# Kenpo and Hapkido



## Hannya

From the desciption of the styles I'm wondering how different the two styles are.

 "Hapkido combines joint locks,pressure points, throws, kicks, and strikes practical to self defence...Emphasizes circular motion, non resistive movements, and control of opponent"

 Sounds like the two are exactly the same except for kenpo you take out the pressure points and throw in eye/groin attacks. I'm still shopping around for a style and had decided on Kenpo because it was practical for self defense, I'm not really looking for a sport MA; but might have to check out some Hapkido now. Has anyone tried out both styles? What were the main differences between the two? Which is more geared toward "street fighting"?

 I'm kinda leaning toward Hapkido because pressure points seem more practical, least damaging way to put a person down. Eye/groin attacks seem a bit excessive to me. I guess when I think of self defense, I dont imagine life/death situations but instead just protecting yourself from harm. Appreciate any responses.


----------



## Zoran

Not even close. I studied a form of Hapkido for a short time. The two don't even compare. Hapkido is much closer to traditional Jujitsu than anything else.



> I'm kinda leaning toward Hapkido because pressure points seem more practical, least damaging way to put a person down. Eye/groin attacks seem a bit excessive to me. I guess when I think of self defense, I dont imagine life/death situations but instead just protecting yourself from harm. Appreciate any responses.


 Really up to you. Joint locks and pressure points take a very very long time to perfect. Applying one to someone who doesn't want it is completely different than just working it in class.


----------



## Hollywood1340

Closer then one might think. Depends on your instructor on both sides of the aisle. Something along the lines of "You're either an inch on the building or an inch off"


----------



## shesulsa

Pressure points don't always work on everybody, either.  And you have to remember that each build is different, so they're not always in the same spot.  People with more body fat / mass will not feel them as much and vital (soft spot) striking becomes important.


----------



## Zoran

Hollywood1340 said:
			
		

> Closer then one might think. Depends on your instructor on both sides of the aisle. Something along the lines of "You're either an inch on the building or an inch off"


 Sorry Hollywood, I don't buy that. If someone had changed Hapkido to the point that it is closer to Kenpo, well then it really isn't hapkido anymore. Maybe should call it HapKenpo (_wish I didn't post that, I'm sure some will now_).

 Here is the diference as far as my experience in Hapkido took me:

 In my 6 months experience in Hapkido, they taught me techniques and how to *make* them work for a given situation.

 In my first 6 months of Kenpo, they taught me techniques and how to change it, if the situation changed.


----------



## MJS

Hannya said:
			
		

> From the desciption of the styles I'm wondering how different the two styles are.
> 
> "Hapkido combines joint locks,pressure points, throws, kicks, and strikes practical to self defence...Emphasizes circular motion, non resistive movements, and control of opponent"
> 
> Sounds like the two are exactly the same except for kenpo you take out the pressure points and throw in eye/groin attacks. I'm still shopping around for a style and had decided on Kenpo because it was practical for self defense, I'm not really looking for a sport MA; but might have to check out some Hapkido now. Has anyone tried out both styles? What were the main differences between the two? Which is more geared toward "street fighting"?
> 
> I'm kinda leaning toward Hapkido because pressure points seem more practical, least damaging way to put a person down. Eye/groin attacks seem a bit excessive to me. I guess when I think of self defense, I dont imagine life/death situations but instead just protecting yourself from harm. Appreciate any responses.



There will be certian aspects of locking/controlling/pressure points in Kenpo, but obviuosly there are arts out there that address certain things on another level.  Doc would be able to give you a much more in depth explaination of this as much of it is contained in his SL4 that he teaches.  

As I say to everyone that is researching arts....make sure that you check out both arts.  Watch classes or take a trial class, and see what appeals to your needs the best.

Good luck on your search.

Mike


----------



## Hollywood1340

Then it would appear your HKD is not mine. The ability to flow with situation makes the art as powerful as it is.


----------



## Paul B

I was training in Kosho Shorei Ryu Kempo before I started Hapkido. What drew me more to Hapkido is the immediate attention to principle driven technique. 

In Kosho,I'd spend a lot of time doing forms,then doing escaping drills,then doing escaping drills w/strikes,etc...

In Hapkido,technique was practiced from day one which contained all these things along with throws and locks to conclude. I practiced more "theory" in one Hapkido technique then I would in a whole Kempo class. 

Everything is relative in the MA...different approaches,same end result. There are many different ways to train,and reasons for them. Like MJS wrote,go see which Art you like better for your reasons and start training. 

Also I just wanted to add that if you learned how to make Hapkido work,you didn't learn Hapkido. That would go against the principles of the Art. We train for nothing,if not adaptability. I will say that being "fluid" in anything after 6 months would be an outstanding result,though.


----------



## hardheadjarhead

The two styles are totally different.  I think the two would compliment each other nicely, however.  And no, I'm not advocating Hapkenpo.  


Regards,


Steve


----------



## arnisador

In my experience the two are pretty different.

Hapkido often has a nice blend of techniques--joint locks, throws, kicking, striking, pressure point work--but sometimes you find someone who teaches it mostly like aikijutsu, or mostly emphasizing the kicks, etc.

As an aside, I'm apparently one of those people on whom pressure point techniques mostly don't work. Or, so I've been told.


----------



## Brother John

Hapkenpo...
I like that.   

Kenpo and Hapkido are both great martial arts. I've had friends that studied Hapkido and shared bits with me. I have an appreciation for it, that's for sure.

There are different flavors of each!! As I understand it there was one Large schism w/in Hapkido a while back... pretty much making two main branches. ((I could have this wrong, probably do... any input Steve??)) From what I understand the larger, more common branch emphasizes jujutsu type self defense sequences with a healthy dose of Tang Soo Do type striking/kicking in with it.

