# Hapkido schools a dying breed?



## Alan Smithee

I don't find much videos of Hapkido online (and no schools where I live). Whenever I do find dojang videos of any kind they tend to be quite dated in time and not complete (in any other famous martial art I can get access to full gradings, full classes, etc). 

This begs the question, is the martial art of Hapkido a dying breed?


----------



## Xue Sheng

Not sure how old you are, I'm thinking young.... been at this for darn near 50 years..... there were never that many Hapkido schools...so no.....later


----------



## Headhunter

Ah haven't had one of these threads in a while


----------



## Alan Smithee

Xue Sheng said:


> Not sure how old you are, I'm thinking young.... been at this for darn near 50 years..... there were never that many Hapkido schools...so no.....later



Why is that?


----------



## Flying Crane

Alan Smithee said:


> I don't find much videos of Hapkido online (and no schools where I live). Whenever I do find dojang videos of any kind they tend to be quite dated in time and not complete (in any other famous martial art I can get access to full gradings, full classes, etc).
> 
> This begs the question, is the martial art of Hapkido a dying breed?


I thought I already cautioned you about thinking that if you cannot find it on YouTube then it does not exist.

You will not find my cat on YouTube.  I can assure you, he most definitely does exist.


----------



## drop bear

Flying Crane said:


> I thought I already cautioned you about thinking that if you cannot find it on YouTube then it does not exist.
> 
> You will not find my cat on YouTube.  I can assure you, he most definitely does exist.



And this is everything that is wrong with martial arts.

Flying cranes imaginary cat fallacy.


----------



## Alan Smithee

Flying Crane said:


> I thought I already cautioned you about thinking that if you cannot find it on YouTube then it does not exist.
> 
> You will not find my cat on YouTube.  I can assure you, he most definitely does exist.



If something is not on Youtube is pretty indicative. Welcome to the real world. And it's not like I haven't checked if there are any schools in my area...


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

From what i understand, a lot of hapkido teachers teach in tkd schools (and are the tkd instructor sometimes), so you might not find them just looking for hapkido.


----------



## Flying Crane

Alan Smithee said:


> If something is not on Youtube is pretty indicative. Welcome to the real world. And it's not like I haven't checked if there are any schools in my area...


I just did a search on YouTube.  I was looking for a video of you wiping your rear end after taking a dump.  I couldn’t find one.

Do you exercise good personal hygiene after using the toilet?  I couldn’t find it on YouTube.  I guess you don’t do it.  Do you have a funky sewer-ish smell about you?


----------



## Alan Smithee

kempodisciple said:


> From what i understand, a lot of hapkido teachers teach in tkd schools (and are the tkd instructor sometimes), so you might not find them just looking for hapkido.



That does happen but TKD include Hapkido joint locks anyway, it's just a reversed emphasis. in the case of TKD a radical reversal. Hapkido tries more to be a jack of all trades.


----------



## jks9199

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Jks9199
Administrator

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Dirty Dog

Alan Smithee said:


> That does happen but TKD include Hapkido joint locks anyway, it's just a reversed emphasis. in the case of TKD a radical reversal. Hapkido tries more to be a jack of all trades.



So now you're an expert on the curriculum in all the many different TKD branches? Must be nice. I think I qualify as pretty knowledgeable after some 50 years, but even then that only applies to the branches I'm ranked in (KKW, ITF, MDK).
And I say you're completely and utterly wrong. TKD can't include Hapkido techniques, because Hapkido didn't exist when TKD was founded.
Certainly there are schools where individual have cross trained in both arts, and may teach both arts. But that is not at all what you're claiming.


----------



## Headhunter

Alan Smithee said:


> If something is not on Youtube is pretty indicative. Welcome to the real world. And it's not like I haven't checked if there are any schools in my area...


There's no videos of me doing martial arts on YouTube....guess I must've imagined the last 40 years then....

Seriously you do realise not everyone wants to show off online and are happy to keep to themselves. Shocker in today's world I know where everyone's desperate for likes and follows because apparently that equals achievement in today's world.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Alan Smithee said:


> Why is that?


----------



## Alan Smithee

Dirty Dog said:


> So now you're an expert on the curriculum in all the many different TKD branches? Must be nice. I think I qualify as pretty knowledgeable after some 50 years, but even then that only applies to the branches I'm ranked in (KKW, ITF, MDK).
> And I say you're completely and utterly wrong. TKD can't include Hapkido techniques, because Hapkido didn't exist when TKD was founded.
> Certainly there are schools where individual have cross trained in both arts, and may teach both arts. But that is not at all what you're claiming.



 Original TKD was basically Karate. When the ITF got going, General Choi had a 3rd Dan Hapkido master add his joint manipulation moves into the curriculum. This is a fact, and I can give you his name if you insist. The KKW may have joint manipulation from other sources.


----------



## Headhunter

@Alan Smithee you talk big and you talk a lot. But you haven't actually said what you do (apart from a bunch of hip throws with no training apparently)


----------



## Alan Smithee

Dirty Dog said:


> And I say you're completely and utterly wrong.


*


"The evidence which many people have found in regards to Taekwon-Do having HapKiDo influence and techniques in it can be derived from several sources. One such source comes from the March 2000 issue of Taekwon-Do Times magazine. In this issue of Taekwon-Do Times magazine a gentleman by the name of Master Chung, Kee Tae from Canada was interviewed and stated that General Choi Hong Hi asked him to teach his (Master Chung Kee Tae who was also a HapKiDo black belt) self defense techniques. Master Chung Kee Tae states that General Choi said it is a very good idea to have the self-defense techniques of Hapkido in our Tae Kwon Do program"

http://www.bluecottagetkd.com/files/6th_Dan_paper_1_.pdf*


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Alan Smithee said:


> *
> 
> "The evidence which many people have found in regards to Taekwon-Do having HapKiDo influence and techniques in it can be derived from several sources. One such source comes from the March 2000 issue of Taekwon-Do Times magazine. In this issue of Taekwon-Do Times magazine a gentleman by the name of Master Chung, Kee Tae from Canada was interviewed and stated that General Choi Hong Hi asked him to teach his (Master Chung Kee Tae who was also a HapKiDo black belt) self defense techniques. Master Chung Kee Tae states that General Choi said it is a very good idea to have the self-defense techniques of Hapkido in our Tae Kwon Do program"
> 
> http://www.bluecottagetkd.com/files/6th_Dan_paper_1_.pdf*


We have no idea the legitimacy of that, since it's referencing an interview where the person themselves was claiming they taught general choi. A quick google search on the guy failed to find anything else from general choi or an official source validating this. 

What my google search did find though, was that choi officially founded/named his tkd in 1955, while hapkido was not created until 1959, and the paper that you linked seems to be suggesting that general choi started seriiusly looking into hapkido around 1970, 15 years after he founded tkd.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Alan Smithee said:


> Original TKD was basically Karate. When the ITF got going, General Choi had a 3rd Dan Hapkido master add his joint manipulation moves into the curriculum. This is a fact, and I can give you his name if you insist. The KKW may have joint manipulation from other sources.



It's always entertaining when someone with zero training or experience tries to tell me about the origins of an art I've spent a lifetime studying. Including training with people who were there from Day One.
So please, go on. Tell me more.



Alan Smithee said:


> *"The evidence which many people have found in regards to Taekwon-Do having HapKiDo influence and techniques in it can be derived from several sources. One such source comes from the March 2000 issue of Taekwon-Do Times magazine. In this issue of Taekwon-Do Times magazine a gentleman by the name of Master Chung, Kee Tae from Canada was interviewed and stated that General Choi Hong Hi asked him to teach his (Master Chung Kee Tae who was also a HapKiDo black belt) self defense techniques. Master Chung Kee Tae states that General Choi said it is a very good idea to have the self-defense techniques of Hapkido in our Tae Kwon Do program"
> 
> http://www.bluecottagetkd.com/files/6th_Dan_paper_1_.pdf*



A second hand reference to an unsubstantiated claim of a hearsay story.
Yeah. That's convincing.
Stand by your claims. You pretty much assured us that if you couldn't find in on YouTube, it didn't exist. So please, by all means, do show us a video of one of the Founders being taught Hapkido.


----------



## Alan Smithee

Dirty Dog said:


> A second hand reference to an unsubstantiated claim of a hearsay story.
> Yeah. That's convincing.
> .



Convincing enough to be posted in that highly reputable magazine. Considering the claim and Chois pattern of behavior, I'd say it's far more likely true than not.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Alan Smithee said:


> Convincing enough to be posted in that highly reputable magazine. Considering the claim and Chois pattern of behavior, I'd say it's far more likely true than not.


Its like you actively avoid the information that puts holes in your ideas, and only focus on the stuff that supports it. It explains why you spent 4 years at a school that apparently teaches how to wristlock incorrectly, then when you acknowledged this went the extreme opposite, stating that wristlocks/aikido do not work at all. Maybe in 4 more years you'll realize some holes in your thinking and find some sort of middle ground.


----------



## Flying Crane

kempodisciple said:


> Its like you actively avoid the information that puts holes in your ideas, and only focus on the stuff that supports it. It explains why you spent 4 years at a school that apparently teaches how to wristlock incorrectly, then when you acknowledged this went the extreme opposite, stating that wristlocks/aikido do not work at all. Maybe in 4 more years you'll realize some holes in your thinking and find some sort of middle ground.


I imagine the school teaches the wristlock just fine.  Likely it is the student who is lacking.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Flying Crane said:


> I imagine the school teaches the wristlock just fine.  Likely it is the student who is lacking.


Maybe. I edited the post to include the word apparently, since I have no way of knowing at this point.


----------



## Flying Crane

kempodisciple said:


> Maybe. I edited the post to include the word apparently, since I have no way of knowing at this point.


Given his pattern of trollish posting, I would say it’s pretty apparent.


----------



## Alan Smithee

kempodisciple said:


> IMaybe in 4 more years you'll realize some holes in your thinking and find some sort of middle ground.



Not if the laws of physiology remain the same in 4 years time.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Alan Smithee said:


> Not if the laws of physiology remain the same in 4 years time.



They do, and it's also true that I have personally used all sorts of joint locks effectively. Now, I've never trained in Aikido, so you can feel free to claim that they're not the same locks. But I have played with Aikidoka, Hapikdoan, etc, and the locks I use are functionally identical (or at least, I can personally detect no difference) to theirs. And yes, I've used them against people of all sizes, who were certainly doing their best to resist.
Perhaps you should consider the possibility that the problem isn't the lock, but you.


----------



## oftheherd1

A lot of misinformation in such a short thread of non-Hapkido practitioners.  Interestingly most of it coming from the OP.  @Alan Smithee what you have stated in this thread is from sources that are mostly incorrect.  A couple may have some truth but it is stretched I think,so I have some doubts.  'Nuff said.

Oh, one other thing, you might want to refine your search techniques.


----------



## Alan Smithee

Dirty Dog said:


> They do, and it's also true that I have personally used all sorts of joint locks effectively. Now, I've never trained in Aikido, so you can feel free to claim that they're not the same locks. But I have played with Aikidoka, Hapikdoan, etc, and the locks I use are functionally identical (or at least, I can personally detect no difference) to theirs. And yes, I've used them against people of all sizes, who were certainly doing their best to resist.
> Perhaps you should consider the possibility that the problem isn't the lock, but you.



You have done what exactly? They are comically easy to resist.


----------



## Alan Smithee

oftheherd1 said:


> @Alan Smithee what you have stated in this thread is from sources that are mostly incorrect. .



Are you the final arbitrator of sound sources?


----------



## Alan Smithee

Dirty Dog said:


> Perhaps you should consider the possibility that the problem isn't the lock, but you.



The instructor failed to apply it to... guess who.. ME. He tried every trick in the book which even then didn't work. It was embarrassing.


----------



## Alan Smithee

Those same TMA instructors believe that you break your arm if you don't comply, I've heard it been said to my face. The delusion is stroong

Well my arm is just fine and he got NOWHERE. I must be a beast!


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Alan Smithee said:


> The instructor failed to apply it to... guess who.. ME. He tried every trick in the book which even then didn't work. It was embarrassing.


Maybe there's a difference between "the instructor failed to apply it", and "the laws of physiology prevent it from working. 

But I'll give you four more years to figure that out again.


----------



## Alan Smithee

kempodisciple said:


> Maybe there's a difference between "the instructor failed to apply it", and "the laws of physiology prevent it from working.
> 
> But I'll give you four more years to figure that out again.



Why would it be different for anybody else? I had no theoretical knowledge of anything.. I just didn't comply. And like I said he tried all manner of things. It didn't distract me one bit to give in. Had he tried all that in a real confrontation... gosh, He would have been perceptible to quite a number of counters when he's scratching his head why the joint manipulation doesn't work.


----------



## dvcochran

Researching the TKD Times archives, there was no March 2000 issue. Go figure. 

I have asked you before, what point are you trying to make? There are plenty of other sites you can go troll.


----------



## dvcochran

kempodisciple said:


> Its like you actively avoid the information that puts holes in your ideas, and only focus on the stuff that supports it. It explains why you spent 4 years at a school that apparently teaches how to wristlock incorrectly, then when you acknowledged this went the extreme opposite, stating that wristlocks/aikido do not work at all. Maybe in 4 more years you'll realize some holes in your thinking and find some sort of middle ground.


Man, wasn't that easy to figure out?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Alan Smithee said:


> You have done what exactly? They are comically easy to resist.



Taken people down with joint locks. Wrist locks. Elbow locks. Shoulder locks. Hip throws.
You know, the stuff you claim can't be done.
If you'll tell me which part you don't understand, I'll try to help.


----------



## Flying Crane

Alan Smithee said:


> The instructor failed to apply it to... guess who.. ME. He tried every trick in the book which even then didn't work. It was embarrassing.


youtube link, please.


----------



## Alan Smithee

Now as for Hapkido and Aikido being nearly identical in the joint manipulation techniques and throws, the founders of each respective styles were both Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu students of Sokaku Takeda.

So it makes sense...


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Alan Smithee said:


> Why would it be different for anybody else? I had no theoretical knowledge of anything.. I just didn't comply. And like I said he tried all manner of things. It didn't distract me one bit to give in. Had he tried all that in a real confrontation... gosh, He would have been perceptible to quite a number of counters when he's scratching his head why the joint manipulation doesn't work.


