Concerning hapkido

Personally...IMHO....you have already done a fine job of demonstrating what you believe....or at least WANT to believe. Have at it. I just don't happen to agree....nor do I feel particularly responsible in trying to correct your misconceptions in spite of you.

Your thoughts and welcome to them.

BTW: I would tip-toe pretty carefully around telling me what the nature of Academic Hapkido is about. It took more than a few years to restructure YON MU KWAN material in a fashion that reflects the Academic Educational model. No it wasn't just one more hashed-together compendium of MA techniques stolen from other sources. It was a tough, bio-mechanical examination-by-examination. And while the rest of the money-driven jerks were pumping my late teacher for all they could get from him I was actually listening and writing....then listening and writing some more. Folks such as youself, FUSEN, come on a Forum like this and hav e available to you Decades worth of information and experience and the best you can do is trifle with it. Even my teacher's own students have stepped away from his traditions and started palying fast and loose with the material. Sooooo....where are all of those people who used to give me such a hard time about Hapkido? Why they have moved on to other arts, other organizations, and other businesses.

Not that I have any issues about any of this, right ?

 

No beliefs here, just an evolving set of theories constantly adjusted via to new experience.

But thanks for the input.

 

Just a tweek:

The Koreans had instruments very similar to the Japanese Policing instruments, including nets, snares, lasso-s, iron bars and trunchoens. The methods of encountering these items and dealing with them successfully is seen in Korean GEUM BEOP. I am sure that as a YAWARA practitioner Choi was probably familiar with these items on a simple and pragmatic basis. I'm guessing, however, that some of his students may have had more experience with these things than he. For example, my late teacher took his first MA lessons with his father in KUMDO and this material formed the basis for his sword material at the YON MU KWAN. My own training in Korean sword exceeded my teacher. And so it goes.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

Bruce:

Either your "answer" was vague to the point of being completely devoid of concrete information or I've simply missed it. If so, my bad. Could you post a link to the post? And if you notice, there were three questions there. Sort of a flow chart. If the post in question doesn't cover the later points, could you supplement it?

Really it's not so much about "watching someone burn" as it is about getting actual facts and supporting evidence instead of vague musings and suggestions. Unfortunately when people lack that substance they almost always lash out and make with the whole "oh you guys just want to harass me" thing. I'm hoping that's not the case here but it's been looking that way for a while now.

You obviously have a problem with the lack of "real hapkido" out there. If you have it, show us. If you can't, don't expect anyone take your authoritatively stated opinions on it seriously.


EDIT: In case it didn't come through before, I'm looking for some kind of tangible example of "the real ultimate" combat stuff you keep talking about that's distinct from commonly practiced skills in martial arts today. You didn't really need to latch onto the "Do you have experience with/access to such" part. It was secondary.

 

Fact is, K-J, my position here is very simple and to the point and for an embellishment on the theme you can check out the other thread I started on my current search to find a Hapkido school in the area I have moved into. Lets make this short and to the point.

a.) Traditional Hapkido----Hapkiyusool---is nasty business; it just is. It proceeds from material that was intended to debilitate the opponent, perhaps take a persons life if need be. If you need a citation go get Don Draeger out of mothballs and read his history on the origins of YAWARA. Nuff said.

b.) Modern Hapkido---- see JI Han Jae--- took HAPKIYUSOOL and HAPKIYUKWONSOOL and added lots of acrobatic Kicking and softened the techniques to make them less painful. Reason? Ji wanted to make Hapkido a vital competitor to TAEKWONDO. In fairness to the other source of Hapkido, KIM Moo Woong, at least HE still taught the kicking to be debilitating in its own right and not acrobatic or a set-up for some other technique as did Ji. Still with me?

c.) Now enter "preasure training" or whatever other "reality based" training you want to call it. Suddenly people who have been training in Hapkido are finding their material is not working. Why? Because the techniques were modified to make them marketable to the common population of Hobbyists and not for people who are actually training to USE the material despite the probability of never having to. As I had told my students semester after semester. Hapkido techniques when done correctly are the techniques that stop the conflict. If a person is using "good" Hapkido in a sport encounter, that person should probably "foul-out" in the first few minutes.

d.) Lastly....and this is supported by my current school search......the majority of people who say they train in Hapkido are few and none. Why? Because its painful, demanding and often monotonous. There are few people who follow a full-scale curriculum and fewer places that offer such. The conclusion I make is that if a person is interested in Traditional Hapkido they need to be willing to give more than they take and that is just not the way the Modern World comes together.