Kenpo? Where do I begin? Schism? Which one? You are pretty safe in looking into Most schools that say they teach "American Kenpo".
Eye gouging. Wow...why are we SO known for that?? I dunno. Really Kenpo has a broad scope of action applied w/in it's self defense techs!!! Stand up grappling, kicks, punches, other hand strikes, elbows, knees, buckles, chokes and yes....the occasional eye attack....etc. etc. Kenpo certainly does apply nerve strikes!!! It doesn't skip'm. 
BEST BET????
Go to each school, investigate heavily. Watch the advanced students... do they move and behave like you'd like to?? Question the instructors...A LOT. If they are like most martial arts instructors they LOVE answering questions about their art, their teachers, their thoughts/beliefs in regards to their arts...etc.
THEN decide.

BUT: Once you are in           *DROP SWEAT DAILY!!!*
and enjoy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your Brother
John


----------



## KenpoDave

Hannya said:
			
		

> Sounds like the two are exactly the same except for kenpo you take out the pressure points and throw in eye/groin attacks.



If you take out the pressure points, you're not doing kenpo.


----------



## Ronin Moose

_


			
				Hannya said:
			
		


			I'm kinda leaning toward Hapkido because pressure points seem more practical, least damaging way to put a person down. Eye/groin attacks seem a bit excessive to me. I guess when I think of self defense, *I dont imagine life/death situations but instead just protecting yourself from harm*.
		
Click to expand...

_


			
				Hannya said:
			
		

> I like what I've seen in Hapkido, although I practice American Kenpo.  I think I'd do Hapkido as an alternative choice.  Either way, in regard to your last sentence - start imagining those life & death situations, while hoping that they don't appear on your doorstep.  Better to practice and be prepared for the worst, then have the skill to adjust your reaction to the present threat.  Or just never leave the gym and keep hoping that all the bad guys will play by the rules.
> 
> Good luck with your search.  These folks on Martial Talk are very encouraging and helpful, and are usually a great source for feedback.
> 
> -Garry


----------



## Akashiro Tamaya

Zoran said:
			
		

> Not even close. I studied a form of Hapkido for a short time. The two don't even compare. Hapkido is much closer to traditional Jujitsu than anything else.



The last two Hapkido schools I trained briefly at were nothing like "traditional Jujutsu" It fell in line more with Aikijujutsu.


----------



## Zoran

Brother John said:
			
		

> From what I understand the larger, more common branch emphasizes jujutsu type self defense sequences with a healthy dose of Tang Soo Do type striking/kicking in with it.


 Yep, that's the one I had experience in.

 Just a note, my experience in the system is limited to the one instructor and one system of Hapkido. From what I've seen of their higher ranking students, they also included some Judo training.

 The best advise is:
_Go to each school, investigate heavily. Watch the advanced students... do they move and behave like you'd like to?? Question the instructors...A LOT. If they are like most martial arts instructors they LOVE answering questions about their art, their teachers, their thoughts/beliefs in regards to their arts...etc.
  THEN decide.
 -- Brother John_


----------



## bdparsons

Having had a good deal of exposure to different methods of both Kenpo and Hapkido, I can tell you both are strong arts and with a good instructor and a proper attitude you won't go wrong no matter which you choose.

Hapkido--As mentioned by arnisador you will find a wide disparity in how Hapkido is taught. Some schools teach a curriculum that resembles aikido with a few kicks thrown in; others teach something that resembles Tae Kwon Do with a few joint locks thrown in (though these are opposite ends of the spectrum, they are not exaggerations). In the mid-late 90s the Hapkido craze gave birth to a plethora of "Hapkido" masters that wouldn't recognize good Hapkido if it bit them in the seat of their pants, but it certainly allowed them to offer "something else" to supplement their income. Closely examine any Hapkido school for a balance of the different facets of the art. These include, not in any particular order,  falling (learning to fall will make your throws stronger), joint manipulations & pressure points (they are different), striking with the hands and feet, stances and manuevering, self defense techniques, etc. Too much emphasis on any one or two areas will by default result in a deficiency in the others. Talk to the prospective instructor about how the curriculum they teach addresses each of these issues.

Kenpo--As with Hapkido you will find a great deal of material being taught as Kenpo. Some folks will group any curriculum that employs rapid-fire striking and relys primarily on self-defense techniques and call it Kenpo. This is a superficial understanding of what Kenpo is. Any martial art that proposes to teach effective has to do with structuring a defense in a fight while deconstructing the attackers offense. Kenpo does this through controlling an assailant's dimensional zones primarily through blocking, striking, lower level leg work, grabbing and (if taught properly) joint manipulations.

Both Hapkido and Kenpo have one basic element in common: When applied properly you are on the opponent like glue. You decide when the encounter is finished and how much force you will choose to use.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## Bode

First, the best advice has already been given:


> Go to each school, investigate heavily. Watch the advanced students... do they move and behave like you'd like to?? Question the instructors...A LOT. If they are like most martial arts instructors they LOVE answering questions about their art, their teachers, their thoughts/beliefs in regards to their arts...etc.-- Brother John


 I have no agenda and can only speak about the art (Science) I practice and that is SL4. So for what it's worth, here is what I have to say:

 When discussing any Martial Art it is difficult to distill them into such a simple description. In a very general sense as you described, Kenpo and Hapkido sound the same. (You used one sentence to describe them). This does not do EITHER system justice. 



> Sounds like the two are exactly the same except for kenpo you take out the pressure points and throw in eye/groin attacks.


 This is not true. Every teacher has their way of teaching. Whether it be Kenpo or Hapkido. One school will be better than the other possibly. One may have taken out the eye gouges and added pressure point strikes (nerve strikes). You may find a great Hapkido instructor who you would learn more from than the bad Kenpo instructor down the street. 
 In SL4 there are hardly any eye gouges for the simple fact that lawsuites are common. Someone grabs you... you poke his eye out.... you go to jail. 



