Difference between Combat Hapkido and Regular Hapkido?

I know someone's gonna be like "you're a black belt you should know this already". But whatever

Can anyone explain to me the difference between "combat hapkido" and regular Hapkido? I've heard the term "combat hapkido" used around here but I've never heard it otherwise

Thanks for correcting my ignorance

~ Lea

 

In all honesty, I get the feeling people throw in the word "combat" to make themselves feel like they are not doing a completely traditional martial art. I think it makes them feel cooler. The only difference I could imagine is "combat" hapkido incorporates sparring in their training, while the ol' joe schmoe hapkido doesn't. That's always been my experience when people throw "combat" in front of anything. I could be wrong though.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Hapkido

http://www.dsihq.com/combat-hapkido.html

Basically its supposed to be a no-nonsense approach to HKD founded by John Pellegrini if I understand it right.

 

Combat Hapkido is a specific style of Hapkido (ratified in Korea I think?) founded by John Pellegrini.
I did a version of it where the combat Hapkido syllabus was the core of what we did (with some additions the instructor liked).
No ideahow similar it is the other forms of Hapkido though.
It had the full gamut of joint locks, breakaways, etc.
Combat Hapkido has added some BJJ and filipino stick stuff too (I think).

 

Thomas (Morrison) teaches COMBAT HAPKIDO and is a well-informed advocate for the practice. The individual who originated the system had quite a bit of experience with YON MU KWAN Hapkido under the late MYUNG Kwang Sik. I have pretty much made a career of YMK Hapkido so I have more than a little understanding of that. By comparison, Thomas has had a LOT of experience with C-H but maybe not so much with YMK. Perhaps if you could give me specifics of what you want to know, Thomas and I could work between the two of us to help you out. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

I'd be happy to try to help out with specific questions. I earned my 2nd dan in 'traditional' Hapkido (GM Myung Jae Nam's IHF) and try to stay at least informed of the various traditional hapkido groups out there. I also have earned a 4th dan in Combat Hapkido and have been an instructor in it for a while.

As far as the 'quick and easy' summary, here it goes.

(GM) John Pellegrini saw a niche in the martial arts for realistic self defense skills (late 80s, early 90s) and eventually looked into creating a practical system that would "bolt on" to established arts/programs, especially Taekwondo (which was very popular in the 80s and 90s). He looked into Hapkido (many TKD schools already were using Hapkido to supplement their self defense). Sources included GM Mike Wollmershauser and GM Myung Kwang-Shik (currently GM Pellegrini is considered a student of GM Seo In-Sun).

The general idea was to compress Hapkido down into its core concepts and ideas and simplify it, to make it easier to learn and easy to "add-on" to other arts. He dispensed with a lot of the more acrobatic breakfalls (kept the basic ones), and a lot of the strikes/kicks beyond a basic set (and got rid of high kicks, spin kicks, jumping kicks, etc). He also removed the traditional Korean weapons for the most part.

At first, the curriculum was organized into bundles of techniques (breakfalls, strikes, wrist grabs, bear hug defenses, etc) and they were set up to be taught either as a whole set or as an "a-la-carte type of deal" (e.g. if you wanted a couple of good bear hug defenses, you wouldn't need all 8 or 10, but you could try them out and pick a couple to use).

The main foundation for the art is the Hapkido 'core operating system' - at its basic core, it follows the key principles of HKD. However, it has been modified further - elements of Jeet Kune Do trapping were added in, as were Filipino stick and knife techniques, and 'Canemaster' style cane material. Later a ground grappling system was built in (with help from people like Pedro Rodriguez and Carlson Gracie). The new parts were fitted into the core Hapkido operating system.

Even today, there are parts being modified and changed as more research is done - nowadays the ground grappling is evolving into ground survival (David Rivas) and more work is being done as far as anatomical strategies (Mark Gridley). Very streamlined versions of Combat Hapkido are being worked into providing responses for very specific sets of demands and this has led to the creation of the Military Combatives and Police Defensive Tactics Programs - all Hapkido based but simplified and modified for specific purposes.

Later on, the system was re-configured - some techniques were removed, some added, some modified, and they were put into a belt rank system ranging up to 6th dan - formal ranking can be earned. Initially, a lot of people transferred in at higher levels or were promoted quickly to try to build up a federation. Nowadays, there is more oversight on quality and promotions.

There are a lot of controversies that go with Combat Hapkido - the afore-mentioned early days of fast promotion, GM Pellegrini's rapid rise through the ranks, and the biggest one, the use of the word 'Combat' used with 'Hapkido'.