Now...thats my postiion in 4 sections. What part of what I just wrote DON'T you understand?

 

Hello all,

The idea that Hapkido started as "traditional" in 1948 and became "modern" when Choi Dojunim was done dealing with most of the Seoul groups in 1969 is questionable.

I think its far more sensible to assume that the low and medium ranked students of Choi Dojunim that broke away are simply no longer doing Hapkido, but something else of their own creation.

The fact that so much of the tech issue from these people does not work is testement to te fact they did not learn the curriculum in it's entirety.

There is no "more deadly Hapkido" and we don't tech anything so deadly we gotta keep it hidden from the general public. It is after all the fight in then dog, not the dog in the fight. In addition, other than some conditioning we might do for specific body parts, Hapkido is no more painful to learn than other arts...each has its area of concentration that some may see as painful...never forget the chest high front kick I got from Leon Kuhn, a Shotokan Black belt, glad I didn't have to get those daily!

Most of us in the Hapkido world don't spend time with overly defining "gradations" of Hapkido....it is or it is not. Some of the "nots" appear to be great martial arts, others well, not so much.

 

1) Its interesting your saying this to people with years in koryu yawara.

2) So your entire system is too deadly to spar. How lovely for you!

 

Not true. But HKD, as far as I've learned it, simply doesn't lend itself to typical sparring situations. Bruce never said it was too deadly, he said that an HKD practitioner using "good" (his words) HKD would foul out. That's not the same as being too deadly.

In sparring, its implied that grabbing, and employing breaking techniques isnt allowed due to the safety aspect. Which makes sense to me. Well, if you remove our breaking, grabbing and throwing then you've limited us tremendously and we're no longer using HKD as an entity.

To say all MAs are suitable for sparring is like saying all cars are suitable for indy racing. Yeah, they can certainly get out there and get around the track as fast as they can.... but it's not what they're designed for so they'll do it poorly. Whats the sense in that?

 

the above must be why hapkido did so well in the early ufc where the only rules were no gauging and.... well thats it you werent even allowed to tap lol, or the early japanese events where even eye gauging was used...oh wait my bad it never stepped up then and did anything either

All arts are suitable for sparring, all techniques might not be suitable, but you could go down the judo route and spar with the suitable ones and drill the dangerous ones....but of course that would mean competing openly and then your students might wonder why they are losing and leave you so better to simply say we are to deadly to spar in any format and when hapkido does spar and loses its because they dont have the real hapkido....my lord its like the 90's all over again

 

Grabbing, throwing and breaking are all allowed in most grappling rulesets, and in MMA even more is allowed such as soccer kicking grounded opponants in some orgs.

 

I simply cannot believe that I am being that obscure. Apparently Mikey did not have any problem understanding what I was commujnicating. I am left to consider that folks who are NOT in the Hapkido community are so founded in their views that they cannot hear anything else. I've reread my posts a couple of times and worked to misinterpret the message along the lines that are mentioned here. The only way it happens is if people make the conscious choice not to understand what is written and continually interject their own thinking. The result is a constant stream of "then you mean this......".
No....I meant exactly what I wrote. Read what I wrote. Or are folks simply looking for a bit of "Post-Baiting" and all of the rest of this is just so much taunting?

 

Guys, I dont have all the answers. I've only been at HKD for a few years. I've never trained MMA, or Judo or any of the like, so forgive me if I can't speak more intelligently about them and how HKD would translate.

Icefield, you made a fair point (right before you got a teeeny bit snotty), that all arts are suitable for sparring in some fashion or another. I'm sure even Ninjutsu could be made suitable. I'll go so far as to say that even MARBO (gasp) could be made suitable. You'll get no argument from me there.

I think though, from where I stand and what I've learned, to make that work in what I've seen on tv (which doesnt really have locks or breaks as such, but more so chokes and variations on armbars [which I know are breaks, but I'm not getting that technical so bare with me], and a LOT of punching and kicking to the face) it seems HKD would have to morph into TKD with less tourney tricks. Which isnt HKD at all.

If I stood there, in the ring, against what I've seen on TV, honestly, I couldn't use the parts of HKD that make it unique. Maybe someone else could, and probably can, so please dont make a sweeping assumption based on my statement alone. Its not fair. In fact, it's rather akin to the sweeping assumptions I made in the MMA thread which I got fairly pounded on for.