> I'm kinda leaning toward Hapkido because pressure points seem more practical, least damaging way to put a person down.


 The amount of damage is not inherent to either system. SL4 has nerve strikes (pressure points) which are used to create an overwhelming nervous response and end the confrontation. Hopefully we have caused little damage. However, keep in mind that Hapkido can be very damaging to the attackers joints. Ligaments and muscle can easily be torn. In the end it's up to the Martial Artist to modulate the level of his response to the attacker. Ask a good Hapkido practitioiner to give you a demonstration of how deadly on the joints Hapkido can be. You'll find that your above statement will be modified. 

  A quote from Doc's writings: 



> This "advanced level" of His American Kenpo as I understand it, shortened sometimes to SL-4? tends to be misunderstood because it covers multiple areas of evolution and applications. When SubLevel Four is used to strike, nerves are activated through basic Destructive Sequencing utilizing Chinese Acupuncture Meridians, pressure points, and nerves embedded in cavities of the human body. This causes the subject to involuntarily react in a predictable manner creating a Negative Body Posture. This places him at a significant anatomical disadvantage. In simple terms, nerve cavities are made accessible and body positioning is physically restricted and vulnerable, thus the term Negative Body Posture. This unique methodology effectively manipulates the body uniquely for each additional action, until it is essentially incapacitated by a bodily dysfunction called Physical/Mental Disassociation or physically incapacitation. At the very least, your attacker is severely momentarily physically restricted.


 

*Body Mass and Pressure Points*


> Pressure points don't always work on everybody, either. And you have to remember that each build is different, so they're not always in the same spot. People with more body fat / mass will not feel them as much and vital (soft spot) striking becomes important.


 VERY, VERY important statement. Very true. Everyone is built differently. The nerver points will be in the same AREA, but it takes years to be able to see exactly where they are on anyone. In terms of body mass. I was recently demonstrating a nerver strike on a larger, rather obese person. It took me longer to find the spot and once I did, I had to hit harder. 

 Dr. Chapel was yelling at me one time. I was looking at the meridian (Pressure point, nerve center) charts. He said, "Don't look at those." Of course, I ask why. "Their wrong!"... ok this got me. The charts, which have been around for years and years were wrong. I had never heard anyone say this before, but Doc insisted. Well... six months later the Chinese health organization (dont know the name) announced that something like 76 of the 300 some odd nerve points were wrong. They were reprinting all charts and recommending people update. Heheheh... Doc looked at me and said, "I told you."



> As an aside, I'm apparently one of those people on whom pressure point techniques mostly don't work. Or, so I've been told.-- arnisador


 Apparently you haven't met Doc! 

 And finally I have to go off on Pain Compliance versus, I don't know what to call it, but here goes, Anatomical Compliance. Doc is in England and would expand further or yell at me. 

*Pain Compliance*
 Hapkido and most joint manipulation relies on pain compliance. You cause enough pain that someone will unwillingly comply. However, as someone stated in this thread, not everyone has the same pain threshold. As such, a technique may not work as well on a larger, more pain tolerant individual. Others may have supple joints or are double jointed, which might possibly add another level of difficulty to pain compliance. 
 So, pain alone cannot be used as a method of controlling an opponent. It is the basis for many arts and is valid, but should not be the only emphasis. In addition, you may end up physically maiming someone who will not comply. They just might force you to pop every ligament in their shoulder, in which case you might have a lawsuite. 
   What complements Pain Compliance? 
  Anatomical Compliance... (Not a Sl4 term, but used for reference. I am sure Doc has a word for it.)
 Certain physical phenomenon are provable and quantifiable. They hold under strict scientific testing. Physics plays a major part. If I throw a ball into the air, I know it will come back down (assuming we are on earth). Gravity is a fact. 
 Consider the human anatomy. If someone bends at the waste and their head is below their waste, they cannot move their feet in any locomative fashion. Perhaps a slight stomp, but nothing substantial. They are stuck in place unless they roll to the ground. Try it. 

 How does the help Pain Compliance work? If you force a persons body into a Negative Body Posture, one in which the body is in a state where it cannot respond efficiently or effectively, you have greatly increased your ability to perform a technique or create compliance. As such, the level of pain compliance is lowered. 
 The person who will not obey with pain alone, is forced to obey, because as much as they might like to, they cannot deny physics. 
 Is it complicated? Yes. Even being able to see when a person is in a Negative Body Posture takes time and creating takes even more training. Creating it spontaneously (i.e. not in a training drill) will take more time still...
 Learning Anatomical Compliance WITH Pain Compliance will help avoid situations where someone does not respond to pain and would otherwise force you to break their arm. In todays society we don't want this. Certainly Police would be better off since their current systems work on Pain compliance as the main control mechanism. 

 I must admit I do see Anatomical Compliance in other arts, but it is not codified or scientificall studied. It is a byproduct of the system. SL4 teaches it, not as a byproduct, but as a necessity. There are names for methods for creating Negative Body Postures and as such, it becomes true knowledge. 
 A simple example is when a cop has a person put their hands on the hood of the car, legs spread wide. This is a difficult position to move quickly from, because it puts the suspect in an anatomically deficient position (negative body posture).
  Wow... ok, I didn't expect to write that much. Hope it helps.


----------



## Kenpoist

Sounds like BD has the best perspective , having experience in both.  Ultimatley, find a good instructor who will teach you practical, street effective martial arts.  For me, American Kenpo offers the best choice in personal protection.

Hapkido would probably offer a good alternative, but keep in mind as mentioned previously, many joint lock techniques are not as effective as you might hope when being applied to a non-compliant assailant/attacker.  I was taught many a technique in my police officer days to subdue a criminal and most of the joint locking techs went out the window when the fight was on - but the kenpo "kicked" in nicely .

