# Hapkido Q&A's



## Disco

Found this on one of my surfing jaunts. Thought I'd share........

Controversial Hapkido Frequently Asked Questions


by David N. Beck



How do *I* know the answers?

It's difficult to know what the actual facts are -- even when there are written records, sometimes the writers are biased. Although I've used books, web sites, mailing lists, questions to my teachers, etc, I am not a trained researcher, and I don't claim that these answers are the be all end all answers to these questions. But they are MY answers to these questions based on what I've experienced, seen, and heard from multiple sources in over 20 years of studying martial arts.

Most of these questions involve differing views of history. To me this is all pretty unimportant. One, both Hapkido and Taekwondo are martial arts that have changed and continue to change with the times. Two, the term 'art' in martial art implies creativity and individual expression. Every instructor teaches a little bit differently, and every student will find certain techniques just work better for them than others, so every martial art becomes an individual martial art. I can teach you *my* interpretation of Hapkido and/or Taekwondo, but that is *my* interpretation -- I encourage you to use that as a base and eventually develop your *own* interpretation. What matters is that you train to meet your goals, not who created that particular method of training.

I have capitalized family names and used the Western approach of placing them last; you'll often see them reversed as is Asian tradition.






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Q. What is the difference between Taekwondo and Hapkido?

A. Sometimes not all that much; there has been a LOT of cross-pollinization. Virtually everyone in Korea gets some Taekwondo training (it's their national sport - ever know an American boy who'd NEVER played baseball?). The specialty jumping spinning kicks of Hapkido proved very useful for demonstration and breaking purposes and got adopted into Taekwondo. Any Hosinsool (self-defense) techniques you see in Taekwondo got adopted from out of Hapkido. Any HKDists that want to spar tend to do so under TKD rules and adapt their techniques accordingly. There's a lot of mixed versions out there. Who originated what techniques? Who cares? But in general if its sport oriented, it's Taekwondo; and if it's self-defense oriented, it's Hapkido.

Q. What's wrong with TKD types doing Hapkido seminar training?

A. Nothing, if it's used properly. There are many many more TKD type places than HKD, and many schools do some sort of mix; doing some Hapkido as the self-defense part of their curriculum. I've attended, taught, and hosted many seminars and much can be learned from them. But for myself and for the vast majority of people, learning something well takes time. For anything physical, repetition to acquire muscle memory is absolutely essential. So if the material shown at a seminar is not practiced enough over time, it is lost. Ongoing regular Hapkido practice with a good instructor will correct mistakes in your practice and stop bad habits from being ingrained. But a seminar here and a seminar there is not going to do much more than give you an idea of the material. Thus I feel that doing rank tests at a seminar that simply test what's been worked on at that seminar is a bad practice. It tends to promote memorization of the particular techniques done just before, without understanding principles behind the techniques or being able to apply the techniques to different situations. And to me, that's like someone playing scales versus someone playing music. If it's rote technique, you're not a martial artist.



Q. Who founded Hapkido?

A. Some sources will say Yong Sool CHOI (1904-1986), some will say Han Jae JI. My answer is Ji, and call Choi the 'father' of Hapkido.



Q. Why would Yong Sool Choi be considered the founder?

A. Because all the branches of Hapkido go back to Choi and Choi was Han Jae JI's primary teacher. Yong Sool CHOI was taken to Japan as a young boy and supposedly became an adopted son of the famous Daito-Ryu Aikijujitsu martial artist Sokaku TAKEDA (1860-1943). He supposedly was with Takeda until Takeda's death, after which Choi returned to Korea and shortly thereafter opened a school.



Q. Why 'supposedly'?

A. Choi always claimed he learned from Takeda, yet none of the Takeda family say they remember him. Takeda kept meticulate records of those he trained down to the level of how much he charged per technique, yet none of the names Choi used appears in the records, and there ARE some Korean names there, including at least one with a teaching license. Choi claimed to have teaching licenses from Takeda, but said the bag he had them is was stolen from him at a train station on his arrival in Korea after Choi's death.

It was common at the time for Korean children to be taken into rich Japanese households as servants. Perhaps Choi was a servant in the household and around (carrying the bags, etc) but not an actual participant in Takeda's seminars. But you would certainly expect the family to remember him, and they say no. As far as an adopted son, perhaps Choi just looked on Takeda as a father figure and there's been some mistranslation in interviews. Culturally, adoption of any Korean into a Japanese family would be VERY unlikely.

