial arts. The philosophy for the blue belt is one of the many ways that Soo Bahk Do is indeed unique.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.201.218.226 (talk) 02:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Soo Bahk Do and Tang soo do are pretty difference. According to Tang soo do site, "Tang Soo Do is a composite style, being 60% Soo Bahk Do, 30% northern Chinese and 10% southern Chinese kicking techniques, for which Tang Soo Do is unsurpassed, are based on Soo Bahk." Only 60% of Tang soo do skills are smilar with Soo Bahk. Manacpowers (talk) 11:57, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Registered Service Mark
Soo Bahk Do is a federally registered service mark (USPTO 3,103,190) of the U.S. Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation, Inc. Unauthorized use is prohibited. SooBahkDo 05:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Registered Trademark
Moo Duk Kwan is a federally registered trademark (USPTO 3,023,145) as is the fist logo (USPTO 1,446,944 and 3,119,287) of the U.S. Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation Inc. Unauthorized use is prohibited. SooBahkDo 05:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Soo Bahk Do Protection
SOO BAHK DO, MOO DUK KWAN and the FIST LOGO are registered trademarks representing to the public ONE thing, the ONLY SOURCE of legitimate training and certifications in the MOO DUK KWAN martial art system. Counterfeiters and unauthorized users of trademarks are subject to legal action. The literal translations are subserviant to the trademark status of this phrase and representing the MOO DUK KWAN phrase as anything other than the trademark that it is, could contribute to public confusion and could even be considered tortuous interference of the trademark owner's rights.


 * The U.S. Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation http://soobahkdo.com has prevailed in 100% of all cases where it sought relief from individuals and organizations engaged in trademark infringement for use of the trademarked phrase MOO DUK KWAN the trademarked FIST LOGO and the service mark SOO BAHK DO. Furthermore, unauthorized "usage" of a trademark by an infringer is still a violation of federal trademark law regardless of the duration of infringement. "Usage" of phrases or emblems that are confusingly similar to a registered trademark will be held by the courts as a violation of the trademark owner's rights. The court awarded damages available to a trademark holder may increase substantialy with the duration of an infringer's activity. Trademark infringement is a bit like speeding, just because you have gotten away with speeding for a long time does not make it legal and when you are caught speeding you will pay the price.  http://soobahkdo.editme.com/TrademarksAndLogosPublic

SooBahkDo 05:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.195.186.185 (talk) 04:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

This article should be merged with a Tang Soo Do article that talks about the older use of the term Tang Soo Do and Hwang Kee's Tang Soo Do Moo Duk Kwan. Soo Bahk Do is not a new martial art or style. It is Hwang Kee's Tang Soo Do, Moo Duk Kwan, Hwa Soo Do, or whatever you want to call it. The entire definition of Soo Bahk Do is Hwang Kee's Tang Soo Do. User5802 04:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * See This. "The Kwan Jang Nim realized the importance and value of 'Soo Bahk' as an art form and he named it 'Soo Bahk Do' and started its promotion in 1957."


 * and This. "The traditional Korean martial art Soo Bahk Do (pronounced 'Sue Bach Doe'), was founded by Kwang Jang Nim Hwang Kee in 1957."


 * and This. "...Grandmaster Hwang Kee changed the name to Soo Bahk Do' in 1957..."


 * and This!. "After translation of the ancient script, the name Soo Bahk Do was adopted by the Moo Duk Kwan."

User5802 05:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Well if anyone making contributions thus far is a Soo Bahk Do practitioner then we probably share similar feelings on the less the distinguished manner our Art has been defined. Further investigation reveals that our Style; Moo Duk Kwan, is steeped in unnecessary controversy. Merging Soo Bahk Do and Tang Soo Do and the Moo Duk Kwan should be considered with a team of people contributing to the project. First, there are source documents to use as reference. Second, as with many martial arts, it must be accepted that some information is simply handed down. The late Kwang Jang Nim Hwang Kee established the Moo Duk Kwan during a difficult time in Korean history. There is historical reference that at least five different Kwan’s opened in Seoul after Korea was liberated from the Japanese. There is also historical reference that a movement occurred to Nationalize a distinctly Korean martial art, of which Kwang Jang Nim Hwang Kee rejected. His stand caused some mixed emotions among the various Kwan’s. Some sought to discredit Hwang Kee, however, there can be no dispute that both Tang Soo Do and Soo Bahk Do exist today, and that the Moo Duk Kwan continues to grow. Recommend that the Moo Duk Kwan be the main page, and that Soo Bahk Do and Tang Soo Do redirect to that page and that a team of people work on the Moo Duk Kwan page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.250.137 (talk) 15:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that's getting closer to the right path User5802 08:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Definitely. Since we are mostly all practitioners of the art, I have this to ask, has anyone gone to the 120th Dan Shim Sa(Black Belt Test)? I went as a first gup and hopefully I passed.68.45.117.23 22:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Capitals
Are all those capitals really needed in this article? Sure the federation uses those letters themselves, but it really looks like a newb has been overusing his caps in this wiki right now... TheZeroorez 14:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Understanding the Belt Ranking System.
Rank in Soo Bahk Do is a privilege despite age or physical ability. It is a marker of mental and physical credential cultivated from years or decades of training under the direction of certified instructors. Students and parents alike can expect a journey that will take them to new levels of self-confidence, positive self-esteem, mental and physical wellbeing and above all membership in a worldwide organization the Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan Federation. Through consistent Soo Bahk Do training and marked progress, students are invited to “test” for rank promotion. Candidates are required to own a uniform a belt and join the “Federation” before their first test. The Federation is the administrative arm of our Art that documents test certifications and coordinates a host of other regional/national endeavors. Studio “Gup tests” are usually conducted one Saturday of each month at the discretion of the studio owner and cost $30 plus an additional $5 - $7 if a new belt and uniform trim are required. Students start at white belt, 10th gup and progress to orange, green and red belt earning stripes between each gup level to 1st gup and black belt candidacy. Gup test candidates are eligible to test a minimum of three month after their last examination by invitation. There are no age requirements therefore students who assert themselves are eligible for Cho Dan (black belt) candidacy as their progress and certified instructors permit. In general, students require at least 5 years of continuous training and PVT participation to reach the level of black belt in Soo Bahk Do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MissBuhrmann (talk • contribs) 22:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-Working
There are essentially four articles often saying the same things to the point it is very difficult to tell one from the other and why there are the four articles. Hwang Kee is the central figure and has his own page - some of his history in each page seems ok but not an expanded version in each of Moo Duk Kwan, Tang Soo Do and Soo Bahk Do. It should be clearer what separates each of the styles from each other - my feeling is that they should all be merged into one. Frankly if you remove the Biography and Belt color information you have very little left.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:34, 18 July 2012 (UTC)