My current instructor teaches Kuk Sool Won joint locking as a supplement to my kenpo training, but it is most effective as "closing technique".  That is - after you have softened your attacker up a little with strikes, kicks, (eye gouges) etc.., you have placed them in a weakened state at which point you apply your joint locking principles to place the attacker into submission/pain compliance.

-Good Luck!


----------



## Bode

> you have placed them in a weakened state at which point you apply your joint locking principles to place the attacker into submission/pain compliance.


 Wouldn't you agree that you apply pain compliance as well as a form of Anatomical Compliance. Meaning, as a police officer, you probably apply pain compliance in addition to forcing them to the ground, up against a car, etc... in a position where they have a difficult time moving/reacting. Codifying and pointing out the anatomical state seems to help people create that state in their attacker. 
 I always appreciate the police perspective.


----------



## Kenpoist

Yes, anatomical complaince goes hand in hand wiith pain complaince on the beat.  It places the non-compliant resister at a point of disadvantage. Good for locking them up.Off the beat - Kenpo would be my first choice for survival because I don't have to go to control tactics to place the cuffs on an individual - I am simply trying to eliminate the threat that is being posed to me or my family at the time - I am not going to dance around with trying to subdue the attacker into compliance.


----------



## Paul B

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> Off the beat - Kenpo would be my first choice for survival because I don't have to go to control tactics to place the cuffs on an individual - I am simply trying to eliminate the threat that is being posed to me or my family at the time - I am not going to dance around with trying to subdue the attacker into compliance.


Actually...I would go with Hapkido on this one. Reason being,I wouldn't have to worry about "arresting" techniques and go straight to "break and escape" mode. Please don't confuse joint locking with joint breaking. Arresting techniques are used for their own purpose,and have their own limitations...justified use of force,etc....Hapkido (mine,anyway) has a very clear outlook on maximum use of power in a self defense scenario. I don't plan on dancing,I plan to do whatever it takes to walk away alive,be it through limb destruction or otherwise. :asian: Just a thought.


----------



## arnisador

Bode said:
			
		

> Apparently you haven't met Doc!


  Why, do his pressure point techniques always work?

 The negative body posture sounds like what's done in Wing Chun/JKD, with the idea that a person moving backward can't defend himself, or that a person who is being clinched is disadvantaged. It's certainly a key idea in BJJ, though that's principally on the ground. But, having never seen Kenpo/SL4, I'm not sure I'm picturing what you're saying correctly.


----------



## eyebeams

I was specifically told by my kenpo teacher that hapkido was the most similar extant art in terms of how to generate power (striking in my kenpo and hapkido is different from EPAK, since there is no chambering or "focus") and in the continuum of techniques.

 When I studied Moo Gong Kwan Hapkido I noted that the striking (which tends to comitted power blows) is quite different. Plus, not all arm/wrist controls rely on pain compliance. A joint can only be bemt so far before it reaches its limit, no matter the pain threshold of the subject. Instead, you must account for varying degrees of flexibility.

 As for effective pressure point striking, there are really two levels to this skill. I didn't stay with hapkido long enough to learn their emphasis.

 The atemi level involves being able to naturally find weak points and note some of the major vulnerable areas. In Ryukai, the maxim "flatten hills and widen valleys" is used to tell people to attack body seams and muscle heads with focused blows.

 The kyusho level is, IMO, somewhat overdone in some schools and based on a more intense study of TCM principles where meridians are struck in sequence to either:

 1) Induce the suppressive cycle.
 2) Enhance the energetic cycle and then "seal" the next meridian in line.

 Really,though, a lot of it is, IMO, after the fact justification for a compound striking or striking/grappling technique. For instance, a common technique makes it easy to hit GB20. It's quite handy that this point is at the back og the neck and would work fine anyway, but you can get to it more easily by securing the person in the correct fashion.


----------



## Hollywood1340

Paul B said:
			
		

> Actually...I would go with Hapkido on this one. Reason being,I wouldn't have to worry about "arresting" techniques and go straight to "break and escape" mode. Please don't confuse joint locking with joint breaking. Arresting techniques are used for their own purpose,and have their own limitations...justified use of force,etc....Hapkido (mine,anyway) has a very clear outlook on maximum use of power in a self defense scenario. I don't plan on dancing,I plan to do whatever it takes to walk away alive,be it through limb destruction or otherwise. :asian: Just a thought.


----------



## Bode

> Why, do his pressure point techniques always work?--Arnisador


 My apologies, I thought you knew who Doc was because I thought you practiced Kenpo. Do they always work? As we were saying in this thread. Pain thresholds differ. Doc's methods overwhelm the nervous system through destructive sequences of nerve strikes. Some people will collapse or have PMD (Physical/ Mental Disassociation) with nothing more than a tap on the corrrest nerve. (Dependent upon body posture). Others will require more. Over time, in our class, people will develop a resistence to the nerve strikes. Your brain get's accustomed to the overwhelming nervous response and requires more to "shut it off". 

 You obviously have a naturally high degree resistence to nerve strikes, which is very believable. However, everyone will respond at some level to nerve strikes assuming the practioner has skill. You might require a harder tap or further misalignment to expose the nerves and give you a "buzz" as we like to call it. If anyone could show you, Doc could. I have seen many a non believer quickly convert. Ask Dr. Dave on KenpoTalk.com



> The negative body posture sounds like what's done in Wing Chun/JKD, with the idea that a person moving backward can't defend himself, or that a person who is being clinched is disadvantaged. It's certainly a key idea in BJJ, though that's principally on the ground. But, having never seen Kenpo/SL4, I'm not sure I'm picturing what you're saying correctly. -- arnisador


 You are correct in a general sense. In Wing Chun when someone is moving backwards they are more vulnerable for various reasons. Moving backwards is a structurally week movement. The body must be re-alligned when the movement is completed. SL4 discusses the weekness of body when it is in a stabalization mode versus a defend mode. When the body is in stablization mode it cannot defend (we're talking muscles now, not arms blocking kicks).  Striking someone when their muscles are in stablization mode is more harmful. The nerves are more open. There are various physical tests to prove this, but require someone capable. Perhaps we can take this to another thread and I, or Doc when he's back, can better explain. (With examples of course). So, in a sense this is what's happening when in Wing Chun they advise striking when the attacker is moving backwards. 