I'm not suggesting it's different in that you didn't comply correctly-that would be ********. I'm suggesting that if it wasn't working, that means that instructor was not doing something about it correctly. I don't know what, I wasn't there, but given how you referred to it as a "wrist flick", and referred to only using the arm for strength, rather than the body, I would bet that's where the issue lies.


----------



## Alan Smithee

kempodisciple said:


> I'm not suggesting it's different in that you didn't comply correctly-that would be ********. I'm suggesting that if it wasn't working, that means that instructor was not doing something about it correctly. I don't know what, I wasn't there, but given how you referred to it as a "wrist flick", and referred to only using the arm for strength, rather than the body, I would bet that's where the issue lies.



I wrote that you cannot compare the limb connection a BJJ person makes to the joint manipulators in TMA. And yes, it is vastly different in terms of how the body is integrated.

This goes over very well key differences. I really suggest you watch it.


----------



## dvcochran

Alan Smithee said:


> I wrote that you cannot compare the limb connection a BJJ person makes to the joint manipulators in TMA. And yes, it is vastly different in terms of how the body is integrated.
> 
> This goes over very well key differences. I really suggest you watch it.


Sigh. A large portion of the posts have been telling you to augment your training. The video reaffirms the point. 

Does Aikido even practice from the guard position?


----------



## jobo

Alan Smithee said:


> The instructor failed to apply it to... guess who.. ME. He tried every trick in the book which even then didn't work. It was embarrassing.





Alan Smithee said:


> You have done what exactly? They are comically easy to resist.



We went through this on the other thread, people have trouble putting me in joint locks including my instructor, but I have also used the very same locks on the genial population.

just as people have trouble throwing me or punching me or kicking me, but I can throw, punch and kick people with reasonable reliability.

all techniques against someone of similar physicality depend on speed and surprise, against someone who expects what your going to do and has a techniques to resist they become useless, ALL OF THEM


----------



## Alan Smithee

jobo said:


> We went through this on the other thread, people have trouble putting me in joint locks including my instructor, but I have also used the very same locks on the genial population.
> 
> just as people have trouble throwing me or punching me or kicking me, but I can throw, punch and kick people with reasonable reliability.
> 
> all techniques against someone of similar physicality depend on speed and surprise, against someone who expects what your going to do and has a techniques to resist they become useless, ALL OF THEM



what do you train?


----------



## Alan Smithee

dvcochran said:


> Sigh. A large portion of the posts have been telling you to augment your training. The video reaffirms the point.
> 
> Does Aikido even practice from the guard position?



I do not train Aikido! Aikido does not have any guard/mount training. They are as clueless on the ground against a jiujitsu guy as a Karateka.


----------



## jobo

Alan Smithee said:


> what do you train?


karate


----------



## Alan Smithee

jobo said:


> karate



Karate is a very generic term. Which style of Karate?


----------



## jobo

Alan Smithee said:


> I do not train Aikido! Aikido does not have any guard/mount training. They are as clueless on the ground against a jiujitsu guy as a Karateka.


we do ground fighting in karate, but then we did striking and kicking and not much ground fighting when i did jiu jitsu.

you cant really make those sort of claims as arts differ massively from place to place


----------



## Headhunter

Alan Smithee said:


> what do you train?


A question Ive asked you that you seem to want to ignore


----------



## jobo

Alan Smithee said:


> Karate is a very generic term. Which style of Karate?


its no more generic than saying aikido, which you've done repeatedly


----------



## dvcochran

Alan Smithee said:


> I do not train Aikido! Aikido does not have any guard/mount training. They are as clueless on the ground against a jiujitsu guy as a Karateka.


So, this whole time you have been dogging a style you have never even train in. Real smart. You are a clueless individual who could Never be considered a source of information. Boring.


----------



## jobo

dvcochran said:


> So, this whole time you have been dogging a style you have never even train in. Real smart. You are a clueless individual who could Never be considered a source of information. Boring.


he has claimed to have spent 4 years studing aikido, before deciding it was useless, which really asks some questions of why it took 4 years to come to that conclusion, it should be obvious in a month, if it is indeed so


----------



## Xue Sheng

Alan Smithee said:


> I do not train Aikido! Aikido does not have any guard/mount training. They are as clueless on the ground against a jiujitsu guy as a Karateka.


 
do you train anything beyond YouTube?


----------



## Alan Smithee

jobo said:


> we do ground fighting in karate, but then we did striking and kicking and not much ground fighting when i did jiu jitsu.
> 
> you cant really make those sort of claims as arts differ massively from place to place



Yes I can. The only Karate styles that have a clue on the ground against BJJ are hybrid-mma styles.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Alan Smithee said:


> I don't find much videos of Hapkido online (and no schools where I live). Whenever I do find dojang videos of any kind they tend to be quite dated in time and not complete (in any other famous martial art I can get access to full gradings, full classes, etc).
> 
> This begs the question, is the martial art of Hapkido a dying breed?


What is available on YouTube will vary greatly by school, organization, and art. Some seem to be more insular (some by design, some simply because they don't market much that way).


----------



## Headhunter

Alan Smithee said:


> Yes I can. The only Karate styles that have a clue on the ground against BJJ are hybrid-mma styles.


lol thank you very much for amusing us


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Alan Smithee said:


> Yes I can. The only Karate styles that have a clue on the ground against BJJ are hybrid-mma styles.


That's a blanket statement that would require you having visited with various schools in all different kinds of Karate (as the term is pretty generic). Your past statements don't lead me to believe you've done that level of extensive research.


----------



## Headhunter

gpseymour said:


> That's a blanket statement that would require you having visited with various schools in all different kinds of Karate (as the term is pretty generic). Your past statements don't lead me to believe you've done that level of extensive research.


I'm guessing his research on karate consists of him watching cobra Kai and that's about It


----------



## jobo

well no you can't, you may say it isn't common, but I don't know if that's true 

it's certain that karate as originally d vised had a up close and on the ground grappling element to it, that seems not to have been kept up in a lot of modern adaptations.  

it's never my choice to go to ground, , it's generally a most disadvantaged position to be in , but if I do then I have techniques that work down there,  will it hold up against bjj? not sure probably not, hard to say


----------



## Bruce7

Alan Smithee said:


> I don't find much videos of Hapkido online (and no schools where I live). Whenever I do find dojang videos of any kind they tend to be quite dated in time and not complete (in any other famous martial art I can get access to full gradings, full classes, etc).
> 
> This begs the question, is the martial art of Hapkido a dying breed?



IMO it is a good question who wants to know about Hapkido.

One of the students said to the teacher what we all thought, I want to go to Korea to learn TKD,  where it all started.
He said, " you would be better off studying Hapkido if he want to go to Korea. The student asked why? He said "TKD in Korea is not the same as it once was and Hapkido has not changed."
IMO He meant the Koreans had already bought the best of TKD to America and there was no deeper knowledge to be found in Korea.
The best Hapkido masters were still in Korea, so if you are go to Korea to improve as a martial artist, studying Hapkido would be the best use of your time.


----------



## dvcochran

jobo said:


> he has claimed to have spent 4 years studing aikido, before deciding it was useless, which really asks some questions of why it took 4 years to come to that conclusion, it should be obvious in a month, if it is indeed so


Forrest Gump syndrome. Stupid is as stupid does.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

REMINDER TO ALL MEMBERS:

Insults and name-calling are not in line with the guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Please keep it civil, or further action may result.

_____________
*Gerry Seymour*
MartialTalk Moderator
@gpseymour


----------



## vince1

Alan Smithee said:


> Why would it be different for anybody else? I had no theoretical knowledge of anything.. I just didn't comply. And like I said he tried all manner of things. It didn't distract me one bit to give in. Had he tried all that in a real confrontation... gosh, He would have been perceptible to quite a number of counters when he's scratching his head why the joint manipulation doesn't work.



Do you have video footage of this that you could share with us?


----------



## vince1

We have at least 5 Hapkido schools in my part of the country. Some of the TaeKwonDo schools in my area have even reached out to my Aikijuijitsu teacher for student instruction. I have a friend who teaches Hapkido a few hours away from my home as part of his TaeKwonDo school. Some of his technique are definitely not as good as an Aikijuijitsu practioner.


----------



## Alan Smithee

vince1 said:


> Do you have video footage of this that you could share with us?



No, strange that i didn't have TMZ around. .


----------



## Flying Crane

Alan Smithee said:


> No, strange that i didn't have TMZ around. .



Hmm.  Go figure...



Alan Smithee said:


> If something is not on Youtube is pretty indicative. Welcome to the real world. And it's not like I haven't checked if there are any schools in my area...


----------



## Alan Smithee

Flying Crane said:


> Hmm.  Go figure...



you equate street fights with school publicity? It was in 2008 for that matter


----------



## dvcochran

Please do not entice the trolls!!!


----------



## Flying Crane

Alan Smithee said:


> you equate street fights with school publicity? It was in 2008 for that matter


Where did you come up with that?


----------



## vince1

Alan Smithee said:


> No, strange that i didn't have TMZ around. .


Then it didn't happen.


----------



## skribs

Alan Smithee said:


> I wrote that you cannot compare the limb connection a BJJ person makes to the joint manipulators in TMA. And yes, it is vastly different in terms of how the body is integrated.
> 
> This goes over very well key differences. I really suggest you watch it.



Except when I'm doing that V-Lock, I'll do a lot more than just stand there and twist his wrist.

I'm using my feet to put me into a position with good leverage.  When I twist his arm, I push my bicep into his elbow in order to apply extra pressure.  If he shifts his weight and turns into the lock to loosen it, I'll change direction and go with that energy to straighten his arm out.  Typically they'll resist again by pulling their arm back in, which sets me up perfect for a Figure-4.

I can do this, because I've trained for years to apply the techniques correctly, and how to read my opponent's resistance to the technique so I can adjust what I'm doing based on their resistance.  

This is all from my Hapkido training.  We learn the basic technique (what the aikido guy does in the video), how to make it work (what the BJJ guy is doing), and what to do when it fails.  Unfortunately this process typically doesn't make it to Youtube.

Students at my school are pretty stubborn about going down and when to tap out.  So you learn how to make the techniques actually work.


----------



## drop bear

kempodisciple said:


> Maybe there's a difference between "the instructor failed to apply it", and "the laws of physiology prevent it from working.
> 
> But I'll give you four more years to figure that out again.



The thing is there are not many people who can make wrist locks work. And I mean people who are really dangerous with them.

But there are a lot of people who say they can.

I think for people to be wrist lock guys they really have to be able to do them consistently live and on command. And so we should be able to see a video of it somewhere.

Basically like a Danaher guy saying he can do a leg lock. It comes from them leg locking everyone. Then you are a leg lock guy.






If people are going to be these wrist lock guys they have to go out and wrist lock people.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> The thing is there are not many people who can make wrist locks work. And I mean people who are really dangerous with them.
> 
> But there are a lot of people who say they can.
> 
> I think for people to be wrist lock guys they really have to be able to do them consistently live and on command. And so we should be able to see a video of it somewhere.
> 
> Basically like a Danaher guy saying he can do a leg lock. It comes from them leg locking everyone. Then you are a leg lock guy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If people are going to be these wrist lock guys they have to go out and wrist lock people.


I think the reality of wrist locks is that it takes a really high skill level to do them on command (with someone resisting , who knows what they’re doing). For most folks, the skill to develop is recognizing when the wrist lock becomes available. That makes them reliable when you go for them, though that’s not going to be as often as other moves.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> The thing is there are not many people who can make wrist locks work. And I mean people who are really dangerous with them.
> 
> But there are a lot of people who say they can.
> 
> I think for people to be wrist lock guys they really have to be able to do them consistently live and on command. And so we should be able to see a video of it somewhere.
> 
> Basically like a Danaher guy saying he can do a leg lock. It comes from them leg locking everyone. Then you are a leg lock guy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If people are going to be these wrist lock guys they have to go out and wrist lock people.



I think another big part of the problem is that most techniques fail.  This applies to all martial arts.  Most techniques you use in a fight will fail.  How many punches does a boxer miss?  How many punches does a boxer land that don't KO the opponent?  How many take-downs does a wrestler get sprawled on?  How many times does a wrestler take someone down and *not* pin them?  How many submission attempts are abandoned in a BJJ match because the opponent was able to defend it?

Wristlocks are the same.  If I'm going for a V-Lock, I assume there's about a 20% chance I will take them down with the V-Lock.  They may try and pull against it, in which case I'll change direction and go for an armbar takedown.  They may use their footwork to "unwind" the lock, in which case I'll follow through and pull their elbow down on my shoulder.  In both cases, there's other ways they may resist, and I have techniques I will transition into.  So my V-Lock may fail, but I may end up with a shoulder lock, a figure-4, a chicken wing, or a hip toss.  All that started from the V-Lock.


----------



## TaiChiTJ

Alan Smithee said:


> If something is not on Youtube is pretty indicative.



I used to think that too. Not so sure now. Highly effective teachers may just choose to not have a strong web presence.