GM Pellegrini chose to use the name "Hapkido" to pay homage to the roots of the art he created. The core system is Hapkido. (If he hadn't kept 'Hapkido' in there, you'd have a lot of people saying 'well, it's just simplified Hapkido'). He chose the word "Combat" to differentiate it from Traditional Hapkido, to show that it is NOT traditional Hapkido and that its main mission to be an art focused on practical self defense, even if that means going off the Hapkido path and filling in perceived gaps with Jeet June Do, Filipino Stick/knife, Brazilian Jujitsu, etc. It was probably not the best choice in names, but that's the spirit in which it was chosen.

As a Federation, it has grown a lot in the past (almost 20 years) and has weathered the bad while improving. I've been a member a long time and I like the video resources, the networking between member schools, the openness and encouragement of cross training, and the ease of going to seminars with GM Pellegrini. Seminars are awesome - very useful and a lot of 'bang for the buck'. The administrative side is well handled too (no paperwork problems and everything is done very quickly.

Anyway, if anyone has questions, fire away and I'll try to answer them.
www.dsihq.com

 

Thanks so much Thomas that answers my question and then some! You said you've trained in both, right? Which would you say you've preferred? (Just curious).

~ Lea

 

I really love both. I had actually started in Combat Hapkido when it was the initial 'bolt-on' program and I trained in it a bit (didn't rank) before I went to Korea to study traditional Hapkido. The basics I had already learned were enough to help with the initial language barrier and got me into a great program without feeling too far behind everyone else. When I came home and joined the Combat Hapkido school full time, my traditional Hapkido foundation made picking up Combat Hapkido much easier (I actually studied the curriculum and then was able to transfer my rank and come in at 2nd dan).

I know that the whole traditional Hapkido vs Combat Hapkido argument can get pretty ugly, but from my experience, students who train in one and then go to the other find the transition pretty easy (even given the wide variety of Hapkido schools and systems out there).

What I really like is the continued development of curriculum and the encouragement to share and cross train. It makes it a pretty dynamic art to study.

 

Excellent start, Thomas. You make it very easy for me to bump YMK up against your practice!! Thank you.

@ OP:

Like Combat Hapkido, YON MU KWAN Hapkido has a set of KEBONSU (Ie. "Core Techniques"). These ten techniques embody the physical and conceptual principles from which all other techniques in the sytem proceed. Think of the KEBONSU being the "hub" of the wheel and all other techniques proceeding from the hub as spokes.

The YON MU KWAN "hub" is made up of ten techniques, and it might follow that there are ten lines proceeding from this hub. However, COMBAT Hapkido may have more or less elements in its hub and may have more spokes or less proceeding from that hub. Both make for sound wheels but the COMBAT Hapkido wheel and the YON MU KWAN wheel may look strikingly different.....especially to an outsider. FWIW.

Are you intersted in taking a deeper looks at comparing particular "spokes" of each practice? Kicking? Striking? Grappling?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

Hi Thomas,

As you may remember, Ive been struggling to decide whether to train in CH or THK. Reading this post has given me the idea of maybe taking the same route that you did by training BOTH THK and CH. I could do THK 2x a week and CH on Saturdays. I also have the CH black belt video series, so Im thinking I could maybe supplement my CH training that way as well. The THK instructor(8th Dan) was born and raised in Korea and teaches HARDCORE, authentic THK, the same as that taught to ROK soldiers, Marines and Special Forces. (!) I have several friends who trained with the Korean military and have the utmost respect for their (devastating) Hapkido prowess. The CH instructor is a 5th Dan in TKD and earned his 1st Dan in CH via distance learning and seminars. Im not suggesting that there's anything inheritantly wrong with that method, however, in comparing the backgrounds of both instructors, I doubt many people would pick the latter over the former. By combining the two, I feel as though I could get the best of both worlds. Though I REALLY like the minimalist, "keep the muscle but lose the fat" philosophy of CH and intend to make best use of their seminar program,(particularly their groundfighting curriculum) I just feel like I would be cheating myself out of some world-class instruction if I dont combine it with what is being offered by a world-renowned instructor in THK. Maybe I could stick with this approach up to getting my 1st Dan in THK(hopefully in THIS lifetime lol) and then switch over completely to CH..? Any thoughts or direction you could offer would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

Dave

 

You are very right, Dave....there is nothing inherently "wrong" with either approach. The pivotal point is what you see yourself doing down the road. Allow me to expand on this.

I think Thomas (Morrison) would agree that CH does, in fact take a minimalist approach. Hence, if someone were interested in immediately applying something to their work environment the next day BOTH approaches would address this. However, what a person studying YMK Hapkido would notice, over a period of time, is that a particular biomechanic would be studied a variety of ways, some of which would be more combat-worthy than others.

For instance, OUTER WRIST Throw, has 5 variants, including the well-known variant used in Japan called KOTE GASHI. Over time, though, YMK would examine that biomechanic (wrist pronation) over a range of situations including standing, sitting, layingdown, alternate hands, striking-and-punching and even as it might apply to the foot and ankle. For combat, need a person know and understand all of these variants? Most certainly not. The variants simply enhance the practitioners understanding of the biomechanic. The same thing can be said of any of the other methods used.