 There is more application of Negative Body Postures in SL4 than I have seen in any other art. Is it necassary? Do other arts utilize it? Yes, as you pointed out, BJJ shows that the person being clinched is at a disadvantage. In general most arts have some form of utilizing the attackers Negative Body Postures, but, and here's the key, they don't define it clearly. Why does it work? What is physicallly happening? Understanding NBP helps you create NBP in your attacker. 
 In addition, SL4 has NBP at the core of the art (science). As I said, it's not a byproduct of training or drills, it is the core. Every technique involves NBP in some way and it's not always the same. The human body is very complex and as such, requires detailed study. 

 Doc has an uncanny ability to find the nerve points in everyone. Any body size. As the body moves the nerve points shift so I respect his ability. It can't be easy. 
 I'm sure he would fin them in you! 



> A joint can only be bemt so far before it reaches its limit, no matter the pain threshold of the subject. Instead, you must account for varying degrees of flexibility. --EYEBEAMS


 Right. But wouldn't you rather have an additional control mechanism that doesn't potentially get you involved in a lawsuite? Popping someones joints can be a bad move. Someone pushes you and he wont go down. "But Sir, I was only trying to control him when he pushed me, I didn't mean to tear his rotator cuff!"
 I am not saying it's invalid. I love Hapkido. I am only saying it's one part of the equation. Life or death, hell, break every bone in his body, but I would say most fights that occur are not life or death. (Perhaps that depends on location... bar fights or gang fights are different)



> TCM principles where meridians are struck in sequence to...


 We call that Destructive Sequencing. Nice to know there are other teachers who are teaching this obscure knowledge.


----------



## eyebeams

> Right. But wouldn't you rather have an additional control mechanism that doesn't potentially get you involved in a lawsuite? Popping someones joints can be a bad move. Someone pushes you and he wont go down. "But Sir, I was only trying to control him when he pushed me, I didn't mean to tear his rotator cuff!"


 Not exactly the same thing. You can apply a technique that neither relies on pain nor dislocates joints. You have to take the person's balance so that their body will move with the technique. This relies on you applying motion with the entire body without the torque you use in percussion to extend and coil the force of the reciever's movement.



> We call that Destructive Sequencing. Nice to know there are other teachers who are teaching this obscure knowledge.


 IMO, it's one of those things that is often made unnecessarily complicated.


----------



## arnisador

Thanks for your responses *Bode*. I'm sure someone could buzz me on nerve points, somewhere on me, but after years of DKI folks trying, most of the major ones have been hit. I also don't use novocaine (lidocaine) at the dentist when getting a filling--I just have a high resistance to pain and, I'm told, to nerve strikes.

 The idea of focusing on negative body posture is interesting to me as I compare it to the JKD and BJJ I study. (I've read some of *Doc*'s stuff here but am not a Kenpoist.) Could it be compared to Judo's off-balancing (_kuzushi_) and similar ides in Jujutsu?


----------



## Bode

> Could it be compared to Judo's off-balancing (_kuzushi_) and similar ides in Jujutsu?


 If you can recommend any reading on the subject I would be interested. As I have only practiced Jujutsu occasionally I don't have any in depth knowledge of their methods. I am always interested though. It's quite enlightening to search for similarities in the arts. Where one calls it "this" the other calls it "that"... fascinating. 
 Either way I don't doubt that Judo or Jujutsu have terms for it, but doubtfully as scientific as the SL4 approach. But hey, if it work, it work. Can't argue that.


----------



## bdparsons

I've been watching this thread with interest, but I'm also a bit disconcerted that the question of the initial poster has quickly faded into obscurity (maybe that's why they've not posted again). I'm intrigued the thread has taken the direction it has, focusing in on what Hapido is or isn't, whether it does what it does by "accident" or by "design". Maybe this part of the discussion should have been broken off into a different thread. That being as it may, here's my thoughts on both issues, for what it's worth.

A strict comparison between Kenpo and Hapkido actually reveals more similarities than differences, perhaps this explains why they blend so well together. Properly taught, both are techniques-based systems, oriented to self defense. Both are principle based, and can have a high degree of flexibility and adaptability while executing technique. [Flexibility-You choosing to modify the techniques based on your preference at the time, possibly ladder of force considerations. Adaptability-You being forced to modify the techniques due to an unforseen circumstance.] Both are based on a balance between linear and circular movement. Both reflect an emphasis on committment to ending confrontations a) in as little time as possible and b) with as little force as possible.  Both make extensive use of anatomical positioning (anatomical compliance or negative body posturing of you will) to phase between defensive (counter-offensive) maneuvers to accomplish the ultimate goal of disengagement. Though some would call these items generalizations, they actually reflect a desired mind-set when approaching the art(s). That mind-set being the establishment of the ability to flow from one phase of defense to the next. Properly executed, neither art will fall into the start-stop-adjust-start-stop method of execution.

The primary differences lies in the emphasis each art places on how we assure anatomical positioning of our attacker. In a general sense, it been my experience that Kenpo emphasizes striking to set up maneuvers while Hapkido emphasizes maneuvering to set up striking. With an understanding that there is a constant ebb and flow between these two. Some may consider this very simplistic, and it probably is, but it helps me not to lose the forest for the trees.

