Common explanations for pattern movements continue to be lacking

I don't keep up with the broader TKD world much these days, but since I've been looking at bunkai videos again my feed sends me TKD stuff. Today I came across this video from Lee DongHee's channel, explanating the purpose of the supporting hand in the double knifehand block. And it's... not great.

After stating that the purpose of the reaction hand is to add power, LHD states that the purpose of the secondary arm in the double knifehand block is... also to add power. Because swinging with both arms is more powerful than one.

So which adds more power? The single knifehand block (which has a pulling hand) or the double knifehand block aka guarding block? Why train both techniques?

In fact, I think the "power" either adds is negligible. The supporting hand in the guarding block has multiple applications, but they all require moving past the block-strike-only paradigm.

Three common double knifehand block aka guarding block applications.

The above are just basic applications. More esoteric applications include a parry-pass, a knockdown throw or sukui nage, a chicken wing lock, a head crank, or holding a leg with the supporting arm. 

I don't want to criticize him too much because LHD is at least analyzing poomsae moves and has produced some application stuff in the past. But I would not tell students the supporting hand "adds power". 

He provides a second, better, explanation: the supporting hand is there as a guard so you can quickly strike. This is obviously true in some patterns, but in modern boxing we tend to keep our guard close to our face rather than chest, though it is true that in older bareknuckle boxing they kept a lower guard so they could defend against tackles.

 

On the ITF side of things, there's the Tul World podcast. There was a recent episode asking if the double forearm block (karate's morote uke) is secretly a strike. They point to a section of the Encyclopedia where General Choi says it could be used as a strike. One of the hosts, a 4th Dan, says "obviously it's a block because we call it a block". A few things came to mind:

1. It's not unusual that Gen. Choi said a block could be used as a strike. Choi also said the W-shape-block could be a strike and the 9-shape-block could be a wrist break. These movements have multiple uses. I feel this should be karate and taekwondo 101
2. Choi's explanations for movements changed over time. The problem with going with "only what Choi said" is that Choi himself changed the explanation of movements. As I discussed with the 1959 version of Sam-Il, the "reverse-knifehand guarding block" was originally described as a "strike", and the double arc-hand block was a combined knifehand rising block and palm strike. Explanations for movements in other patterns clearly changed between Choi's 1965 book and the Encyclopedia. 
3. No mention of the karate connection.

Iain Abernethy applying the morote uke from Pinan Shodan. You can use the same application in Toi-Gye

 

The comments to the episodes are not much more enlightening, although one comment came from a self-described "SEA kickboxer" who says the double forearm is "neither a block or a strike but a shove". He at least has discovered the movement doesn't work as a block, but he is still trying to apply the movement in a pure kickboxing context. 

Tul World produced another episode about punching with the palm on the forearm in Yoo-Sin after the two x-blocks. It's this movement.

 

I actually covered an application for this movement in a previous post. But one of the hosts, the 9th-Dan, suggests that the preceding x-knifehand rising block is "hiding your rear hand". And so the reason the left palm is there is because you sneakily punched after hiding your right fist.

Again, this is an attempt to fit everything into the block-strike-only paradigm. But with even a little analysis it makes no sense. The previous movement is an x-knifehand rising block. You are not hiding your rear hand; you are raising both palms over your head. Even if you were hiding your rear hand, why place the palm on your forearm instead of bringing it back to guard?

A different application for the movement in Yoo-Sin?

The hosts also mention the second movement of Won-Hyo. They say that some schools, but not them, teach that the purpose of bringing the front fist in is pulling in the opponent. (Ironically, General Choi also mentioned this in his 1959 book about move 2 of Heian Nidan). They instead teach that it "adds power". They also mention the supporting arm for the front backfist strike, as found in Gae-Baek but originally from kata Naihanchi. They say it "supports posture".

While it's neat that the two hosts analyze some of the weirder movements from patterns, they never come to any interesting conclusions. They dismiss any grappling explanations and stick to standard explanations about posture or power.

And I get it. The sparring that ITF taekwondo does is kickboxing. While I've interacted with individuals who claimed to train "military taekwondo" back in the 70s and 80s with locks and throws as part of the curriculum, the bulk of ITF students do not train those. So they try to relate the movements in patterns to kickboxing, even though that's not what the movements were originally for. They were developed for hoshinsul, or self-defense sets, which in taekwondo has always contained a mix of striking and grappling.

So what's the solution? If you train for "self-defense" or just want to integrate your forms with function, it's a good idea to learn some grappling in a safe way. That's what kata-based sparring attempts to do. If you train martial arts just for fun or fitness, you might not care. But a part of me that thinks it's intellectually dishonest to say these pattern movements "add power" or "support posture" when there are clearly better explanations available.