----------



## Gweilo

@Alan Smithee The reason most are unsuccesful in locks etc is they do not understand fulcrum points, and if you come up against someone who is very good at them, the 1st you will know about it, is when the immense pressure is put on the relevant part of the body. Someone very good at locks, throws, takedowns etc knows how to get into a position, or manipulate their opponent into a favouarable position. The fulcrum point is the point at which there is no return, knowing where this point is of a technique becomes 2nd nature, you could compare it to a competant adult deciding if they can cross the road safely before the approaching vehicle reaches them.
Before I go any further, yes I used to train in Hapkido, I attained 3rd Dan (I still practise a lot of the techniques and blend them in with my current and previous arts), it is hinted that you did train Aikido for 4 years, so you would have been a novice, and had a vague understanding of its techniques, and this is evident in your comment about the teacher trying to apply a lock, and you found it embarressing because you stopped him from applying it. The reason techniques are applied with a compliance in class is, A: the attacker can feel what its like when the technique is applied correctly, B: the receiver can feel what its like when the technique is applied correctly, only then can the student start to understand bio mechanics and fulcrum points, then you can start resistance training.
Even a novice at locks etc will know, if you are trying to apply a wrist lock for example, and its not happening because your opponent has put strength/tension in the wrist, their mind is in their wrist, so revert to a good old smack in the face, throat, plums,  etc. It amazes me why people think, someone who practices an art form, that uses a lot of locks etc, are one dimensional fighters. I am in the US, september this year, if you would like a demonstration/play/spar or fulcrum points explained, I would be happy to oblige, or of course if you are in the UK, near Bath, you are welcome to come and have a play.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> I think another big part of the problem is that most techniques fail.  This applies to all martial arts.  Most techniques you use in a fight will fail.  How many punches does a boxer miss?  How many punches does a boxer land that don't KO the opponent?  How many take-downs does a wrestler get sprawled on?  How many times does a wrestler take someone down and *not* pin them?  How many submission attempts are abandoned in a BJJ match because the opponent was able to defend it?
> 
> Wristlocks are the same.  If I'm going for a V-Lock, I assume there's about a 20% chance I will take them down with the V-Lock.  They may try and pull against it, in which case I'll change direction and go for an armbar takedown.  They may use their footwork to "unwind" the lock, in which case I'll follow through and pull their elbow down on my shoulder.  In both cases, there's other ways they may resist, and I have techniques I will transition into.  So my V-Lock may fail, but I may end up with a shoulder lock, a figure-4, a chicken wing, or a hip toss.  All that started from the V-Lock.



That was the point of using the Danaher guy. In that they are pretty successful with them. 

Successful enough that people paid attention even though it fell outside a lot of accepted belief.


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> @Alan Smithee The reason most are unsuccesful in locks etc is they do not understand fulcrum points, and if you come up against someone who is very good at them, the 1st you will know about it, is when the immense pressure is put on the relevant part of the body. Someone very good at locks, throws, takedowns etc knows how to get into a position, or manipulate their opponent into a favouarable position. The fulcrum point is the point at which there is no return, knowing where this point is of a technique becomes 2nd nature, you could compare it to a competant adult deciding if they can cross the road safely before the approaching vehicle reaches them.
> Before I go any further, yes I used to train in Hapkido, I attained 3rd Dan (I still practise a lot of the techniques and blend them in with my current and previous arts), it is hinted that you did train Aikido for 4 years, so you would have been a novice, and had a vague understanding of its techniques, and this is evident in your comment about the teacher trying to apply a lock, and you found it embarressing because you stopped him from applying it. The reason techniques are applied with a compliance in class is, A: the attacker can feel what its like when the technique is applied correctly, B: the receiver can feel what its like when the technique is applied correctly, only then can the student start to understand bio mechanics and fulcrum points, then you can start resistance training.
> Even a novice at locks etc will know, if you are trying to apply a wrist lock for example, and its not happening because your opponent has put strength/tension in the wrist, their mind is in their wrist, so revert to a good old smack in the face, throat, plums,  etc. It amazes me why people think, someone who practices an art form, that uses a lot of locks etc, are one dimensional fighters. I am in the US, september this year, if you would like a demonstration/play/spar or fulcrum points explained, I would be happy to oblige, or of course if you are in the UK, near Bath, you are welcome to come and have a play.



No. It is because you can either generally defend them or attack with something else that works better. Like punching. 

And so to get them on you have to be really slick at them. And most people don't bother because they could be really slick at something high percentage instead.


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> No. It is because you can either generally defend them or attack with something else that works better. Like punching.
> 
> And so to get them on you have to be really slick at them. And most people don't bother because they could be really slick at something high percentage instead.



Yes, Im not saying its easy, but this just goes to show peoples misunderstanging of Hapkido and its techniques, it has techniques to deal with an aggressive attack, from a mma style upright type, once you clinch you are playing their game, I agree Hapkido is weak in ground techniques, which is where training a grappling/wrestling art helps, but other than that, your posts reaks of not understanding. Hapkido has elements that orignate of Daito ryu, and techniques similar to Karate, tkd, judo. Going for a lock is not the game plan, its an opportunity you take if it arises, but your lack of beleif that they cannot be applied to you, is a weakness to you.


----------



## Gweilo

@drop bear Sorry I edited it as you clicked like.


----------



## Gweilo

Cant have people thinking we agree


----------



## skribs

Gweilo said:


> The reason techniques are applied with a compliance in class is, A: the attacker can feel what its like when the technique is applied correctly, B: the receiver can feel what its like when the technique is applied correctly, only then can the student start to understand bio mechanics and fulcrum points, then you can start resistance training.



My progression through a technique is:

Active compliance
Passive compliance
Passive resistance
Active resistance
Creative use (sparring, experimentation, etc)
The other thing I find with beginners is some will refuse to be thrown and end up hurting their own wrist out of stubbornness.  That is another reason compliance is good in beginners.



> Even a novice at locks etc will know, if you are trying to apply a wrist lock for example, and its not happening because your opponent has put strength/tension in the wrist, their mind is in their wrist, so revert to a good old smack in the face, throat, plums, etc. It amazes me why people think, someone who practices an art form, that uses a lot of locks etc, are one dimensional fighters.



My hapkido is much more focused on the grappling.  We're taught that if one lock fails, you usually have another lock available.  If I'm trying to go inside and you pull outside, then going outside becomes much easier.  If I'm trying to go forward and you push back, then going backward is easier.  If I try to flex your arm to get a tight v-lock or z-lock and you lock your arm straight, then there are other wristlocks that open up that put tension on the elbow.

However, going back to the point I quoted above - at the beginning, you need to learn all of these techniques individually.  You need to learn the inside technique and the form of it, and the outside technique and the form.  Otherwise you don't have a solid technique to switch to when you feel resistance.

I also think this is a problem with many of the comments on demonstration videos.  Those videos are showing the beginner-level version of the technique (with compliance), but they get ripped apart as if the single technique is the entire fighting style.


----------



## Gweilo

I agree, when I was taught, then taught others, learn how the technique worked, and when it didnt work, learn the bio mechanics and fulcrum points, and transition in combat (as you  pointed out move to another joint, part of the body, another technique like a strike).
Done correctly, it does not matter if your opponent is stronger, very little strength is needed if the angles and pressure are applied correctly. Knowing your movement, and being sensitive to your opponents movement, makes applying locks far easier.
Many a time people have told me, wrist locks etc dont work, I am very happy to prove them wrong, and demonstrate the techniques to them, when they have finished rubbing their wrist etc.


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> Yes, Im not saying its easy, but this just goes to show peoples misunderstanging of Hapkido and its techniques, it has techniques to deal with an aggressive attack, from a mma style upright type, once you clinch you are playing their game, I agree Hapkido is weak in ground techniques, which is where training a grappling/wrestling art helps, but other than that, your posts reaks of not understanding. Hapkido has elements that orignate of Daito ryu, and techniques similar to Karate, tkd, judo. Going for a lock is not the game plan, its an opportunity you take if it arises, but your lack of beleif that they cannot be applied to you, is a weakness to you.



It depends what you spend your time on. I have spent time going for arm locks when I could have been going for something more effective because I was paid to. If I get an arm Iock I have pretty much guaranteed access to their back. And then I can suplex them or choke them and possibly kill them.

So if you are farting around trying standing arm locks I am in a better situation than I could have been otherwise had you taken a position that is more dangerous.

And they are a lot harder to do. Which is why we never see them done live. And they are almost always trained unrealistically which is why I am always suspect of arm bar specialists who can't provide any evidence.

And you can really only get reliable arm bars from clinching because you need to break their structure first.


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> It depends what you spend your time on. I have spent time going for arm locks when I could have been going for something more effective because I was paid to. If I get an arm Iock I have pretty much guaranteed access to their back. And then I can suplex them or choke them and possibly kill them.
> 
> So if you are farting around trying standing arm locks I am in a better situation than I could have been otherwise had you taken a position that is more dangerous.
> 
> And they are a lot harder to do. Which is why we never see them done live. And they are almost always trained unrealistically which is why I am always suspect of arm bar specialists who can't provide any evidence.
> 
> And you can really only get reliable arm bars from clinching because you need to break their structure first.



Transition in the flow of combat, real combat is rarely decided by a single technique, the ability to make transitions from one hold or contact to another is crucial, its the ability to recognise these opportunities during the flow of combat, which is constantly changing. Yes for every technique there is a counter, and forvevery counter, there is a counter, with a host of techniques/strength, the hallmark of a good fighter is that persons ability to transition from one technique to another, constantly adjusting to their opponents movement, balance and power, if you are truely in sync with your opponents movements, you can transition efficeintly, which is vital in this senario/discussion, strength then becomes mostly irrelevant.
If you understand the limitations of the body, and as I said earlier, you understand why the techniques of holds/locks work, and the type of force that needs to be applied (which does take practice, and practice with resistance), along with transitions, you can create, modify techniques to suit the changing flow of combat.
So, yes you can change it up, but so can I, to actually beleive, someone proficeint in holds/locks, is going to stand still, and try to implement such techniques, then you are very much mistaken. 
Suplex,? you should change your name to Hulk Hogan, whats next,  a piledriver, or a drop bear superfly jimmy snooker?
OOOHYEAHHH.


----------



## skribs

Gweilo said:


> Yes for every technique there is a counter, and forvevery counter, there is a counter, with a host of techniques/strength



I'm curious how many "steps ahead" you can take a technique before you hit a loopback call, where it's not a new concept but just a counter that was already in the thought process before.


----------



## drop bear

Ok. Lets  make this a separate post about how you could be operating in an unethical manner if you were teaching standing arm bars.






That sissor


Gweilo said:


> Transition in the flow of combat, real combat is rarely decided by a single technique, the ability to make transitions from one hold or contact to another is crucial, its the ability to recognise these opportunities during the flow of combat, which is constantly changing. Yes for every technique there is a counter, and forvevery counter, there is a counter, with a host of techniques/strength, the hallmark of a good fighter is that persons ability to transition from one technique to another, constantly adjusting to their opponents movement, balance and power, if you are truely in sync with your opponents movements, you can transition efficeintly, which is vital in this senario/discussion, strength then becomes mostly irrelevant.
> If you understand the limitations of the body, and as I said earlier, you understand why the techniques of holds/locks work, and the type of force that needs to be applied (which does take practice, and practice with resistance), along with transitions, you can create, modify techniques to suit the changing flow of combat.
> So, yes you can change it up, but so can I, to actually beleive, someone proficeint in holds/locks, is going to stand still, and try to implement such techniques, then you are very much mistaken.
> Suplex,? you should change your name to Hulk Hogan, whats next,  a piledriver, or a drop bear superfly jimmy snooker?
> OOOHYEAHHH.



Yeah but when you understand arm bars and the specifics you will understand their limitations more.

The counter for arm bars is not being crap.

Being suplexed in a street fight is possibly one of the most terrifying prospects you can face as it can break your neck.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> The counter for arm bars is not being crap.



Really?  According to stats you posted in the general thread: UFC Statistics : 5,000 Fights Tracked! - UFC Secrets Arm-bars make up the most common arm submission in UFC.

Are UFC fighters crap?


----------



## Gweilo

skribs said:


> I'm curious how many "steps ahead" you can take a technique before you hit a loopback call, where it's not a new concept but just a counter that was already in the thought process before.



It depends on the opponent, in my own experience, some are easily led, others have to be encouraged or manipulated into a favourable position.


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> Ok. Lets  make this a separate post about how you could be operating in an unethical manner if you were teaching standing arm bars.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That sissor
> 
> 
> Yeah but when you understand arm bars and the specifics you will understand their limitations more.
> 
> The counter for arm bars is not being crap.
> 
> Being suplexed in a street fight is possibly one of the most terrifying prospects you can face as it can break your neck.



Heres the problem, its your perception of the arm bar, leverage on the elbow can be done with my elbow, knee or hip, shoulder, even my head, you see it as a submission move, I see it as a control movement, a transition movement or a submission movement. A senario, I try to perform a standing arm bar, opponent responds to defend, as he moves to defend, I have already moved on to, could be a strike, could be a structure break, could be the neck, or a stamp on the foot. 
You say its impossible to implement a standing arm bar in a sd situation, others here have said nothing is impossible, but they would not try it, unless it was a sitting duck, or use it as a way to suck you in to another move, yet you still want to go back and argue about a standing arm bar, and quite willing to beleive someone is going to stand still, and let you suplex them.


----------



## Gweilo

Your video is a good point, even though its a training session, its a very basic set of skills, if you have watched it all, you should understand what others are saying, these takedowns with locks will work on unskilled individuals, have a fair chance of working on more experienced individuals, and less chance of working experienced individuals, so once the basic principle is taught, and the students learn the restrictions of human body, and are allowed to explore/experiment, transitions will come quicker. The very 1st technique in the video, lets just imagine, the women is defending against a big powerful drop bear, and she does not catch the strike cleanly, in this video although the technique has a higher % of success, she has no follow up, no transition, shes left herself open to a secondry attack, which is a problem with this type of technique taught in the way of this video, if she is taught all the holds and locks, allowed to experiment, train with increasing resistance, and understands fully how the anatonmy of her opponents arm works, in this senario, she has a higher % to succeed, because she can transition to another hold or lock.
Transitions are more than that, if the students in the video were taught the correct stance, with correct foot placement, their movement would be a lot smoother, add this and circular movement, in the 1st technique with the woman defending, would have taken the chap down with very little effort, or performed the break with ease.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> Really?  According to stats you posted in the general thread: UFC Statistics : 5,000 Fights Tracked! - UFC Secrets Arm-bars make up the most common arm submission in UFC.
> 
> Are UFC fighters crap?



Are any of them standing arm bars?


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> Heres the problem, its your perception of the arm bar, leverage on the elbow can be done with my elbow, knee or hip, shoulder, even my head, you see it as a submission move, I see it as a control movement, a transition movement or a submission movement. A senario, I try to perform a standing arm bar, opponent responds to defend, as he moves to defend, I have already moved on to, could be a strike, could be a structure break, could be the neck, or a stamp on the foot.
> You say its impossible to implement a standing arm bar in a sd situation, others here have said nothing is impossible, but they would not try it, unless it was a sitting duck, or use it as a way to suck you in to another move, yet you still want to go back and argue about a standing arm bar, and quite willing to beleive someone is going to stand still, and let you suplex them.



Yes. Taking someone's back and suplexing them is much higher percentage.