Finally a note concerning the assertion that many Hapkido techniques rely mainly on pain compliance. For the majority of joint manipulations this is correct, though it is by no means required. It is actually quite easy to modify joint manipulations so that the flow of the technique will affect the center of gravity (up, down, forward or back) and/or balance with no pain, though admittedly most beginning manipulations are taught as pain compliance maneuvers. There does need to be a clear distinction between joint manipulations and pressure point usage in Hapkido. While joint manipulations can entail using pressure points, the scope of pressure points lie in the whole of Hapkido, using these points in different manners including pressing, grasping or striking. That being said, there is such an integration between each facet of the art, my opinion has to be that it was by design, not by accident.

Just another voice crying in the wilderness.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## Doc

shesulsa said:
			
		

> Pressure points don't always work on everybody, either.  And you have to remember that each build is different, so they're not always in the same spot.  People with more body fat / mass will not feel them as much and vital (soft spot) striking becomes important.


It would appear you are the under the impression the pressure point activations do not work because there is not always a "pain response." This is untrue. They work on everyone but the effects of a single "pressure" activation may not be noticeable. While it is true that some respond more visibly than others to "pressure" on a single point, when a series of points are properly activated the effect is involuntary and significant.


----------



## shesulsa

Doc said:
			
		

> They work on everyone but the effects of a single "pressure" activation may not be noticeable. While it is true that some respond more visibly than others to "pressure" on a single point, when a series of points are properly activated the effect is involuntary and significant.


 We study pressure points.  Could you provide an example of a no-fail series such as you mentioned?


----------



## eyebeams

shesulsa said:
			
		

> We study pressure points.  Could you provide an example of a no-fail series such as you mentioned?


 I'm fairly skeptical. Claims like this are usually demonstrated on suggestible targets -- in other words, the majority of students and seminar participants --  in static scenarios. This is usually actually a public demonstration/moneymaking/reputation enhancement, along with things like breaking staves across the body and various strength/"fakir" style tricks. The point used to be to demonstrate that an art was being taught without giving away the real trick to it.

 Points that don't create pain can have an effect. In TCM terms these is because the meridian struck affects subsequent meridians. The single most common sequence is to strike a brachial point that has already been brough to the surface by causing the limb to pull or bend, followed by hitting a point in the head, neck or torso. The final point is often effective on its own, but made moreso by the preliminaries.

 For instance, the soft parry/limb strike/head or neck strike is very common. In one version, the soft parry (or grab) hyperextends the arm, exposing a point on the inside of the biceps tendon. Hitting that point exposes a point on the neck (2 thumb-widths from the corner of the mandible) that can be hit without causing serious injury to the receiver.


----------



## Doc

shesulsa said:
			
		

> We study pressure points.  Could you provide an example of a no-fail series such as you mentioned?


I wouldn't begin to give such information out over the internet. However anyone properly trained in acupuncture can tell you the effects are not always manisfested in the individual as "pain." That is the misconception. Pain CAN be a vicareous byproduct of activations but is not actually the intent of the knowledgeable, nor should it be.


----------



## Brother John

bdparsons said:
			
		

> Finally a note concerning the assertion that many Hapkido techniques rely mainly on pain compliance. For the majority of joint manipulations this is correct, though it is by no means required. It is actually quite easy to modify joint manipulations so that the flow of the technique will affect the center of gravity (up, down, forward or back) and/or balance with no pain, though admittedly most beginning manipulations are taught as pain compliance maneuvers.


BILL...
Your whole post is the BEST analysis of eihter art that I've read on MT!!!! 
Bar NONE.
 :asian: 

With regard to what you said about the successful use of joint manipulations being mainly based upon 'pain compliance'. Isn't it also true though that anytime you place a joint into "Control" that you are placing it in a position where that limb has no power and that if you continue the motion it took to get there that you will be SNAPPING tendons/ligaments and contorting the joint it'self. ...therefore affecting the alignment of the body overall???

I may just be restating something you said.

Your Brother
John


----------



## pete

not specifically hapkido, since i never studied it... but the skill of chin na (qinna) as practiced through the art of tai chi chuan (taijiquon), i was given the following analogy:  controling the joint or the limb (through pain or otherwise) is like trying to push a chain up a hill.  locking the spine through that initial joint is like putting the chain in a box and carrying it up the hill. 

pete


----------



## donald

As I remember it. When asked about what arts he thought were worth their salt. Mr.Parker Sr., mentioned Hapkido, namely its "water" theory. Like its  already been stated here. It realy depends on which system of Hapkido, or Kenpo you choose. Some kenpo systems are very rapid fire self-defense oriented(ie,Epak), and some are very much rooted in the more traditional aspects of training(ie,Kosho-Ryu). From what I've read over the years. It would seem that Hapkido is no different. If possible I would try to examine a studio, or two of each system. Someone here gave that same advise with an added twist. Look at the more advanced students, and see if they move how you would like to. I had never thought of that approach, but it makes perfect sense! I looked to an instructor that I wanted to move like. He became the yard stick by which I would measure other practioners. I have'nt hit his level yet, but with our Lord Jesus' help, maybe some day I will.I hope The Lord blesses your journey. Have you ever heard of Shinsei Hapkido? Check out Karate for Christ International. You can get some of there info online. There may be a class near you to examine. 
By GOD'S Grace


----------



## Brother John

pete said:
			
		

> controling the joint or the limb (through pain or otherwise) is like trying to push a chain up a hill.  locking the spine through that initial joint is like putting the chain in a box and carrying it up the hill.
> 
> pete


Hey Pete...
these analogies sound interesting, but I'm having a hard time really fleshing them out.
Could you extrapolate on what you mean by them??
thanks


Your Brother
John


----------



## bdparsons

Brother John said:
			
		

> With regard to what you said about the successful use of joint manipulations being mainly based upon 'pain compliance'. Isn't it also true though that anytime you place a joint into "Control" that you are placing it in a position where that limb has no power and that if you continue the motion it took to get there that you will be SNAPPING tendons/ligaments and contorting the joint it'self. ...therefore affecting the alignment of the body overall???