There were other teachers of Daito-ryu aikijujitsu, I think that perhaps Choi was a second generation student of Takeda rather than first generation. Regardless of where and from whom he learned, Choi was a formidable martial artist when he returned to Korea after Takeda's death.



Q. Why would JI be considered the founder?

A. Because Ji came up with the name, added many different things to the art, and is most responsible for the spread of Hapkido. Choi actually directly taught very few people because he always charged very high rates and the training was very severe. Between 70-80% of the Hapkido branches can be traced back to Ji. Choi never taught high, spinning, or jumping kicks; cane, staff, or other weapons; or breathing exercises -- these things were added by Ji. Most new martial arts styles come from some one person studying several different arts under several teachers, merging some things and modifying others, and then teaching the result under a new name. Choi never claimed to have studied with any other teacher than Takeda, and never modified what he taught.

Han Jae JI began martial arts training in 1949 at the age of 13 with Choi in Seoul. He trained for 7 years full time with Choi. Ji learned meditation techniques, weapons, and Tae Kyun kicking from a man he know as Taoist Lee starting at age 18. He learned more meditation techniques from a lady Taoist monk he knew only as Grandma. He was still training with Choi during this time as well.

Ji moved to his hometown of Andong, opening a school there (the An Moo Kwan) as a 3rd Dan in 1956. He taught Yoo Kwon Sool there for 9 months, then moving to Seoul and opening a school at a tie factory he called the 'Sung Moo Kwan'. He gained more students and soon was able to teach from a boxing gym. He added techniques to deal with boxing style punches at this time.

In 1958, Ji moved his school to Joong Boo Shi Jang where he continued teaching until April of 1960. During this period, Ji began to add basic kicking and punching techniques taken from other Korean schools and his Tae-Kyun training. In 1959 he decided that his system was sufficiently different from Choi's culturally patterned Japanese aiki-jiu jitsu to call it 'Hapkido'.

Into the early 60's, Ji was merging in techniques and modifying his curriculum. A fellow student of Choi's and good friend of Ji's, Moo-Woong KIM, gave input and advice during 8-9 months in 1961 to help finalize the kicking curriculum. Kim had also trained in Tae-Kyon and was a noted kicker.

Ji offered Choi use of the name and Choi thereafter trained using 'hapkido' until his death in 1986. Choi continued always with his original teachings, which meant that most of the striking, kicking techniques and weapons techniques were omitted.



Q. So if what Choi taught was simply Daito-Ryu Aikijujitsu, why not continue to call it that?

A. Choi didn't care what it was called. He called it 'yawara' at first. Then 'Dai Dong Ryu Yu Sool', the Korean equivalent of Daito-Ryu Aikijujitsu. Many of Choi's students had backgrounds from other martial arts, and Korean names were desired rather than Japanese names. So it became 'Dai Dong Ryu Yu Kwon Sool', then 'Hapki Yu Kwon Sool', then eventually 'Hapkido'.


Q. Isn't it inconsistant to call Ji the founder of HKD and not call Hong Hi Choi the founder of TKD? Didn't both create the name, add stuff to the art, and spread it widely?

No, it's more a matter of degree. Ji is directly responsible for the differences between HKD and Daito-Ryu Aikijujitsu, including the name, and at least 70% of HKD lineage is his. Choi is not responsible for any differences between TKD and its karate forebears with the exception of the sine wave (done only in ITF TKD), he may or may not be responsible for the name Taekwondo, and his percentage of TKD lineage is less than 10%. And even that percentage would more properly be credited to Tae Hi Nam. See the Controversial TKD FAQ.




Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Aikido?

A. Aikido founder Morehi USHEBA studied with Sokaku TAKEDA for a number of years as well as a number of other teachers before forming Aikido. The simularity of technique is very apparent between the two arts in the circular non-resistive motions, joint-locking and throwing. Both even are written with the same Chinese characters. However, the philosophy is different in that a Hapkidoist mixes in hard with the soft, including kicks and strikes; plus the footwork tends to be a little different. Possibly CHOI never directly studied with TAKEDA but only watched (and Aikidoists wear the hakamas - which block viewing of the feet). Or possibly the cross-influence of other Korean kicking/punching arts with Hapkido modified the footwork. There has been enough cross training influence over the years that it's very hard to track. There have been HKDists that studied Aikido and Aikidoists that studied Hapkido, with the primary crossover influence being Hapkido Grandmaster Jae Nam MYONG. Myong founded the International Hapkido Federation (one of the top 3 HKD organizations in Korea) and became the International Aikido Federation representative in Korea.



Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Kido?

A. None. The same Chinese written characters are used for Hapkido and Aikido. In the early 60's, President Chung Hee PARK lifted import restrictions from Japan and Ji came across a book on Aikido and noticed this for the first time. He didn't like them having the same name and dropped the 'Hap' from his art. In 1963 the Korean government granted a charter through the Ministry of Education to create the Korea Kido Association, with Choi as Chairman and Jung Yoon KIM as First Secretary. The majority of Ji's students didn't like the name change and many kept calling it Hapkido, plus Ji and Kim did not get along. By 1965 Ji was in the politically powerful position of Chief Instructor for the President's Security Forces and left the Kido Association to establish the Korean Hapkido Association. The Korea Kido Association retained many members and became something of an umbrella organization for Korean martial arts that did not want to associate themselves with Taekwondo and the Kukkiwon. So now it contains Hapkido, Kuk Sool Won, Hwarangdo, Tuk Gong Mool Sool, etc. at least 31 styles at last count. It is headed by GM In Sun SEO, whose brother In Hyuk SUH founded Kuk Sool. It remains one of the three major hapkido organizations in Korea.



Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Kuk Sool?

A. Not much, mostly more palm heel strikes and Chinese weaponry training from Southern Praying Mantis. Any other differences appear to be in the trappings; fancier uniforms, stressing flashier techniques, etc. In Sun SEO studied Hapkido with Yong Sool Choi and earned a black belt in 1958. The founder of Kuk Sool Won, In Hyuk SUH, is SEO's brother (same name, they just spell it differently in English). Suh claims that everything in Kuk Sool is from his grandfather, that he never studied with Hapkido with Choi or kung fu with Monk Hae Dong and Wang Tae-eui. But Suh is extremely nationalistic, and discounts everything non-Korean. He sees Choi's HKD as Japanese daito ryu aiki jujitsu, and kung fu as Chinese. I think that Suh can perhaps justify to himself saying that he never trained with Choi because it came through his brother. But you look at the techniques and Kuk Sool Won is Hapkido with a few other things added in. For many years Kuk Sool schools even went by the name Kuk Sool Hapkido.

Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Hwarangdo?

A. Not much. The founder of Hwarangdo, Dr. Joo-Bang Lee studied Hapkido in private lessons with Choi and also visited and trained in many schools, including with Moo-woong Kim and In Hyuk Suh, founder of Kuk Sool. He claims to have merged a little HKD with secret techniques taught to him and his brother Joo Sang Lee by a monk named Sahm Dosa to create Hwarang-do. Supposedly the techniques were secretly handed down through 57 generations of warrior/monks since the Silla dynasty and the days of the hwarang. Dr. Lee had his own school as early as 1960, and was promoted to 8th degree by Yong Sool Choi at the same time as Han Jae Ji in May of 1968. From 1961-68 he called his school a Hapkido school. But shortly after that he supposedly got permission from Sahm Dosa to teach the 'secret techniques', founded Hwarangdo, and moved to the USA.

Actual differences to Hapkido appear to be in the trappings -- more philisophical and Korean cultural stuff based on the historical hwarang, some forms and more strikes than is typical in HKD, and more weapons training. But all the self-defense techniques in his 3-book series are HKD. And the forms and teaching methodologies are very similar to Kuk Sool. How much stock to put in the 'secret techniques' and the 57 generations handed down from monk to monk -- well, I won't say it's *impossible*.



Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Krav Maga?

A. In the late sixties the Korea Hapkido Association President was Woo Joong KIM, also president of the Dae Woo Company which had many interests in the Middle East. Many HKD instructors went there and taught police forces and military officers. The founder of Krav Maga was an Israeli boxer and wrestler that participated in some of this training and boiled things down into a very simple practical system to teach the Israeli armed forces. It looks like some basics from a number of martial arts including HKD. It's a good fighting system; I wouldn't call it a martial *art*. It's immediate destruction no nonsense stuff, great for a sentry in the military; not so good for graduated levels of response necessary for policemen or for the general person in today's society.



Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Viet No Vuem?

A. In 1967 the KHA sent 15 members of demonstration teams to Vietnam and taught Korean, US, and Vietnamese troops and special forces. Viet No Vuem is the Vietnamese martial art that came out of it. Viet No Vuem appears to be basic HKD with some TKD mixed in, plus the advanced acrobatic falls and rolls from Hapkido.




Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Han Moo Do?

A. Han Moo Do is Dr. He-Young KIMM's combination of Hapkido, Kuk Sool, and Taekwondo. Dr. Kimm is a HKD pioneer in the US, a scholar, and the author of the Hapkido Bible. Train with him if you ever get the chance.



Q. What's the difference between Hapkido and Hankido?

A. Hankido is Jae Nam MYONG's combination of Hapkido and Aikido. Introduced in 1992, it tries to be an easy-to-learn martial art. Myong is the head of the International Hapkido Federation. Myong died in 1999 and his IHF is led by his son Sung Kwang Myong. This IHF is actually a 3-pronged organization that teaches with the martial arts of Hapkido under the banner of International Hapkido Federation, Hankido under the banner of the International Hankido Federation, and Hankumdo (Korean sword) under the banner of the International Hankumdo Federation. A lot of IHF's already, plus there are at least two other totally unrelated International Hapkido Federations, one led by Bong Soo HAN and another by James Benko.



Q. What Hapkido organizations exist?

A. There are many, there's no clearly dominant one like TKD has in the WTF. I've noted the head of the organization and a sentence or two on what I know of them.
Note: the same word in Korea is used for 'federation' or 'association', so some of these can be confusing.

World Hapkido Federation - Kwang Sik MYUNG 
This is the biggest in the US, and the one BMA is affilated with. Myung was a student of Ji's (starting in 1957) that claims Choi as his teacher. Excellent training materials (books and tapes).

World Sin Moo Hapkido Association - Han Jae JI- founder of Hapkido. This is Doju-nim Ji's current organization. It is fairly small and has no training materials available yet, but is developing some from Doju-nim Ji's 50th m.a. anniversary seminars.

Korea Hapkido Federation - Se Lim OH 10th Dan largest in Korea
Oh was an early student of Ji's in Andong, his first school. The KHF overall has a good reputation, but...supposedly the U.S. rep is Richard Hacksworth., Ocee, Florida. I don't understand all the relationships here, but associated is the National Han Moo Kwan Association and the Korean Martial Arts Instructors Association, and a slew of other organizations. My own experience with him has been limited to buying via him material represented as being the official KHF curriculum, but it was in fact only his requirements. Other reputable HKD people I know of have had much worse experiences with him. I do know of other people in the KHF with impeccable reputations; I would say this is a case where you won't be able to tell anything from the organization and should look at people on an individual basis.

International Hapki Federation - Jae Nam MYONG (deceased), now named the International Hapkido Federation. Close relationships with Aikido organizations. This one is also involved in sponsoring HKD competitions. Also involved is Marshall Gagne.

World Kido Federation/Korea Kido Association - In Sun SEO
Seo was a student of Choi's. This is something of an umbrella organization for non-TKD martial arts in Korea. Many Hapkido kwans are members, including Hal Whalen's Moo Ye Kwan and Pelligrini's International Combat HKD Federation, so it's a grab bag of good and bad.

Korea Hapkido Association - Duk Kyu HWANG 
Hwang was Ji's first student in Seoul.

Korean Hapkido Association - Moo Woong KIM - helped add the kicks to HKD

American Hapkido Association - Chong Min LEE

American Hapkido Association - Mike Wollmershouser
Wollmershouser was a student of Choi's, his bio says the highest ranking American ever taught by Choi. Active in the northeast U.S. There was a video series he put out in the 1980's that I've seen one or two of; cheap quality but excellent techniques shown, well worth getting if you can find them. He died some years ago of cancer.

Universal Hapkido Institute - Ik Hwan KIM

International Hapkido Federation - Bong Soo HAN
Han was a student of Ji's (starting 1958) and Choi's that claims Choi as his teacher. He was one of the first Hapkido instructors in the United States and is famous for the Billy Jack movies that gave Hapkido its first big visibility. He also appeared in Kentucky Fried Movie in perhaps the funniest MA related scenes ever filmed.