The parts of HKD that I find make it unique are its approaches to situations where its not two opponents in garb, with a ring, and gloves, who know they're both martial artists and are out to pummel one another. It's HKDs ability to handle a situation that arises suddenly, with no prep, against an attacker that has no idea you have any training, or you, he. The element of surprise is so huge in HKD - again, based on just what I've learned. An opponent confronts you, say throws an awkward punch, you react, Oh-Jee (sp) block, trap, pull it to the beltline, pivot, knife hand to the back of the neck, fan break, with sweep and send the guy onto his back, break the wrist, move to arm bar, and then decide what to do next. Thats not sparring that I've ever seen... but its HKD as I've seen it.

It's not about standing toe to toe and slugging it out. I think that's the part that we seem to get ruffled on. Many arts are like that, but not all. Now, having said that, COULD there be a sparring scenario FOR HKD? I think so. But it would require a fair bit of control on the part of the participants. I think I'd find that brilliantly interesting and a damn good idea!

Again, all this is just from my tiny slice of experience. Please dont let this serve as an HKD wide statement.

 

Bruce, I think it stems from a lack of exposure to HKD philosophies and principles. Many of the stylists here are from MMA, or Karate (used generically), etc, which have different approaches.

I've always been told not to use my techniques unless I have no choice and then, when it comes to it, use them with all I have. That simple thought, to me, makes HKD not very readily translatable to typical sparring as I've seen it. Which isn't saying much as I'm positive the bit I've seen isn't even a dent.

Again, I'm sure it could be done, but in order to allow it to function in its full form, it would take an incredible amount of control on the part of the players. It's not like TKD where you can get padded up and tell folks only to punch here. You cant get pads to stop a wrist break or a knee kick, or a finger to the throat...

 

Kevin, in YOUR case you are in the Hapkido community and know very well what I am communicating so I am wondering at your posturing that what I am writing is somehow beyond your ken.

Choi taught one thing. Later it was modified then modified again and has been repeatedly rehashed. Choi taught one thing and Ji taught something else. I am repeating the position that you stated months ago on another forum. Why do you suddenly play as though this is something new?

Starting with Ji and Kim in the 1960-s we have HapkiDO. That means that Choi's material was embellished with Kicks, stikes, locks and throws that Choi didn't teach but which Ji though would make the material he had learned more saleable. This is Modern Hapkido....which should be differentiated from Traditional Hapkido AKA Hapkiyusool. But you know all of this since you made this case months ago. Why act like this is something new?

Lastly this stuff about "deadly" is just a lot of theatre. If a person learns Hapkido the way that its taught and uses it as it is meant to be used, lethal force can easily become part of the equation. My White Belts know at least one lethal technique by the time they are halfway through their White Belt material. They don't KNOW that they know it, but its there.

But the bit that really gnaws at me is representing that Hapkido is "no more painful to learn than any other art". Maybe thats YOUR experience but it wasn't mine, nor was it my teachers nor was it the experience of dozens of people who tried HAPKIYUSOOL with Choi and quit because it was too painful.
I dodn't know this for a fact but there is some part of me that wonders if a goodly portion of what you do is Marketing rather than telling the truth. Thats for another thread.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

I'm sure you are right, Mikey. Most of the time I feel as though I am shoveling through years of misrepresentation and and just plain "BS" and there is no way in the World I can correct all of that. Its the same with Korean sword. Start talking about GEUM BEOP and its amazing how all of the misinformation attached to KUMDO and HAE DONG KUMDO comes out of the woodwork. The fact that a lot of this stuff was heaped-up by the Koreans themselves does not help either. It would help if there was at least SOME scholarship involved but most of this just seems to be "chat-room" quality. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

Ya gotta work with watcha got, Bruce

As they say in my business, speak TO your audience, never at them... even if it means drawing pictures in crayon, lol...

 

Those of use in the yawara community Have different views to yourself due to having different experiences and hence having what would possibly be a more experienced viewpoint to yourself.

However in saying that theres a few posts of your describing competative weapons sparring bouts you have undergone. In these I belive you mention how easy it was for your opponants to close the distance and grapple / use yawara on you, and this is despite you having the 'true hapkido' experience.
So which is it true hapkido is yawara and hence great. But those pesky freespares use grappling / yawara yourself far too easily.

 

so from the above we are led to believe HKD doesnt work one on one in a situation both you and your opponent are ready for and where the rules are very limited and there are no weapons and your opponent deosnt have any friends.....but it does work if you are suddenly attacked by one or more guys who might have weapons and are not playing by any rules.... anyone else see the problem with this?

 

nope some got it, we just thought it such a discredited and tired old argument that we had to make sure you were using it seriously

And coming from you the old "you reading but not understanding and only reading what you want to read" argument is hilarious