Close. But also remember the action of placing the limb in position of control is in and of itself affecting body alignment, and depending on the technique can with proper adjustments affect CG and balance with no or minimal discomfort. It's important to note that it's not an "all or nothing" proposition. For joint manipulations it comes down to a matter of choices. If you recall the "Lock to Throw or Lock to Strike" thread on the General Self Defense section where we both posted, that's what was touched upon.

A quick side note: Joint manipulation is often associated with limb extremities such as elbows and wrists, knees and ankles. Don't forget the torso! Shoulder, hips and the "longest" joint in the body, the spine (including the neck). Because of their proximity to the body core these take the least amount of effort to affect CG and balance. Not to mention they can hurt like nobody's business as well!

Thanks for the kind words.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## shesulsa

Doc said:
			
		

> I wouldn't begin to give such information out over the internet. However anyone properly trained in acupuncture can tell you the effects are not always manisfested in the individual as "pain." That is the misconception. Pain CAN be a vicareous byproduct of activations but is not actually the intent of the knowledgeable, nor should it be.


 Agreed.  However, we all know that pressure point striking and the "X-touch knock-out" is popularly taught.  Woukl you say that a rapid-fire multiple-point technique is effective, in your opinion?


----------



## pete

ok, using kenpo-terms think of the hammerlock attack in flight to freedom, since its fresh in my mind from last night's class! if the attacker is controling your spine through the hammerlock, you will not be able to step back and elbow him effectively, if its just your arm that he's got, the tech works fine.

the analogy compares the human body to a 200 pound iron chain, each limb being a link and the joints are where the links meet.  if you grab one link and lock it to only the one link next to it, it would be difficult to move the entire chain. the further away from the link you've grabbed would remain unaffected and difficult to move, even though you may have good control on the 2 links that are locked. so in the ineffective hammerlock, the kenpoist can move his leg to step back and use his other elbow to deliver the strike.

if the you use your whole body to control your opponent's whole body, its like putting the chain in a box.  all the links are affected when you move the box, and cannot move independantly. in the hammerlock example, an effective lock would go through the elbow, shoulder and down the spine disturbing your balance and putting you up on your toes, making any attempt at steppinb back and elbowing ineffective, if at all possible...

pete


----------



## Brother John

Thank you Very much!!!
That turned the light on for me.

Your Brother
John


----------



## eyebeams

Enh. I take issue with the idea that it's bad/wrong to explicitly discuss presure point techniques. Why?

 1) It gives cover to frauds. There are many, many frauds in this field promoting touch/no touch knockouts. They are often, in fact, using the same methods as stage hypnotists.

 2) It's all in print or on video somewhere anyway, and I'm not particularly interested in supporting a commercial monopoly on practical knowledge about the body.

 3) Knowledge alone does not make any technique effective. Constant practice to the point where the technique is reflexive make it effective. Many things that used to be secrets are not secrets any more and it hasn't made much of a difference, because only a minority are going to practice to make it effective. There have been more deaths from children trying to replicate wrestling moves and finishers from TV and video games than from martial arts techniques. And it takes little esoteric knowledge to realize that a strike to the carotid artery works very, very well.

 4) Limiting the free exchange of ideas is anathema to claims of a scientific approach to martial arts training. Imagine, if you will, that Pons and Fleischman has refused to share information about their cold fusion claims except to note how well it worked. This would have retarded research by quite a bit as scientists attempted to reverse engineer or refute without the required information.

 This is a bigger issue, and what annoys me about the "scientific" buzzword. Science is a specific methodology designed to ensure testable results regardless of the individual observer. Acupuncture and TCM have benefitted greatly from real science to the point where the average person can research how plausible the claims of an individual acupunturist are.

 So how many martial "scientists" are using double-blind experiments with "placebo" strikes to ineffective points? As far as I know: none. There is nothing wrong with this, but you can't make a scientific claim without reputable experimental protocols that can be tested by impartial researchers (in the case of martial arts: someone outside your school, someone who didn't pay for your seminar).

 Some folks aren't going to enjoy what I just wrote, but it's not meant as a troll. I think it describes some of the most serious impediments to developing martial arts.


----------



## eyebeams

pete said:
			
		

> ok, using kenpo-terms think of the hammerlock attack in flight to freedom, since its fresh in my mind from last night's class! if the attacker is controling your spine through the hammerlock, you will not be able to step back and elbow him effectively, if its just your arm that he's got, the tech works fine.
> 
> the analogy compares the human body to a 200 pound iron chain, each limb being a link and the joints are where the links meet. if you grab one link and lock it to only the one link next to it, it would be difficult to move the entire chain. the further away from the link you've grabbed would remain unaffected and difficult to move, even though you may have good control on the 2 links that are locked. so in the ineffective hammerlock, the kenpoist can move his leg to step back and use his other elbow to deliver the strike.
> 
> if the you use your whole body to control your opponent's whole body, its like putting the chain in a box. all the links are affected when you move the box, and cannot move independantly. in the hammerlock example, an effective lock would go through the elbow, shoulder and down the spine disturbing your balance and putting you up on your toes, making any attempt at steppinb back and elbowing ineffective, if at all possible...
> 
> pete


 This is a great, simple description. The only thing I'd add would be that the person needs to be unbalanced so that they are a long chain, as opposed to a chain attached to a rock . . .


----------



## bdparsons

eyebeams said:
			
		

> Knowledge alone does not make any technique effective. Constant practice to the point where the technique is reflexive make it effective. Many things that used to be secrets are not secrets any more and it hasn't made much of a difference, because only a minority are going to practice to make it effective.