----------



## Gweilo

I say this in the nicest way possible, WTF you smoking?
You got more chance of the queen of England, giving you a bj, than me giving you my back.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> Are any of them standing arm bars?



Irrelevant.  We're not talking about that technique right now.

You made the claim that armbars have significant limitations.  Yet it's the most popular arm submission in the UFC, and some people have made their career based on that technique (Ronda Rousey).

You're also insinuating that because we take Hapkido instead of BJJ or MMA, that we can't know about how an armbar works.  Which, I get that you think I know nothing*, but that comment wasn't directed at me.  You seem to have this assumption that if you don't take a specific art, your training in what that art teaches is useless.  That if you don't take BJJ, you don't know anything about submissions, if you don't take Judo or Wrestling you won't know anything about take-downs or throws, if you don't take boxing you won't know how to punch.  I've seen you make these claims before, and not just directed at me.

So what is it?  Are you so arrogant that you think your way is the only way you can learn a martial skill?  Or are you so insecure in your training that you need to bash everyone else who takes a different art, in order to make you feel good about your training style?  I've seen a lot of posters on various sites that have similar mentalities to yours, but you're the most extreme case of it that I've ever seen.  Believe it or not, people can learn how techniques work without taking the specific arts you deem acceptable.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> So what is it? Are you so arrogant that you think your way is the only way you can learn a martial skill? Or are you so insecure in your training that you need to bash everyone else who takes a different art,



No if you are saying a bunch of dumb stuff works. And then can't show it working ever. And nobody else can show it working and you can't show your training. And there is literally nothing to indicate you understand martial arts at all.

Then I feel I have every right to be sceptical.

That isn't insecurity. It is just common sense.

Insecurity is doing a martial arts you hope works but will never risk it to test. And then trying to fool people with all this silly misinformation to increase your status as a martial artist. 

You don't understand there is a difference between a standing and a ground arm bar. Thats fine. I do. 

You don't understand that a lot of what you suggest won't work in self defense. 

Me having to constantly correct you is not my fault. It is yours. Go out. Use these techniques and concepts then come back and we could have a real discussion.


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> I say this in the nicest way possible, WTF you smoking?
> You got more chance of the queen of England, giving you a bj, than me giving you my back.



You would not be able to stop me. Not in a mean way. I can't stop better grapplers from taking my back. 

It is an element you learn from realistic training.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> You don't understand there is a difference between a standing and a ground arm bar. Thats fine. I do.



When have I ever said this?  Every discussion we've had I've explained the differences.  You're so far out in left field you've left the stadium.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> When have I ever said this?  Every discussion we've had I've explained the differences.  You're so far out in left field you've left the stadium.



So you were just being silly and taking arm bars as ground submissions out of context.


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> So you were just being silly and taking arm bars as ground submissions out of context.



Ok, so will you admit, an arm bar can be quickly substituted as a elbow/arm break technique?


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> Ok, so will you admit, an arm bar can be quickly substituted as a elbow/arm break technique?



It is such a complicated question. 

I don't think arms just break very easily and so there is a huge risk to quickly substituting an arm bar for an arm break unless it is just an arm bar done hard.  

The biggest issue is if you try to substitute good fulcrums for speed you wind up loosing the arm. 

So you can but you run the risk of the whole thing not working and having the guy squirm out. 

Or we rely on some outrageous assumptions like the guy is going to grab you with a dead straight arm or something and then not be able to kink it a bit when you go for it.


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> It is such a complicated question



Its only complicated when someone does not understand, exactly what the technique is or does.



drop bear said:


> I don't think arms just break very easily and so there is a huge risk to quickly substituting an arm bar for an arm break unless it is just an arm bar done hard.



A break to the elbow can quicly become an arm bar or vice a versa, its just a case of understanding the technique and why its applied.



drop bear said:


> The biggest issue is if you try to substitute good fulcrums for speed you wind up loosing the arm.



 This happens when you are not well practiced or do not understand the technique.



drop bear said:


> So you can but you run the risk of the whole thing not working and having the guy squirm out.



This happens when you are not well practiced or do not understand the technique.



drop bear said:


> Or we rely on some outrageous assumptions like the guy is going to grab you with a dead straight arm or something and then not be able to kink it a bit when you go for it.



Conjecture and fear speaking.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> The biggest issue is if you try to substitute good fulcrums for speed you wind up loosing the arm.
> 
> So you can but you run the risk of the whole thing not working and having the guy squirm out.



Fully agree.
One thing I do in class for explanation to others and for my own understanding/practice is show how the application of a technique changes between a person shorter, the same height, or taller than you are. Plus a person who is quite bulky, whether from muscle or otherwise. This directly falls in to the "there is no one size fits all" category for technique.

Some of the best training a person gets is when their technique is Not working. It is the best case scenario to learn either what you are doing wrong in a technique or, for various reasons, that you may have to modify the technique to work for you. 
What the partner/Uke does during drills is just as important as what the person practicing the drill does. Being 
compliant has to get progressively less compliant.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> I don't think arms just break very easily and so there is a huge risk to quickly substituting an arm bar for an arm break unless it is just an arm bar done hard.
> 
> The biggest issue is if you try to substitute good fulcrums for speed you wind up loosing the arm.
> 
> So you can but you run the risk of the whole thing not working and having the guy squirm out.



I think we may have found the root of our issue, it may be a terminology thing.  For you, would you say the arm bar is the specific technique where you lock someone with your legs, and then pull the arm?  The technique I'm describing as a "standing arm bar" is maybe what you would consider an "arm break".  I call it a "standing arm bar" because the base mechanic is similar (using your leg as a fulcrum to hyper-extend the elbow), and because we have a lot of other arm breaks that would break the arm in a different way (mostly wrist breaks, a few shoulder breaks, a few that would twist the elbow instead of hyper-extend it).  

In our Hapkido class, any technique that relies on locking that elbow straight is called an "arm bar".  For example, if I twist your wrist so that your arm is straightened out, and then I push down on the elbow to hold you in place or to push you down to the ground, we would call that an "arm bar" to differentiate it from the other locks we use.

If so, you are entirely correct that if you don't have a good fulcrum and you just try and go fast, you can easily lose the arm or have the guy squirm out of it.  And that was my point about the arm break - if the only option is that you get a perfect break or the guy squirms out, it ain't gonna work in a fighting rule system where you're not supposed to actually break the arm or choke someone out - but get them to the point just before.  If you don't have them pinned down, squirming out becomes very easy.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

*ATTENTION ALL POSTERS:*

Please remember that this is a _friendly _martial arts forum, and argue the topic, not the poster. Thank you.

William H
@kempodisciple 
Martialtalk Moderator


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Gweilo said:


> Going for a lock is not the game plan, its an opportunity you take if it arises


This. And there are a lot of folks in the aiki/hapki arts that don't seem to quite understand that point.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

skribs said:


> In our Hapkido class, any technique that relies on locking that elbow straight is called an "arm bar". For example, if I twist your wrist so that your arm is straightened out, and then I push down on the elbow to hold you in place or to push you down to the ground, we would call that an "arm bar" to differentiate it from the other locks we use.


We do this in NGA, as well. We even examine 6 variants of the technique (which really could be called at least 6 different techniques). We do a similar thing with the term "leg sweep", applying the term to at least 5 different Judo techniques, eventually.


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> Its only complicated when someone does not understand, exactly what the technique is or does.



It is only simple when someone doesn't understand the technique. They don't see the layers.


----------



## oftheherd1

drop bear said:


> It is only simple when someone doesn't understand the technique. They don't see the layers.



I'm not sure I understand you.  What do you mean by layers?


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> It is only simple when someone doesn't understand the technique. They don't see the layers.


I cannot agree with that one.


----------



## skribs

oftheherd1 said:


> I'm not sure I understand you.  What do you mean by layers?



You see...arm bars are like an onion...


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> I cannot agree with that one.



Not as suprised about that as you would imagine.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> You see...arm bars are like an onion...



Or an ogre. Yes pretty much.


----------



## drop bear

oftheherd1 said:


> I'm not sure I understand you.  What do you mean by layers?



Ok. So there is a concept in martial arts that a whole bunch of stuff has to have happened before you wind up in that devastating arm bar.

And to be a good martial artist you need to start creating an environment where this arm bar works well before there is an arm bar.

So an arm bar takes two things. For you to isolate their arm and for you to break their posture. (Especially standing because you don't have the advantage of being able to throw your whole body at it.)

Now that is a lot to ask for in a fight. And especially for any period of time it takes to actually arm bar someone. Which is a hell of a lot in four or five punches a second fighting times.

So this is where being incredibly cagey about how people train comes in because this process is almost always short cutted by people who don't have a good understanding of what they are doing. You get these terms like I will use their momentum or take an opportunity or other meaningless phrases.

And what you normally wind up getting is training to reflect when a bad guy does something fundamentally silly for long enough to take advantage of.






Unfortunately even dumb bad guys quite often are not that dumb and will do simple defences that make arm bars basically impossible if you are not that good at them.

(You see this with police a bit where they wind up beating on a guy to get that arm and posture break)

So to get arm bars or arm breaks generally you need to break their posture first. Gain a position and isolate their arm. Unfortunately people spend years on grappling arts to try to get just that bit right. That is an incredibly nuanced process and is the reason good grapplers beat bad grapplers pretty consistently.

So if you are talking about someone throwing some slack punch or making a dead straight arm grab then arm bars, arm breaks and martial arts are simple. Unfortunately they also tend not to work.

So an arm break bar kind of can and kind of can't be substituted as an arm break. Some of them do both. There are some like arm drags where you can pressure the joint but not get it to break. There are some shoulder throws that torque the arm as you fall.

As I said it is complicated.


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> So an arm bar takes two things. For you to isolate their arm and for you to break their posture. (Especially standing because you don't have the advantage of being able to throw your whole body at it.)



No, if the arm bar, or elbow lock is available, this can be your structure break.



drop bear said:


> Now that is a lot to ask for in a fight. And especially for any period of time it takes to actually arm bar someone. Which is a hell of a lot in four or five punches a second fighting times



Again no, once the lock is on or used as a structure break, you will be off balance, your combination will not reach.



drop bear said:


> You get these terms like I will use their momentum or take an opportunity or other meaningless phrases.



Again, you sound like someone who has spent a couple of hours training this, not many years, blending, absorbing, or redirecting your opponents power/vector/speed, is a well known, and well used stratergy/technique.



drop bear said:


> So to get arm bars or arm breaks generally you need to break their posture first.



Not true.



drop bear said:


> So if you are talking about someone throwing some slack punch or making a dead straight arm grab then arm bars, arm breaks and martial arts are simple. Unfortunately they also tend not to work.


No, you are not listening, these techniques are not a stratergy, they are an opportunity.


drop bear said:


> So an arm break bar kind of can and kind of can't be substituted as an arm break. Some of them do both. There are some like arm drags where you can pressure the joint but not get it to break. There are some shoulder throws that torque the arm as you fall.


 Thiscwas my point, but i read this in another post, that i think defines my point, you have a lock or hold opportunity, it can be ramped up, by combining rotations ( a basic goose or chicken neck can be multiplied by combining rotations, as well as placing presure to the elbow you can rotate the lower arm, like the accelerator on a motorcycle grip), with good stance and foot position, you can rotate the body for extra torque, again moving you away from secondry attacks. This is your problem, you see a technique as a singularity,, not as a means to an end, or a sequence of techniques to control.


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> Again, you sound like someone who has spent a couple of hours training this, not many years, blending, absorbing, or redirecting your opponents power/vector/speed, is a well known, and well used stratergy/technique.



So is punching them and not letting them punch you. But they are still meaningless terms.


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> No, if the arm bar, or elbow lock is available, this can be your structure break.



Because as soon as you attack that arm they just don't move?

I pull the arm out straight, he walks forwards until it bends again. Their structure doesn't break. They just move a bit.

You mostly won't get a bent arm out straight like you think you do.

Have you ever wondered why knife defense. Which basically hinges on this idea that you can secure an arm mostly doesn't work?

I mean this isn't uncommon.





And he is using a rubber knife and attacking with just one hand and just repeating the same attack. This should be a gimme for standing locks.

Why didn't he blend, redirect or take an opportunity?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Or an ogre. Yes pretty much.


Or parfait. Everybody likes an armbar.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Ok. So there is a concept in martial arts that a whole bunch of stuff has to have happened before you wind up in that devastating arm bar.
> 
> And to be a good martial artist you need to start creating an environment where this arm bar works well before there is an arm bar.
> 
> So an arm bar takes two things. For you to isolate their arm and for you to break their posture. (Especially standing because you don't have the advantage of being able to throw your whole body at it.)
> 
> Now that is a lot to ask for in a fight. And especially for any period of time it takes to actually arm bar someone. Which is a hell of a lot in four or five punches a second fighting times.
> 
> So this is where being incredibly cagey about how people train comes in because this process is almost always short cutted by people who don't have a good understanding of what they are doing. You get these terms like I will use their momentum or take an opportunity or other meaningless phrases.
> 
> And what you normally wind up getting is training to reflect when a bad guy does something fundamentally silly for long enough to take advantage of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately even dumb bad guys quite often are not that dumb and will do simple defences that make arm bars basically impossible if you are not that good at them.
> 
> (You see this with police a bit where they wind up beating on a guy to get that arm and posture break)
> 
> So to get arm bars or arm breaks generally you need to break their posture first. Gain a position and isolate their arm. Unfortunately people spend years on grappling arts to try to get just that bit right. That is an incredibly nuanced process and is the reason good grapplers beat bad grapplers pretty consistently.
> 
> So if you are talking about someone throwing some slack punch or making a dead straight arm grab then arm bars, arm breaks and martial arts are simple. Unfortunately they also tend not to work.
> 
> So an arm break bar kind of can and kind of can't be substituted as an arm break. Some of them do both. There are some like arm drags where you can pressure the joint but not get it to break. There are some shoulder throws that torque the arm as you fall.
> 
> As I said it is complicated.