Now, at the risk of deriding my own tradition, let me say that often some schools, styles or teachers get carried away with variants and begin to move away from pragmatism. In fairness I must tell you that this is a mistake. At their core the Hapkido arts are about combat and to eclipse this with acrobatics does the practitioner no good service. IMVVHO.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

If memory serves, and correct me Thomas, I believe he did one then the other, not both together.
I would pick one, then change if it is needed. Not sure how I would feel if someone just said they were going to get a low rank with me and just jump ship later, I doubt I would train them. But to each his own.

 

Bruce and Kevin offer good advice.

I started out with Combat Hapkido in a fairly informal manner - mostly working time "here and there" with my Taekwondo instructor who was learning Combat Hapkido at the time time through intensive seminars and the video course. From there, I went to Korea and began studying Traditional Hapkido exclusively. My previous training served me well and gave me a good starting point. I came home with a 2nd dan in Traditional Hapkido and then began studying Combat Hapkido formally. It took me about a year to really pick up/re-arrange/learn the COmbat Hapkido curriculum to the point where I felt I could test for 2nd dan. It ended up that I didn't have to test but instead I was able to reconcile my Traditional Hapkido grade (transfered my 2nd dan in TH for a 2nd dan in CH). From there I continued and eventually tested formally for 3rd and 4th in CH. So in essence, I never realy did both at the same time.

If I were in your shoes, I would go to the Traditional Hapkido school first and try it out. The initial factor to me would be the experience level of the TH instructor - 8th dan vs 1st dan in CH. I would actually recommend training there as much as you can and work through the curriculum there without starting to cross train until about 1st dan. At that point, I think you'd really love cross training in Combat Hapkido.

I mention this because if you have the chance to train in Traditional Hapkido under a good instructor, it's worth doing, partly because it's not easy to find good TH instructors out there. Plus. you'll get exposure to the whole system (from falls to strikes to locks, etc) and by 1st dan will have a nice fundation. Then, as you start to see where the CH cuts and streamlines (and adds-in) you should be able to adapt fairly easily and understand where the approach comes from. Also, if you go to Combat Hapkido from a Traditional School, you can usually transfer grade in if you like.

I would pick one to focus on and really get the foundation laid - now, that's not to say that if seminars come up (especially if GM Pellegrini comes to the area) or an occasional training session opens up, I wouldn't miss that. I really do think you could take either path - either start in CH and go to TH or start in TH and go to CH, but in this case, I'd go with the more experienced instructor to begin with and get a good foundation before cross training too much.

Good training!

 

Double post

 

Combat Hapkido vs traditional Hapkido

Thomas, Bruce and Kevin,

Thank you all very much for your excellent advice! This discussion is illustrative of why forums can be such a valuable resource: the ability of us newbies to pick the brains of those who are far more experienced and knowledgeable. You shorten our learning curves by so much and I for one am very grateful for that!

Respectfully,

Dave

* Thomas-upstate New York is such a beautiful area. Im jealous!

 

Great info Thomas, appreciate that. I actually am only in my second month of CH. I do love learning new things and joint locks are IMO one of easiest ways to make a person leave you alone or to make them do what you want. I have done a lot of reading recently from many who down the art and oddly enough don't even take it.

I show people just what little bit I know and the typical response is "well if you are doing it that slow I can do this or that". The funny part is when you see it done even remotely fast you realize how much damage it can quickly do with very little effort. Even a little bit scary sometimes at what you are able to do. Breaking arms, wrists, legs in half, etc. isn't the most pleasant things if you aren't into hurting people. For me, it's for my own protection, my Wife and soon to be son who's about 2.5 months away from arriving

Of course i'd like to learn many other styles, but as you had already stated, there are a lot of additions that can be thrown in and A LOT of room for improvisation and anyone involved or has a history in hard striking combat would enjoy some of the different ways the elbows, punches, kicks, etc can be thrown. My instructors encourage me to always think of new ways to follow up different breakaways and such (of course I learn all the proper ways first). It's truly an evolving art and I always look forward to class.

 

how do you know you can break peoples' legs in half?

 

Just wanted to say, great thread guys!

 

IMHO they absolutely aren't. Not standing locks anyway.
Just watch any police arrest video or prison officers taking down unruly prisoners.
There's a good reason they go in mob handed.
And that reason is that even a fairly small person, if they don't want to go along with what you want them to do, can put up a massive fight.
Even people that are only resisting arrest (rather than a full on assault with intent to harm you) can be a nightmare to get a lock on to any effect.

 

Situational Awareness and smart behavior are far more important than any particular approach to fighting.