I agree whole-heartedly! There are to many folks today that just "play" with pressure points. At best it's deceptive, at worst someone could be accidently get seriously hurt or die.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## Doc

shesulsa said:
			
		

> Agreed.  However, we all know that pressure point striking and the "X-touch knock-out" is popularly taught.  Woukl you say that a rapid-fire multiple-point technique is effective, in your opinion?


Yes.


----------



## Gentle Fist

Great posts Bill, keep them coming!


----------



## MJS

bdparsons said:
			
		

> I agree whole-heartedly! There are to many folks today that just "play" with pressure points. At best it's deceptive, at worst someone could be accidently get seriously hurt or die.
> 
> Respects,
> Bill Parsons
> Triangle Kenpo Institute



Excellent advice!!  While PP may not always be easy to hit, I think that there is a great value in learning them, especially for a controlling situation.  I do feel though, as you stated, that its very important to have a very good understanding of them.  

Mike


----------



## Doc

donald said:
			
		

> As I remember it. When asked about what arts he thought were worth their salt. Mr.Parker Sr., mentioned Hapkido, namely its "water" theory. Like its  already been stated here. It realy depends on which system of Hapkido, or Kenpo you choose. Some kenpo systems are very rapid fire self-defense oriented(ie,Epak), and some are very much rooted in the more traditional aspects of training(ie,Kosho-Ryu). From what I've read over the years. It would seem that Hapkido is no different.


Mr. Parker was talking about specific interpretations of Hapkido as practiced by Sea Oh Choi and no other. There are many who claim almost as many Hapkido interpretations as kenpo as you stated.


----------



## kenpoworks

I personally asked Mr.parker about a comparible art to Kenpo and without drawing breath he said "Jujitsu. if you can't study Kenpo, study jutitsu"..Plymouth UK 1989


----------



## Doc

kenpoworks said:
			
		

> I personally asked Mr.parker about a comparible art to Kenpo and without drawing breath he said "Jujitsu. if you can't study Kenpo, study jutitsu"..Plymouth UK 1989


As long s you know he wasn't talking about the so-called "Brazillian" kind. Mr. Parker was a black belt in Jiujitsu. But more importantly it should tell you a great deal about what he left out of his commercial Kenpo. Think about it.


----------



## arnisador

kenpoworks said:
			
		

> I personally asked Mr.parker about a comparible art to Kenpo and without drawing breath he said "Jujitsu. if you can't study Kenpo, study jutitsu"


 If you can't study Kenpo, take this...so he didn't mean as a companion, but rather as a next-best. Interesting! I think of Kenpo as emphasizing strikes and Jujutsu as emphasizing locks, so I would have seen them as more different.



			
				Doc said:
			
		

> Mr. Parker was a black belt in Jiujitsu.


 Did he favor a certain style of (Japanese) Jujutsu?


----------



## eyebeams

EPAK seems like it wouldn't blend as well with Hapkido schools that borrow their striking more from Taekkyon/Soo Bahk, since these are big, committed circular blows. For instance, the basic punch in Moo Gong Kwan Hapkido features a full body rotation and ends in a forward stance with the torso in line with the rear leg. Anybody on the end of that thing is *finished.* You learn shorter blows later in styles like this, but you start out with an internal CMA striking methdology that's been put back into a  longer blow. I personally found that it  went well with both the kenpo I do and Mizong Luohanquan, which uses a similar method.

 Other styles do use shorter, quicker strikes right from the start, as well as more common sorts of chambering.


----------



## Doc

arnisador said:
			
		

> If you can't study Kenpo, take this...so he didn't mean as a companion, but rather as a next-best. Interesting! I think of Kenpo as emphasizing strikes and Jujutsu as emphasizing locks, so I would have seen them as more different.
> 
> 
> Did he favor a certain style of (Japanese) Jujutsu?


In the old days of Chow Kenpo in Hawaii, it would have been difficult to tell the difference between the two. Examine the early film of Mr. Parker on the mainland and almost every technique ended with a throw, or takedown and breakfall.

Parker through Chow was exposed to the DanSan Ryu Jiu-jitsu of Henry Okazaki, which broke from the "traditional Japanese" in the islands.

The modern Jiu-jitsu/Judo prevails, (and in some cases they are the same)  and today they emphasize "sport grappling," while more traditional Jiu-jitsu is quite different.


----------



## arnisador

Ah, thanks! I've read about Henry Okazaki's system, but I don't have any direct knowledge of it.


----------



## kenpoworks

Doc said:-
As long s you know he wasn't talking about the so-called "Brazillian" kind. Mr. Parker was a black belt in Jiujitsu. But more importantly it should tell you a great deal about what he left out of his commercial Kenpo. Think about it.

Hey Doc,
Nobody had really heard of Brazillain Jujitsu then, Edmund told me about six years ago in Ireland that his father was a BlackBelt in Jujitsu when i told him the story and yes I have thought about it as well as addressed the fact ever since.
The "commercial" stuff may be the "vehicle", but I have not follwed the "commercial" route for a long time.....thats why I love your "stuff" so much!
With Maximum Respect
Richard
ps many thanks for the upgrade


----------



## Doc

kenpoworks said:
			
		

> Doc said:-
> As long s you know he wasn't talking about the so-called "Brazillian" kind. Mr. Parker was a black belt in Jiujitsu. But more importantly it should tell you a great deal about what he left out of his commercial Kenpo. Think about it.
> 
> Hey Doc,
> Nobody had really heard of Brazillain Jujitsu then, Edmund told me about six years ago in Ireland that his father was a BlackBelt in Jujitsu when i told him the story and yes I have thought about it as well as addressed the fact ever since.
> The "commercial" stuff may be the "vehicle", but I have not follwed the "commercial" route for a long time.....thats why I love your "stuff" so much!
> With Maximum Respect
> Richard
> ps many thanks for the upgrade


Anytime, China!


----------