I teach most standing arm bars as transition points (kind of like stances). Start with an arm drag, use the arm for some leverage. If it stays straight (probably the 4th most likely possibility out of 5, in broad terms), you can always finish with the arm bar as a takedown or break. If (more likely) the arm bends, you've used the beginning (what I term the entry) to break their structure and something else will present, even if it's only an opportunity to drive a knee in or such. If the arm drag entry doesn't lead to breaking the posture in any significant way, either you used it without an opportunity (that is, a place where an arm drag would be somewhat effective) or they countered.

In this approach, the lock becomes the least important part of the technique. The entry is what they're really learning to use, and the lock is just learning to manipulate a straight arm from several different positions.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Gweilo said:


> No, if the arm bar, or elbow lock is available, this can be your structure break.


I'd have to see what you mean by that. The lock itself is not normally available unless the structure is broken or their body movement is restricted. An arm drag or arm roll will start that structure change and can be enough sometimes to make the lock available. But it may be that you include one or the other in your definition of the arm bar.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> Ok. So there is a concept in martial arts that a whole bunch of stuff has to have happened before you wind up in that devastating arm bar.
> 
> And to be a good martial artist you need to start creating an environment where this arm bar works well before there is an arm bar.
> 
> So an arm bar takes two things. For you to isolate their arm and for you to break their posture. (Especially standing because you don't have the advantage of being able to throw your whole body at it.)
> 
> Now that is a lot to ask for in a fight. And especially for any period of time it takes to actually arm bar someone. Which is a hell of a lot in four or five punches a second fighting times.
> 
> So this is where being incredibly cagey about how people train comes in because this process is almost always short cutted by people who don't have a good understanding of what they are doing. You get these terms like I will use their momentum or take an opportunity or other meaningless phrases.
> 
> And what you normally wind up getting is training to reflect when a bad guy does something fundamentally silly for long enough to take advantage of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately even dumb bad guys quite often are not that dumb and will do simple defences that make arm bars basically impossible if you are not that good at them.
> 
> (You see this with police a bit where they wind up beating on a guy to get that arm and posture break)
> 
> So to get arm bars or arm breaks generally you need to break their posture first. Gain a position and isolate their arm. Unfortunately people spend years on grappling arts to try to get just that bit right. That is an incredibly nuanced process and is the reason good grapplers beat bad grapplers pretty consistently.
> 
> So if you are talking about someone throwing some slack punch or making a dead straight arm grab then arm bars, arm breaks and martial arts are simple. Unfortunately they also tend not to work.
> 
> So an arm break bar kind of can and kind of can't be substituted as an arm break. Some of them do both. There are some like arm drags where you can pressure the joint but not get it to break. There are some shoulder throws that torque the arm as you fall.
> 
> As I said it is complicated.



For the record, the technique at 1:43 is the technique I'm talking about when I refer to a standing armbar.

I only seek it if they land in that position.  If they land on their stomach I use a different version or a different technique.  If their arm is curled I use a different version or a different technique. 

The basic concept of Hapkido is that you start by training various locks that can be used for take-downs and for limb destructions.  Over time you learn how to read your opponent's resistance and quickly figure out what techniques are available, based on where they're pulling or pushing, and what position you are in.  I've heard similar things from BJJ guys - that you need to know when to give up on a submission and transition into another technique.

The difference is Hapkido isn't supposed to be a long drawn-out fight or a chess match.  In BJJ, your goal is typically to gain position, and then achieve the submission hold.  In Hapkido, the idea is generally to have them on the ground with a broken arm before they realize you're fighting back.  That's why we do a take-down and then immediately attack a joint - whatever joint we're holding onto.  If we took you down by the leg we'll go for a heel hook, if we took you down by the arm we'll usually go for your wrist or shoulder. 

The other thing is that we like to stay standing up.  If there's another person present, then setting an armbar on the ground is the last place I want to be.  And if the standing one doesn't work, I've still taken them down, where unless they're trained in BJJ I probably have the advantage.

It's a different approach than what you train.  And I'm not going to say one is better than the other or not, because I've seen videos of how well BJJ works in self-defense, and I know how well it works in UFC.  In fact, if I can find the spare time, I'd like to cross-train in BJJ.  It's the top of my list of things I would like to try.  Because I would like to learn the ground game.

When you worry about me teaching the standing armbar, all I'm teaching is that if you've got them in the position (at 1:43 in the video), put your knee under their elbow and pull.  I'm not teaching anything other than that leverage point.

Edit to clarify:  I'm not teaching the standing armbar as a mystical technique.  I'm teaching it as an option if the circumstance is right.  And the way we do our take-downs, it's right a fair amount of the time.


----------



## Gweilo

gpseymour said:


> I'd have to see what you mean by that. The lock itself is not normally available unless the structure is broken or their body movement is restricted. An arm drag or arm roll will start that structure change and can be enough sometimes to make the lock available. But it may be that you include one or the other in your definition of the arm bar.



I should have been clearer, I was talking about structual manipulation through joint control.
For example, if someone grabs your wrist, you can push into their limb in a way that locks the joints of their arm, from their wrist up to the elbow and shoulder, in a way that affects their balance so you can take them to the ground without the use of pain as a motivator.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I teach most standing arm bars as transition points (kind of like stances). Start with an arm drag, use the arm for some leverage. If it stays straight (probably the 4th most likely possibility out of 5, in broad terms), you can always finish with the arm bar as a takedown or break. If (more likely) the arm bends, you've used the beginning (what I term the entry) to break their structure and something else will present, even if it's only an opportunity to drive a knee in or such. If the arm drag entry doesn't lead to breaking the posture in any significant way, either you used it without an opportunity (that is, a place where an arm drag would be somewhat effective) or they countered.
> 
> In this approach, the lock becomes the least important part of the technique. The entry is what they're really learning to use, and the lock is just learning to manipulate a straight arm from several different positions.



The entities can be pretty solid. Because we could be using tried and tested methods like underhooks, arm drags and shoulder shrug. 

There is a bit of clever standing kimoura stuff as well. 

And this is basically how I get arm bars on guys who are not very good. 

But for these entries to work you have to be able to wrestle.  It is going to be the major component in this equation.  If you have a terrifying clinch game you are basically an arm bar specialist. (Of which I don't and am not)

But I really don't think people are spending their time on that as much as an arm bar specialist kind of should. I think they are describing entries that are not realistic. So that their arm bar game works. Or they are trying lock flows. Which are defended by bringing the elbow in to the body pretty much. 

And I don't think this method works very well. 

Which is also why we don't see it that often.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I'd have to see what you mean by that. The lock itself is not normally available unless the structure is broken or their body movement is restricted. An arm drag or arm roll will start that structure change and can be enough sometimes to make the lock available. But it may be that you include one or the other in your definition of the arm bar.



Arm bar specialists should basically look like this. And Aikido or whatever off shoot this is Aikijitsu or something? Is a good example.






I can see it. I can see it with resistance and we can break down to a certain degree what they are doing. 

Very different to drill based arm bars.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> The difference is Hapkido isn't supposed to be a long drawn-out fight or a chess match. In BJJ, your goal is typically to gain position, and then achieve the submission hold. In Hapkido, the idea is generally to have them on the ground with a broken arm before they realize you're fighting back. That's why we do a take-down and then immediately attack a joint - whatever joint we're holding onto. If we took you down by the leg we'll go for a heel hook, if we took you down by the arm we'll usually go for your wrist or shoulder.
> 
> The other thing is that we like to stay standing up. If there's another person present, then setting an armbar on the ground is the last place I want to be. And if the standing one doesn't work, I've still taken them down, where unless they're trained in BJJ I probably have the



This is where things go weird. 

If you want these outcomes you have to be a lot better than the guy you are fighting. 

It is not a stylistic choice (mostly) to say you train for short fights and easy takedowns.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> For the record, the technique at 1:43 is the technique I'm talking about when I refer to a standing armbar.



By the way with that straight arm bar. If the shoulder is above the elbow. You don't have that lock. You can crank that all day and you won't get a result.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> There is a bit of clever standing kimoura stuff as well.


That sounds tasty.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Arm bar specialists should basically look like this. And Aikido or whatever off shoot this is Aikijitsu or something? Is a good example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can see it. I can see it with resistance and we can break down to a certain degree what they are doing.
> 
> Very different to drill based arm bars.


Probably Tomiki Aikido. As you'd expect, their competition movement and casual sparring (randori) tends to look like Judo in a lot of ways. And, to me, that's key. The aiki drills are useful, and important if you want to understand some of the nuances available in the techniques. But they're much more usable if you have that sort of Judo viewpoint, where you don't depend on the aiki version exclusively.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> This is where things go weird.
> 
> If you want these outcomes you have to be a lot better than the guy you are fighting.
> 
> It is not a stylistic choice (mostly) to say you train for short fights and easy takedowns.



And that's why we train for years.  

Surprise is also an element.  Something that's not there in the ring (in the ring, they *know* you're going to fight back).


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> Probably Tomiki Aikido. As you'd expect, their competition movement and casual sparring (randori) tends to look like Judo in a lot of ways. And, to me, that's key. The aiki drills are useful, and important if you want to understand some of the nuances available in the techniques. But they're much more usable if you have that sort of Judo viewpoint, where you don't depend on the aiki version exclusively.



I think there is a more encompassing idea of unresisted drills vs. ........

The Aiki version is an example of that. 

In that trying to learn aikido concepts without sparring/competing defeats the purpose of what you are trying to do because you don't get the authentic response. 

Hapkido would also need that authentic response for their stuff to work. 

But all the Hapkido training I have seen has been very manufactured situational stuff. And then trying to overcome this huge gap by trying to perfect technique. And it doesn't work very well at all. 

And this is why the conversations don't have the technical depth you would expect from an expert. Their attackers are these one dimensional mockeries of real attackers.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> And that's why we train for years.
> 
> Surprise is also an element.  Something that's not there in the ring (in the ring, they *know* you're going to fight back).



If you trained right it would take less years. 

And look if you can't reliably put guys down in the ring (Or anywhere for that matter) you can't make up excuses that your techniques still work.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> I think there is a more encompassing idea of unresisted drills vs. ........
> 
> The Aiki version is an example of that.
> 
> In that trying to learn aikido concepts without sparring/competing defeats the purpose of what you are trying to do because you don't get the authentic response.
> 
> Hapkido would also need that authentic response for their stuff to work.
> 
> But all the Hapkido training I have seen has been very manufactured situational stuff. And then trying to overcome this huge gap by trying to perfect technique. And it doesn't work very well at all.
> 
> And this is why the conversations don't have the technical depth you would expect from an expert. Their attackers are these one dimensional mockeries of real attackers.


Let me guess, you watch a few Aiki and Hapkido videos on Youtube and surmised this had to be true. Have you Ever trained or worked out in either.
FWIW, I can find tons of instructional MMA videos done Exactly the way you reference. 
Gotta call BS again.


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> Let me guess, you watch a few Aiki and Hapkido videos on Youtube and surmised this had to be true. Have you Ever trained or worked out in either.
> FWIW, I can find tons of instructional MMA videos done Exactly the way you reference.
> Gotta call BS again.



Ok. So we are going down the secret of mystery training again?

If I haven't trained in Aikido/hapkido how can I judge?

If I have but haven't got a black belt then I never stayed long enough to learn the true secrets. 

If I got a black belt then I haven't learned the advanced true secrets that brings everything else together.

I could show a MMA double leg working live. And the static drill should reflect that. You could go to a MMA open mat and wrestle a MMA guy and have him put a double leg on you. And that would reflect the drill.

You could watch a MMA competition and see that same double leg being used and that would reflect the drill. 

You could enter a MMA competition and face a double leg and that would reflect the drill.

And then you could suggest that the drill works without having to conveniently spend thousands of hours and dollars on a system that may be ripping you off.

I mean If you want to discuss a brilliant marketing scam. If you haven't tried it then how do you know it is bad for you. Us one of the oldest in the book.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Ok. So we are going down the secret of mystery training again?
> 
> If I haven't trained in Aikido/hapkido how can I judge?
> 
> If I have but haven't got a black belt then I never stayed long enough to learn the true secrets.
> 
> If I got a black belt then I haven't learned the advanced true secrets that brings everything else together.
> 
> I could show a MMA double leg working live. And the static drill should reflect that. You could go to a MMA open mat and wrestle a MMA guy and have him put a double leg on you. And that would reflect the drill.
> 
> You could watch a MMA competition and see that same double leg being used and that would reflect the drill.
> 
> You could enter a MMA competition and face a double leg and that would reflect the drill.
> 
> And then you could suggest that the drill works without having to conveniently spend thousands of hours and dollars on a system that may be ripping you off.
> 
> I mean If you want to discuss a brilliant marketing scam. If you haven't tried it then how do you know it is bad for you. Us one of the oldest in the book.


I get where you are coming from. But the same can be said for most every MA style. No, they are not always as overt as MMA but they are certainly not mystic. That does not make them invalid from jump. Just like MMA is not valid from jump.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> If you trained right it would take less years.



Doctors must train wrong, because it takes 12-15 years before they're licensed.  It only took me a couple of months to study for my Security+ test to be certified according to my job requirements.  Therefore, by your logic, I'm smarter than a doctor, because I trained right and they trained wrong.

These are techniques with a high skill curve compared to a double-leg.  With a double leg there's a lot of nuance that goes into making it work on a resisting target, with these there's a lot of nuance that goes into making them work, period.  



> And look if you can't reliably put guys down in the ring (Or anywhere for that matter) you can't make up excuses that your techniques still work.



I mean, I'm pretty sure my shotgun will put someone down, but I can't test that in the ring.  Can't go around testing that in public either.  By your logic, my shotgun wouldn't work in self-defense.



drop bear said:


> Ok. So we are going down the secret of mystery training again?
> 
> If I haven't trained in Aikido/hapkido how can I judge?
> 
> If I have but haven't got a black belt then I never stayed long enough to learn the true secrets.
> 
> If I got a black belt then I haven't learned the advanced true secrets that brings everything else together.



It's not secret mystery training.  It's staying long enough to actually learn things.  Of course when you label it "secret mystery training" it sounds cringe.  I could label MMA fighters as "testosterone-fueled fist-jocks" and suddenly that sounds cringe, too.



> I could show a MMA double leg working live. And the static drill should reflect that. You could go to a MMA open mat and wrestle a MMA guy and have him put a double leg on you. And that would reflect the drill.
> 
> You could watch a MMA competition and see that same double leg being used and that would reflect the drill.
> 
> You could enter a MMA competition and face a double leg and that would reflect the drill.
> 
> And then you could suggest that the drill works without having to conveniently spend thousands of hours and dollars on a system that may be ripping you off.
> 
> I mean If you want to discuss a brilliant marketing scam. If you haven't tried it then how do you know it is bad for you. Us one of the oldest in the book.



And yet I've heard you make the claim that if you learn the technique outside of a sporting context, you still don't know it.  If someone were to post a TKD Double-Leg or a Kung Fu double-leg, you'd just say "they didn't learn it at an MMA gym, so they don't really know it."


----------



## oftheherd1

drop bear said:


> Ok. So there is a concept in martial arts that a whole bunch of stuff has to have happened before you wind up in that devastating arm bar.
> 
> And to be a good martial artist you need to start creating an environment where this arm bar works well before there is an arm bar.
> 
> So an arm bar takes two things. For you to isolate their arm and for you to break their posture. (Especially standing because you don't have the advantage of being able to throw your whole body at it.)
> 
> Now that is a lot to ask for in a fight. And especially for any period of time it takes to actually arm bar someone. Which is a hell of a lot in four or five punches a second fighting times.
> 
> So this is where being incredibly cagey about how people train comes in because this process is almost always short cutted by people who don't have a good understanding of what they are doing. You get these terms like I will use their momentum or take an opportunity or other meaningless phrases.
> 
> And what you normally wind up getting is training to reflect when a bad guy does something fundamentally silly for long enough to take advantage of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately even dumb bad guys quite often are not that dumb and will do simple defences that make arm bars basically impossible if you are not that good at them.
> 
> (You see this with police a bit where they wind up beating on a guy to get that arm and posture break)
> 
> So to get arm bars or arm breaks generally you need to break their posture first. Gain a position and isolate their arm. Unfortunately people spend years on grappling arts to try to get just that bit right. That is an incredibly nuanced process and is the reason good grapplers beat bad grapplers pretty consistently.
> 
> So if you are talking about someone throwing some slack punch or making a dead straight arm grab then arm bars, arm breaks and martial arts are simple. Unfortunately they also tend not to work.
> 
> So an arm break bar kind of can and kind of can't be substituted as an arm break. Some of them do both. There are some like arm drags where you can pressure the joint but not get it to break. There are some shoulder throws that torque the arm as you fall.
> 
> As I said it is complicated.



Thanks for taking the time to post your explanation.  Much of what you say is true if you are moving slowly and not using other breaks, twists, distractors, or pressure points.  In the Hapkido I studied, we normally did that.  It helps.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Ok. So we are going down the secret of mystery training again?
> 
> If I haven't trained in Aikido/hapkido how can I judge?
> 
> If I have but haven't got a black belt then I never stayed long enough to learn the true secrets.
> 
> If I got a black belt then I haven't learned the advanced true secrets that brings everything else together.
> 
> I could show a MMA double leg working live. And the static drill should reflect that. You could go to a MMA open mat and wrestle a MMA guy and have him put a double leg on you. And that would reflect the drill.
> 
> You could watch a MMA competition and see that same double leg being used and that would reflect the drill.
> 
> You could enter a MMA competition and face a double leg and that would reflect the drill.
> 
> And then you could suggest that the drill works without having to conveniently spend thousands of hours and dollars on a system that may be ripping you off.
> 
> I mean If you want to discuss a brilliant marketing scam. If you haven't tried it then how do you know it is bad for you. Us one of the oldest in the book.


This again confuses “most reliable” with “works”.  Some techniques work, but not as reliably against well-trained opponents who expect you to also be trained. Those done make it into competition for reasons that should be obvious. 

And some techniques work only with lots of training and experience. And sometimes that is precisely the point.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Ok. So we are going down the secret of mystery training again?


No sir. Only You jumped to that narrative. Everyone else who crawled out from under their rock 20 years ago or longer have long since debunked that line of thinking.


----------



## skribs

dvcochran said:


> No sir. Only You jumped to that narrative. Everyone else who crawled out from under their rock 20 years ago or longer have long since debunked that line of thinking.



There are some schools that try to have the air of mystery.  They'll tell you there are secret techniques you can only learn at black belt.

This is different from a school in which you consistently improve until black belt and then continue to learn, which is what I think (most of us) we're talking about.


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> I get where you are coming from. But the same can be said for most every MA style. No, they are not always as overt as MMA but they are certainly not mystic. That does not make them invalid from jump. Just like MMA is not valid from jump.



Ok. The reason for  packaging to conceal the product is quite often because the product isn't what it is cracked up to be. 

You are suggesting this deception is not evidence for bad product. And I am suggesting it is. 

Otherwise any fu fu magic might work. Voodoo could work. I don't know I haven't done it. Meth might be good for you. I haven't tried it. 

The only method any of us can use to stop running in to brick walls is to go by the evidence we can see. 

Not the evidence we can't.

So when there is nothing that supports a story I can deem it as false. Especially when there are other stories that do have evidence. Like Aikido competitions.

So when we look at a technique with no evidence behind it. Or a system with no way of checking on it. I can call shenanigans. As a reasonable logical approach. 

What I can't do is compete point for point against fantasy. There is a finite amount of reality and there is an infinite amount of BS.

And this is a concept I raised a wile back about a thing called the celestial tea cup. 

You think your argument works but it isn't based on logic.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> There are some schools that try to have the air of mystery.  They'll tell you there are secret techniques you can only learn at black belt.
> 
> This is different from a school in which you consistently improve until black belt and then continue to learn, which is what I think (most of us) we're talking about.



Really?


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> No sir. Only You jumped to that narrative. Everyone else who crawled out from under their rock 20 years ago or longer have long since debunked that line of thinking.



Obviously not. 

They are just better at rationalizing it.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Ok. The reason for  packaging to conceal the product is quite often because the product isn't what it is cracked up to be.
> 
> You are suggesting this deception is not evidence for bad product. And I am suggesting it is.
> 
> Otherwise any fu fu magic might work. Voodoo could work. I don't know I haven't done it. Meth might be good for you. I haven't tried it.
> 
> The only method any of us can use to stop running in to brick walls is to go by the evidence we can see.
> 
> Not the evidence we can't.
> 
> So when there is nothing that supports a story I can deem it as false. Especially when there are other stories that do have evidence. Like Aikido competitions.
> 
> So when we look at a technique with no evidence behind it. Or a system with no way of checking on it. I can call shenanigans. As a reasonable logical approach.
> 
> What I can't do is compete point for point against fantasy. There is a finite amount of reality and there is an infinite amount of BS.
> 
> And this is a concept I raised a wile back about a thing called the celestial tea cup.
> 
> You think your argument works but it isn't based on logic.



Ok, I cannot disagree with that reasoning. But why paint All TMA with the same brush? ALL MMA concepts came out of TMA or wrestling. No matter what modern name is put on techniques. How does that track?


----------



## dvcochran

skribs said:


> There are some schools that try to have the air of mystery.  They'll tell you there are secret techniques you can only learn at black belt.
> 
> This is different from a school in which you consistently improve until black belt and then continue to learn, which is what I think (most of us) we're talking about.


I still think that crap went out the window about 2 decades ago. It would take a very gullible mind to buy into that line of thinking.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> Doctors must train wrong, because it takes 12-15 years before they're licensed.  It only took me a couple of months to study for my Security+ test to be certified according to my job requirements.  Therefore, by your logic, I'm smarter than a doctor, because I trained right and they trained wrong.
> 
> These are techniques with a high skill curve compared to a double-leg.  With a double leg there's a lot of nuance that goes into making it work on a resisting target, with these there's a lot of nuance that goes into making them work, period.
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, I'm pretty sure my shotgun will put someone down, but I can't test that in the ring.  Can't go around testing that in public either.  By your logic, my shotgun wouldn't work in self-defense.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not secret mystery training.  It's staying long enough to actually learn things.  Of course when you label it "secret mystery training" it sounds cringe.  I could label MMA fighters as "testosterone-fueled fist-jocks" and suddenly that sounds cringe, too.
> 
> 
> 
> And yet I've heard you make the claim that if you learn the technique outside of a sporting context, you still don't know it.  If someone were to post a TKD Double-Leg or a Kung Fu double-leg, you'd just say "they didn't learn it at an MMA gym, so they don't really know it."



Ok.

So we have a claim that you have these martial skills that nobody can verify based on a system nobody knows if it works. 

So unlike being a doctor who we could look at their ability to heal sick people we know literally nothing.

The difference between a double leg and your arm bar is we can see it work and who makes it work.

With your arm bar we know literally nothing.

With your shot gun we can test to see if it works. We could look at people shot by guns and see if it works.

Vs. Literally nothing. 

Literally nothing is the definition of mystery training. I mean seriously. What do we know so far?

Nothing?

Well  Mabye that is a mystery then. 

If you learn a technique from someone who can't do it there are two ways of finding out. And this is important. 

They either do it and fail consistently. 

Or they don't do it and tell you literally nothing. Hiding behind some sort of mysterious training. 

I mean this should be pretty simple.


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> Ok, I cannot disagree with that reasoning. But why paint All TMA with the same brush? ALL MMA concepts came out of TMA or wrestling. No matter what modern name is put on techniques. How does that track?



I haven't. I separate them in to evidence based and non evidence based.

The issue is sport just has a lot more evidence. And so people complain that I am biased to sport. 

Not my job to support people's claims. If you want to say TMA works come up with something to show it works.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Ok.
> 
> So we have a claim that you have these martial skills that nobody can verify based on a system nobody knows if it works.
> 
> So unlike being a doctor who we could look at their ability to heal sick people we know literally nothing.
> 
> The difference between a double leg and your arm bar is we can see it work and who makes it work.
> 
> With your arm bar we know literally nothing.
> 
> With your shot gun we can test to see if it works. We could look at people shot by guns and see if it works.
> 
> Vs. Literally nothing.
> 
> Literally nothing is the definition of mystery training. I mean seriously. What do we know so far?
> 
> Nothing?
> 
> Well  Mabye that is a mystery then.
> 
> If you learn a technique from someone who can't do it there are two ways of finding out. And this is important.
> 
> They either do it and fail consistently.
> 
> Or they don't do it and tell you literally nothing. Hiding behind some sort of mysterious training.
> 
> I mean this should be pretty simple.



There are many other narratives here. 
Just a couple; They could do 'it' and fail until they become proficient at it. Typical of MA's of any style, including MMA. 

They don't do it unless they really need to because that is the way they were trained/raised. 

I don't know you at all. Don't know what you do for work. Don't know anything about you. 
But this I am certain of this, my experience has taught me that people who make such strong opinions either got pummeled once/a few times and never got over it, run in a Very small self-edifying circle,  just set on the couch and throw stones, or stay juiced Way too much.  

Man, get over yourself and let others, and yourself enjoy the forum. You are nothing but a distraction.


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> I still think that crap went out the window about 2 decades ago. It would take a very gullible mind to buy into that line of thinking.



There is very little difference between using hardooken blasts and dead drilling.  Or setting up fall guys to over represent a success rate.

The gullible mind is basically the same. 

Multiple sparring. If two people of about your ability really want you. Your success rate plummets 

Now do people like to people just wailing on a guy with no chance?

Apparently not. 

So we start inserting these elements of training were the person with no chance suddenly start to win. 

Nobody is that gullible to think that they are really winning. Yet people are still training it.


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> There are many other narratives here.
> Just a couple; They could do 'it' and fail until they become proficient at it. Typical of MA's of any style, including MMA.
> 
> They don't do it unless they really need to because that is the way they were trained/raised.
> 
> I don't know you at all. Don't know what you do for work. Don't know anything about you.
> But this I am certain of this, my experience has taught me that people who make such strong opinions either got pummeled once/a few times and never got over it, run in a Very small self-edifying circle,  just set on the couch and throw stones, or stay juiced Way too much.
> 
> Man, get over yourself and let others, and yourself enjoy the forum. You are nothing but a distraction.



That's fine but if you are supporting a fantasy forum. 

What justifies the behavior towards people like Rat?


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> That's fine but if you are supporting a fantasy forum.
> 
> What justifies the behavior towards people like Rat?


Can you further explain? I do not understand what you are asking.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> With your shot gun we can test to see if it works. We could look at people shot by guns and see if it works.



Not by standards I've seen you put forth regarding other techniques.  In another thread on wristlocks, your comment was something along the lines of that if it works against criminals, it doesn't prove it works because you don't know if they were skilled or not.  So how do we know that the people who were shot by guns weren't just unskilled?



drop bear said:


> There is very little difference between using hardooken blasts and dead drilling. Or setting up fall guys to over represent a success rate.



Who said anything about dead drilling?  Increased resistance is the key to becoming proficient in these techniques.  



drop bear said:


> I haven't. I separate them in to evidence based and non evidence based.
> 
> The issue is sport just has a lot more evidence. And so people complain that I am biased to sport.
> 
> Not my job to support people's claims. If you want to say TMA works come up with something to show it works.



You're not biased to sport.  You are exclusive to it.  You are very quick to bash TMAs, tell anyone who takes a TMA that they don't know how to do anything because they don't fight in the cage.  You always have some reason why the other person doesn't know a technique or why someone's training is worthless.  You also tend to take comments way out of context or use hyperbole to make your points.  

A bias toward sport is fine.  That's what you enjoy.  That's the training model you have the most faith in, and it validates you in a way that fits with your worldview.  It is possible to love and be committed to MMA and the sport-based arts, and to also not be a jerk to everyone who trains a different martial art than you.  It's possible to train BJJ and boxing, and NOT jump down the throat of people who train Hapkido and Taekwondo whenever they talk about a technique that you don't train.

I believe you know a lot about MMA.  It would be nice if you would come into threads and share your perspectives from MMA so I could see some different ideas, than for you to come in with this air of superiority like I'm a lower class citizen because I don't take your art.  It would be nice if we could have productive discussions instead of feeling like I'm always on the defensive, because you're aggressive in your posting.  This forum isn't supposed to be a fight or a sparring match, it's supposed to be a place for us to collaborate and share ideas.

For example, when I watch a boxing footwork video, I'm looking for what I can take from it and apply to my footwork.  Some things don't apply, because footwork for kicks is a little bit different.  The boxing rules of always staying in the orthodox stance and never crossing your feet don't work too well for kicking.  It would be very easy for me to look at a boxer and say "it's stupid to only stay on one side" or "they don't do cross-steps because their legs because their balance sucks."  It's quite easy to bash someone who has a different style.  But I don't do that.  I look for the way they move and what I can learn from that and weave into what I do.

I'm not expecting you to take my techniques and work them into your fighting.  But what I would like is for you to accept our differences instead of always trying to argue over them.  Yes, we have different training styles and goals.  Why is that such a bad thing?



drop bear said:


> What justifies the behavior towards people like Rat?



First off, why bring him into this?  He's not part of this thread.

But since you brought him up, he's the kind of guy who could benefit from you pushing MMA.  He tried TKD, didn't like the forms, and didn't feel like he could trust what his instructor taught.  His two biggest concerns that come up time and time again for why he doesn't take classes are that he doesn't want to waste his time on kata, and that he doesn't want to waste time if the instruction is no good.  MMA (or one of it's component arts like boxing or BJJ) would be perfect for him.  Have you brought that up to him?


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> That's fine but if you are supporting a fantasy forum.
> 
> What justifies the behavior towards people like Rat?[/QUOTE
> 
> The behaviour to people like yourself and rat is really quite simple, you have little respect for others and their veiws, you jump into conversations shouting bs, then back it up by youtubejitsu, you have yourcway of training, and that is great, and you say it works for you, and thats great, but to quote others as wu wu voodoo magic, especially when you have no experience. When you are argueing with people like dvcochran you are telling someone who holds a 5th dan in his art, that he is incorrect, when asked on your experience in that art, you have none, then you start claiming, there is no evidence, or secret techniques, when you dont understand the very basics, of what others have spent years training.


----------



## Gweilo

The behaviour to people like yourself and rat is really quite simple, you have little respect for others and their veiws, you jump into conversations shouting bs, then back it up by youtubejitsu, you have yourcway of training, and that is great, and you say it works for you, and thats great, but to quote others as wu wu voodoo magic, especially when you have no experience. When you are argueing with people like dvcochran you are telling someone who holds a 5th dan in his art, that he is incorrect, when asked on your experience in that art, you have none, then you start claiming, there is no evidence, or secret techniques, when you dont understand the very basics, of what others have spent years training.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

drop bear said:


> Ok.
> 
> So we have a claim that you have these martial skills that nobody can verify based on a system nobody knows if it works.
> 
> So unlike being a doctor who we could look at their ability to heal sick people we know literally nothing.
> 
> The difference between a double leg and your arm bar is we can see it work and who makes it work.
> 
> With your arm bar we know literally nothing.
> 
> With your shot gun we can test to see if it works. We could look at people shot by guns and see if it works.
> 
> Vs. Literally nothing.
> 
> Literally nothing is the definition of mystery training. I mean seriously. What do we know so far?
> 
> Nothing?
> 
> Well  Mabye that is a mystery then.
> 
> If you learn a technique from someone who can't do it there are two ways of finding out. And this is important.
> 
> They either do it and fail consistently.
> 
> Or they don't do it and tell you literally nothing. Hiding behind some sort of mysterious training.
> 
> I mean this should be pretty simple.


I checked out 4 different places that looked at submissions in the UFC. And all of them listed arm bar as the third most popular submission for ending a fight. So clearly it works.


----------



## dvcochran

skribs said:


> Not by standards I've seen you put forth regarding other techniques.  In another thread on wristlocks, your comment was something along the lines of that if it works against criminals, it doesn't prove it works because you don't know if they were skilled or not.  So how do we know that the people who were shot by guns weren't just unskilled?
> 
> 
> 
> Who said anything about dead drilling?  Increased resistance is the key to becoming proficient in these techniques.
> 
> 
> 
> You're not biased to sport.  You are exclusive to it.  You are very quick to bash TMAs, tell anyone who takes a TMA that they don't know how to do anything because they don't fight in the cage.  You always have some reason why the other person doesn't know a technique or why someone's training is worthless.  You also tend to take comments way out of context or use hyperbole to make your points.
> 
> A bias toward sport is fine.  That's what you enjoy.  That's the training model you have the most faith in, and it validates you in a way that fits with your worldview.  It is possible to love and be committed to MMA and the sport-based arts, and to also not be a jerk to everyone who trains a different martial art than you.  It's possible to train BJJ and boxing, and NOT jump down the throat of people who train Hapkido and Taekwondo whenever they talk about a technique that you don't train.
> 
> I believe you know a lot about MMA.  It would be nice if you would come into threads and share your perspectives from MMA so I could see some different ideas, than for you to come in with this air of superiority like I'm a lower class citizen because I don't take your art.  It would be nice if we could have productive discussions instead of feeling like I'm always on the defensive, because you're aggressive in your posting.  This forum isn't supposed to be a fight or a sparring match, it's supposed to be a place for us to collaborate and share ideas.
> 
> For example, when I watch a boxing footwork video, I'm looking for what I can take from it and apply to my footwork.  Some things don't apply, because footwork for kicks is a little bit different.  The boxing rules of always staying in the orthodox stance and never crossing your feet don't work too well for kicking.  It would be very easy for me to look at a boxer and say "it's stupid to only stay on one side" or "they don't do cross-steps because their legs because their balance sucks."  It's quite easy to bash someone who has a different style.  But I don't do that.  I look for the way they move and what I can learn from that and weave into what I do.
> 
> I'm not expecting you to take my techniques and work them into your fighting.  But what I would like is for you to accept our differences instead of always trying to argue over them.  Yes, we have different training styles and goals.  Why is that such a bad thing?
> 
> 
> 
> First off, why bring him into this?  He's not part of this thread.
> 
> But since you brought him up, he's the kind of guy who could benefit from you pushing MMA.  He tried TKD, didn't like the forms, and didn't feel like he could trust what his instructor taught.  His two biggest concerns that come up time and time again for why he doesn't take classes are that he doesn't want to waste his time on kata, and that he doesn't want to waste time if the instruction is no good.  MMA (or one of it's component arts like boxing or BJJ) would be perfect for him.  Have you brought that up to him?


Very, very good post.


----------



## dvcochran

Gweilo said:


> The behaviour to people like yourself and rat is really quite simple, you have little respect for others and their veiws, you jump into conversations shouting bs, then back it up by youtubejitsu, you have yourcway of training, and that is great, and you say it works for you, and thats great, but to quote others as wu wu voodoo magic, especially when you have no experience. When you are argueing with people like dvcochran you are telling someone who holds a 5th dan in his art, that he is incorrect, when asked on your experience in that art, you have none, then you start claiming, there is no evidence, or secret techniques, when you dont understand the very basics, of what others have spent years training.


FWIW, 7th Dan, but who's counting.


----------



## Sensei Becker

Alan Smithee said:


> I don't find much videos of Hapkido online (and no schools where I live). Whenever I do find dojang videos of any kind they tend to be quite dated in time and not complete (in any other famous martial art I can get access to full gradings, full classes, etc).
> 
> This begs the question, is the martial art of Hapkido a dying breed?


No Hapkido is still one of the better arts to train in. Striking and Judo and Aikijujutsu mixed martial art. Ji Han Jae Sin Moo Hapkido is great.


----------



## Gweilo

dvcochran said:


> FWIW, 7th Dan, but who's counting.



My appolgies


----------



## skribs

Gweilo said:


> The behaviour to people like yourself and rat is really quite simple, you have little respect for others and their veiws, you jump into conversations shouting bs, then back it up by youtubejitsu, you have yourcway of training, and that is great, and you say it works for you, and thats great, but to quote others as wu wu voodoo magic, especially when you have no experience. When you are argueing with people like dvcochran you are telling someone who holds a 5th dan in his art, that he is incorrect, when asked on your experience in that art, you have none, then you start claiming, there is no evidence, or secret techniques, when you dont understand the very basics, of what others have spent years training.



The one difference (in favor of @drop bear ) is that DB actually trains under people within the training method he prefers.


----------



## dvcochran

skribs said:


> The one difference (in favor of @drop bear ) is that DB actually trains under people within the training method he prefers.


Agree; that is the 'very small self-edifying circle I referred to earlier.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> If you want to say TMA works come up with something *I like* to show it works.


I corrected it for you to state your position more accurately.


----------



## drop bear

kempodisciple said:


> I checked out 4 different places that looked at submissions in the UFC. And all of them listed arm bar as the third most popular submission for ending a fight. So clearly it works.



Yeah. But not the standing arm bars that are being described here.

And also not in the manner in which they are probably being done which we dont know because we will never see it.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I corrected it for you to state your position more accurately.



You do that a lot.

It is dishonest.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Yeah. But not the standing arm bars that are being described here.
> 
> And also not in the manner in which they are probably being done which we dont know because we will never see it.


Yep, All of the UFC is wrong and you are right.


----------



## drop bear

Gweilo said:


> The behaviour to people like yourself and rat is really quite simple, you have little respect for others and their veiws, you jump into conversations shouting bs, then back it up by youtubejitsu, you have yourcway of training, and that is great, and you say it works for you, and thats great, but to quote others as wu wu voodoo magic, especially when you have no experience. When you are argueing with people like dvcochran you are telling someone who holds a 5th dan in his art, that he is incorrect, when asked on your experience in that art, you have none, then you start claiming, there is no evidence, or secret techniques, when you dont understand the very basics, of what others have spent years training.



Yeah. Look. You can't argue faith based with me though. If dvcochran has studied for years and understands the secrets of the universe. Then he can present them. And we can judge those secrets based on it's own merits.

I have trained faith based for years and it does not stack up against evidence based. This is why when we look at competition or you tube videos of self defence we can see more evidence and more consistent evidence of evidence based martial arts being just better.

It is not your style but the way you are trying to justify your style.

And this moves us mentally from subscribing to magic. To maybe looking critically at what we do. In a practical skill this is very important.

If I am a twentieth impressive seal of enlightenment that does not change a single aspect of what I do. That should only act as a better base to be able to validate a concept. It is not a reason I dont have to.

There is no limit to fantasy. And this is important.


----------



## drop bear

dvcochran said:


> Yep, All of the UFC is wrong and you are right.



Do you understand what I am saying here?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> You do that a lot.
> 
> It is dishonest.


How? You readily reject the kinds of evidence you use (specifically video and input from folks who use their training in their work), when it doesn't fit your narrative. That seems dishonest, if we're going to be using that word. All I did was put the words in that reflected what you frequently do. I clearly marked what I changed and pointed it out, specifically to be honest about what I was doing. But then you like to throw words like "dishonest" around, because it makes it sound like you're being reasonable.


----------



## Gweilo

drop bear said:


> If I am a twentieth impressive seal of enlightenment that does not change a single aspect of what I do. That should only act as a better base to be able to validate a concept. It is not a reason I dont have to.



The only thing I have seen you do on, and that is if was you, is kick a bag on the floor, in a yard/field, and rather poorly may I add, apart from this, the only thing you have offered is for the most part (because I agree with some things you write, on some posts), is what you have heard the big boys of mma say, that being a load trash talk of tma, and a load of youtube videos.
Heres the thing, you may do some good quality stength training, and some good cardio, but out of the realm of SPORT, your facts and figures mean diddly squat, what you quote, works in a ring, a ring with rules, basically entertainment governed rules, yes it has real hazzards, but mma is good at mma, a science based sport, with the same % of working in sd, as tma, because 25% is the training, the other 75%, is the person, and their mental attitude to what they do, you can be the fittest, fastest, strongest person out there, but if you go to pot, when the preverbial hits the fan.
Fighting is like an antiques dealer, you have specialists, and generalists. A generalist knows a little about a lot of things, and is a good all rounder, the specialist, knows everything about one thing maybe silver, but knows sweet F A about porcelain, but heres the thing, a generalist will gain small profits from a lot of small purchases, the specialist will gain big profits from a smaller field, but a specialist will always recognise quality, because he has experience in better quality items in what ever they come across, through years of knowledge gaining. I thought of that analogy, because you like to go off on a tangent, about everything apart from what you are talking about.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Do you understand what I am saying here?


Most of the time you are just running around in circles so, no.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Yeah. Look. You can't argue faith based with me though. If dvcochran has studied for years and understands the secrets of the universe. Then he can present them. And we can judge those secrets based on it's own merits.
> 
> I have trained faith based for years and it does not stack up against evidence based. This is why when we look at competition or you tube videos of self defence we can see more evidence and more consistent evidence of evidence based martial arts being just better.
> 
> It is not your style but the way you are trying to justify your style.
> 
> And this moves us mentally from subscribing to magic. To maybe looking critically at what we do. In a practical skill this is very important.
> 
> If I am a twentieth impressive seal of enlightenment that does not change a single aspect of what I do. That should only act as a better base to be able to validate a concept. It is not a reason I dont have to.
> 
> There is no limit to fantasy. And this is important.


Never said I have at clue about how the universe works. You are the one who keeps jumping the narrative to the silly extreme to fit you own agenda. Not anyone else.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> Yeah. Look. You can't argue faith based with me though. If dvcochran has studied for years and understands the secrets of the universe. Then he can present them. And we can judge those secrets based on it's own merits.
> 
> I have trained faith based for years and it does not stack up against evidence based. This is why when we look at competition or you tube videos of self defence we can see more evidence and more consistent evidence of evidence based martial arts being just better.
> 
> It is not your style but the way you are trying to justify your style.
> 
> And this moves us mentally from subscribing to magic. To maybe looking critically at what we do. In a practical skill this is very important.
> 
> If I am a twentieth impressive seal of enlightenment that does not change a single aspect of what I do. That should only act as a better base to be able to validate a concept. It is not a reason I dont have to.
> 
> There is no limit to fantasy. And this is important.



Why are you assuming it's faith based?

I feel the techniques when they're used against me.  I use the techniques in sparring, and I have them used against me in sparring.  I can usually spot why a technique doesn't work.  I can also tell you that when a technique doesn't work, more often than not it's because the person is a lower belt and hasn't quite figured everything out yet.

The same is true for whatever arts you take.  People don't go into their first class and have techniques that work to the level that you'd agree is competent.  They don't have the muscle memory to execute the technique in a high-stress situation, and they don't have the strategy or experience to know when to use the technique appropriately.  It's something that comes with time.  You made a snide comment in another thread that I don't know how to jab, because I haven't learned it in boxing.  Does that mean that the jab is a mystical technique?  



gpseymour said:


> How? You readily reject the kinds of evidence you use (specifically video and input from folks who use their training in their work), when it doesn't fit your narrative. That seems dishonest, if we're going to be using that word. All I did was put the words in that reflected what you frequently do. I clearly marked what I changed and pointed it out, specifically to be honest about what I was doing. But then you like to throw words like "dishonest" around, because it makes it sound like you're being reasonable.



Wish I could Like and Agree, and do each more than once.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> Why are you assuming it's faith based?
> 
> I feel the techniques when they're used against me. I use the techniques in sparring, and I have them used against me in sparring. I can usually spot why a technique doesn't work. I can also tell you that when a technique doesn't work, more often than not it's because the person is a lower belt and hasn't quite figured everything out yet.
> 
> The same is true for whatever arts you take. People don't go into their first class and have techniques that work to the level that you'd agree is competent. They don't have the muscle memory to execute the technique in a high-stress situation, and they don't have the strategy or experience to know when to use the technique appropriately. It's something that comes with time. You made a snide comment in another thread that I don't know how to jab, because I haven't learned it in boxing. Does that mean that the jab is a mystical technique?



It is faith based because you seem to be the only person who has seen it work. 

And can't show this technique or method working anywhere. 

The jab for you is a mystical technique because nobody knows if it works or not. 

There are plenty of realistic techniques that when trained badly don't work. 

You keep trying to get around this idea that to be good at martial arts it has to be trained honestly. 

And you literally can't get around that.

All you do is make the martial art you train dishonest.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> How? You readily reject the kinds of evidence you use (specifically video and input from folks who use their training in their work), when it doesn't fit your narrative. That seems dishonest, if we're going to be using that word. All I did was put the words in that reflected what you frequently do. I clearly marked what I changed and pointed it out, specifically to be honest about what I was doing. But then you like to throw words like "dishonest" around, because it makes it sound like you're being reasonable.



I have rejected anecdotal evidence. So have you. Otherwise what evidence have I rejected?

If you were honest you would not be constantly making false accusations and then backing down when I asked you to prove them.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> I have rejected anecdotal evidence. So have you. Otherwise what evidence have I rejected?
> 
> If you were honest you would not be constantly making false accusations and then backing down when I asked you to prove them.



Your definition of "anecdotal evidence" changes by whether or not that evidence supports your argument.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> It is faith based because you seem to be the only person who has seen it work.
> 
> And can't show this technique or method working anywhere.
> 
> The jab for you is a mystical technique because nobody knows if it works or not.
> 
> There are plenty of realistic techniques that when trained badly don't work.
> 
> You keep trying to get around this idea that to be good at martial arts it has to be trained honestly.
> 
> And you literally can't get around that.
> 
> All you do is make the martial art you train dishonest.



Except, we've had several people in this discussion.  People who train different martial arts and don't even know each other, and all of us are capable of discussing these techniques with our experience.

You're trying to make it some random claim that only one person is making, but that's not the case.  People who train Taekwondo, Hapkido, Karate, Aikido, Japanese Jiu-Jitsu, and various forms of Kung Fu can discuss these techniques and methods with each other.  It's not one person.  It's most martial arts from that corner of the world.  Gerry and I have completely different background and we know what each other is talking about.

It's not a mystical technique to us.  You're making it mystical because you don't understand it.

Nobody is trying to get around training honestly.  We train well enough to know what works and what doesn't.  What *you* can't get around is that people train in different ways than you, evaluate themselves in different ways than you, and use techniques that you don't know or understand.  Literally all of these posts you make are like a teenager temper tantrum because we don't understand you.  That's how I see it.  That's how it seems more and more people see it in other threads.  That you can't handle people with different opinions, so you just berate them and mock them into siding with you.  And for some reason you haven't figured out yet why that makes your position hold less and less weight the more we see of it.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> Except, we've had several people in this discussion.  People who train different martial arts and don't even know each other, and all of us are capable of discussing these techniques with our experience.
> 
> You're trying to make it some random claim that only one person is making, but that's not the case.  People who train Taekwondo, Hapkido, Karate, Aikido, Japanese Jiu-Jitsu, and various forms of Kung Fu can discuss these techniques and methods with each other.  It's not one person.  It's most martial arts from that corner of the world.  Gerry and I have completely different background and we know what each other is talking about.
> 
> It's not a mystical technique to us.  You're making it mystical because you don't understand it.
> 
> Nobody is trying to get around training honestly.  We train well enough to know what works and what doesn't.  What *you* can't get around is that people train in different ways than you, evaluate themselves in different ways than you, and use techniques that you don't know or understand.  Literally all of these posts you make are like a teenager temper tantrum because we don't understand you.  That's how I see it.  That's how it seems more and more people see it in other threads.  That you can't handle people with different opinions, so you just berate them and mock them into siding with you.  And for some reason you haven't figured out yet why that makes your position hold less and less weight the more we see of it.



So something exists or not or is correct or not because of some sort of popular vote?

And it isn't opinion. There is no evidence behind your claim. That isn't my opinion. 

This is why you are everything that is wrong with martial arts. Because you treat it as a popularity contest of some some sort of belief system. You make self defense The equivalent of astrology.

It is nice you believe in these things but you are ultimately pedalling fantasy.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> Your definition of "anecdotal evidence" changes by whether or not that evidence supports your argument.



Ok then show a video.

That's right laser eye beams. 

So anecdotes and astrology. If you wake up read your horoscope and it says something bad might happen. And it does.

That doesn't prove your system works.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> So something exists or not or is correct or not because of some sort of popular vote?
> 
> And it isn't opinion. There is no evidence behind your claim. That isn't my opinion.



This is why you are everything that is wrong with martial arts. Because you treat it as a popularity contest of some some sort of belief system. You make self defense The equivalent of astrology.

It is nice you believe in these things but you are ultimately pedalling fantasy.[/QUOTE]

No.  You're everything that's wrong with martial arts.  You think that because you train for MMA, it gives you this air of superiority over everyone who doesn't.  You think that because you picked MMA over a TMA, that it makes you better than everyone who trains a TMA.  You think you're the only person smart enough to weight the evidence.  You think you're the only one smart enough to decide what evidence counts and what is "anecdotal".

And because you think you're so smart, whenever people don't agree with you, you assume it's out of stupidity or malice.  They're either too dumb to know how smart you are, or they're making up lies (because that's the only way someone could think different than you).  

The fact that you think there's no evidence is an opinion.  My evidence is the collective knowledge of several Asian martial arts from different countries and lineages.  The fact you so callously dismiss them is proof that your opinion is worth about as you think of everyone else.  The standards you set are definitely opinions.  You just think yours is a fact and all the others are opinions, because you are too narcissistic to realize that what you think are "facts" are your opinion.



drop bear said:


> Ok then show a video.
> 
> That's right laser eye beams.
> 
> So anecdotes and astrology. If you wake up read your horoscope and it says something bad might happen. And it does.
> 
> That doesn't prove your system works.



I know you think that you're so smart, and we're so dumb.  But you're so transparent we can see right through.  If I share a video, you'll come up with any number of excuses:

That was a compliant partner
This wasn't a real situation it was just in class
I don't know who that guy in your video is so I don't know if he's good enough for me to verify the technique works
This wasn't done in MMA, so therefore your video is pointless
I've had this discussion with you several times.  I've seen this discussion from a bunch of other MMA sheep that think the same way you do.  You don't want me to post the video because you'll believe me.  You want me to post a video so you can poke all sorts of holes in it and continue to think yourself right.  You want more information to nitpick.  

You think you're slick and manipulative, but really you're just a purposefully-ignorant wannabe-intellectual who's trying (and miserably failing) to masquerade intolerance as logic.  When I talk to you, I have flashbacks to a couple of different people, and none of these comparisons paint you in a good light.  I think of teenagers arguing with their parents.  I think of the Terrible Twos.  And I think of my drug-addict cousin trying to rationalize every argument he ever got into.  These people, like you, are too stubborn to think about anything from anyone else's perspective, or to learn from the wisdom of anyone else.  They think they're right, or they think they're smart enough to get away with stuff, but everyone sees right through you.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I have rejected anecdotal evidence. So have you. Otherwise what evidence have I rejected?
> 
> If you were honest you would not be constantly making false accusations and then backing down when I asked you to prove them.


You've also used anecdotal evidence, and even said input from folks who've had to use their training is useful (after having said those were "just stories" when I made a similar suggestion). And you've rejected videos that showed things you ranted against were real, then used videos of your own choosing as ample evidence for other points. You're all over the place.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> You've also used anecdotal evidence, and even said input from folks who've had to use their training is useful (after having said those were "just stories" when I made a similar suggestion). And you've rejected videos that showed things you ranted against were real, then used videos of your own choosing as ample evidence for other points. You're all over the place.



Lol. Ok then show where I did that.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> The fact that you think there's no evidence is an opinion. My evidence is the collective knowledge of several Asian martial arts from different countries and lineages.



Twenty pages ago you could have thrown up a video of your arm bars working. But so far you haven't. And I seriously doubt you ever will.

You keep missing this important distinction of course there are TMAs that work. Yours just does not happen to be one of them. 

The difference is not MMA vs TMA. The difference is your lack of knowledge in martial arts makes you unable to make your system work. 

And we know your system doesn't work because if it did we would have seen it working by now. 

And instead of cracking a sad at me. You would be much better off making your system work so that the next time you encounter some meanies like me you can just go. "Here. Cop this." And show a video of your system working. 

It is a lot easier that these mental gymnastics that you are trying to do at the moment.


----------



## drop bear

skribs said:


> I've had this discussion with you several times. I've seen this discussion from a bunch of other MMA sheep that think the same way you do. You don't want me to post the video because you'll believe me. You want me to post a video so you can poke all sorts of holes in it and continue to think yourself right. You want more information to nitpick.



Ok this is weird.

Who cares? I am nit picking you anyway. At what point would my opinion of you deter you from doing this?

Like you would loose all this credibility or something.


----------



## Gweilo

@DB, whats your professional/amateur fight record?
What is your experience in tma?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Lol. Ok then show where I did that.


As I've said before, I simply don't have the inclination to dig around through thousands of posts. I have no idea how I'd manage such a search, other than literally re-reading every thread you've posted in for the past year.

If you really think you haven't done that, then you're not self-aware enough to learn from me finding the posts, anyway. Past experience suggests you'd likely just "nope" it away, anyhow.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Ok this is weird.
> 
> Who cares? I am nit picking you anyway. At what point would my opinion of you deter you from doing this?
> 
> Like you would loose all this credibility or something.


It's more a matter of it not being worth the effort. Anything he posts, unless it's video of him (or, perhaps, a confirmed Hapkido-only practitioner) using it against an attacker, or someone you approve of using it (read: MMA for the most part), you're just going to dismiss it. Like you did with the several videos I posted showing that big, looping single punches actually happen in the wild.


----------



## skribs

drop bear said:


> Ok this is weird.
> 
> Who cares? I am nit picking you anyway. At what point would my opinion of you deter you from doing this?
> 
> Like you would loose all this credibility or something.



For one, this is a Hapkido thread, and I train Hapkido.  For another, you have personally gone after me in the past.


----------



## Gweilo

skribs said:


> For one, this is a Hapkido thread, and I train Hapkido.  For another, you have personally gone after me in the past.



I wouldnt take it as personal, as I thought the same a little while ago, its just DB way, its a syndrome, a lot of ma do, in DB mind, his art, his training, his opinion, is the best and only way, I'm probably sure he used to train in WWF, before it acknowledged it was staged for entertainment, I am sure he takes his vitamins,  and rips his T shirt off, whilst shouting "WHAT YA GONNA DO", just before class starts.


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Ok then show a video.
> 
> That's right laser eye beams.
> 
> So anecdotes and astrology. If you wake up read your horoscope and it says something bad might happen. And it does.
> 
> That doesn't prove your system works.


Your analogy’s does not hold water. Astrology works because every question/situation has multiple ‘correct’ outcomes. It is never fully wrong or right. Does this fit your argument?

What is it you want a video of anyway?


----------



## dvcochran

drop bear said:


> Ok this is weird.
> 
> Who cares? I am nit picking you anyway. At what point would my opinion of you deter you from doing this?
> 
> Like you would loose all this credibility or something.


Now that is just a truly sad and telling post.


----------



## Bruce7

AceVentura said:


> True Hapkido schools seem to be rare in the United States.  There are some good ones out there if you are lucky enough to be in an area where they are available.  Most Hapkido I see is being advertised by TKD schools who put a few basic techniques into the TKD training, requiring you to join the TKD classes to practice Hapkido. But you are not able to obtain rank and don't learn more than the most basic techniques you would learn as a white belt in a Hapkido Dojang.  Often times these techniques are being taught by TKD instructors who never actually studied Hapkido and simply went to a seminar or two.



I agree most TKD school know very little Hapkido, There are a very few TKD schools where the teacher is a black belt in Hapkido and TKD.
IMO they are some of the best teachers.

One of the students said to the teacher what we all thought, I want to go to Korea to learn TKD, where it all started.
He said, " you would be better off studying Hapkido if he want to go to Korea. The student asked why? He said "TKD in Korea is not the same as it once was and Hapkido has not changed."
IMO He meant the Koreans had already bought the best of TKD to America and there was no deeper knowledge to be found in Korea.
The best Hapkido masters were still in Korea, so if you are go to Korea to improve as a martial artist, studying Hapkido would be the best use of your time.


----------



## Headhunter

Gweilo said:


> @DB, whats your professional/amateur fight record?
> What is your experience in tma?


I’ve asked that question to....never got an answer either


----------



## Gweilo

Bruce7 said:


> The best Hapkido masters were still in Korea, so if you are go to Korea to improve as a martial artist, studying Hapkido would be the best use of your time.



Completely agree, I spent 6 months training HKD in Korea, although I thouroughly enjoyed it,  I should have trained in the US.


----------



## drop bear

Headhunter said:


> I’ve asked that question to....never got an answer either



Same as yours I have nothing verifiable.

So let's say it is non existent.


----------