International Hapkido Federation - James Benko, Ph. D


International Combat HKD Federation - John Pelligrini. Pelligrini has the reputation of having taken out much of the Hapkido curriculum and primarily markets to martial artists of other styles, focusing on seminar training. It is my opinion and that of many others that this is a disservice to HKD, making it easy to get HKD rank and formenting a picture of it as an adjunct style rather than the complete martial art it is. I cannot speak to Pelligrini's skills not having met the man, seen him on the mat, or seen his videos ... but others I respect have been on the mat with him and were not impressed. For what it's worth, I started Hapkido before he did. My understanding is he was a TKD guy that did some seminars with Mike Wolmersouser and received an HONORARY 1st Dan black belt in Hapkido given at a seminar in 1988, then bounced around orgainization to organization doing seminars and jumping up in rank; emerging with an 6th Dan when he created the ICHF in 1992, and shortly thereafter getting an 8th Dan from In Sun SEO. I guess since he was able to gain rank quickly by seminars and changing organizations he's happy to do the same for others. For what it's worth, I tested for my 1st Dan in 1997, and I'm not yet eligible for 6th Dan by my and most organization's guidelines.



Lets end with some ones I KNOW are good:

United States Korean Martial Arts Federation - J.R. West. I've now been to several of Master West's seminars and was extremely impressed. His reputation as a superb Hapkido man is well-deserved. The integrity, openess, and skill of this man is amazing. Train with him if you ever get the chance. He puts on a big seminar every six months in Jackson, Mississippi that attracts a lot of major Hapkido people, and his organization involves no politics; simply helping people learn the art.

National Korean Martial Arts Association - Rudy Timmerman. Excellent reputation. GM Timmerman is a Kuk Sool and Kong Shin Bup person, a student of In Hyuk SUH and others. Based in Canada, his is another organization with a reputation for no politics and helping people learn.

International Hapkido Alliance - Geoff Booth. Master Booth is a student of GM Ji. I've hosted him now 5 or 6 times and it's always a great deal of fun, with superb Hapkido and keeping everyone smiling with his jokes. Master Booth has a DVD series out that are fantastic -- great techniques, very clear, extremely well done.




Q. Why do all these 10th Dan HKD Grandmasters who were Ji's students claim Choi as their teacher?

Korean martial artists traditionally study under multiple people and then claim one as their teacher, supposedly the one who most influenced them. So they could study for years under Ji, go to one seminar with Choi, and claim Choi (the more famous person) as their teacher. Ji was a very young man when he first started teaching -- almost all his students were older.

Another reason is that DJN Ji is a very creative individual and would teach whatever he felt like teaching that day. When an organization sets out specific requirements for rank for instance, if he didn't follow them or he promoted someone that hadn't met those specific requirements; it caused problems. He doesn't like doing the administrative work that is necessary to run a good organization. So he'd be involved in founding a HKD organization, then would delegate the admin details, eventually there'd be some disagreement on some detail or another, and he'd leave that organization to found another one.

And DJN admits to not being very likeable when young -- he didn't really mellow and begin using the Taoist theory he put into Sin Moo HKD until after his prison term.



Q. Prison term? What happened?

GM Ji was the head of the presidential bodyguards when President Chung Hee Park's wife was killed during an attempt on the President's life. Gm Ji was out of the country on R&R at the time. Gm Ji was not the head of the bodyguards when President Park was killed in 1979. The new head bodyguard was with President Park at that time and was also killed. The assassin was the head of the Korean CIA, i.e. someone within President Park's inner circle. But Ji resigned after the assasination anyway. When he became a civilian he joined the Min Jung Dang political party, and got involved with one of two rival groups inside the party. Ji started training some people from one group to protect President Doo-whan CHUN when he would visit party headquarters, and the leader of the other group reported to the president that secret training was going on to overthrow him. Ji received a 1-year prison term. During the term, he was unable to work out, but meditated a great deal, and when he got out started Sin Moo Hapkido.



Q. What's the difference between Sin Moo Hapkido and other kinds of Hapkido?

A. Technique wise, essentially none. Sin Moo Hapkido adds more mental and spiritual training, with more stress on meditation and how to live your life.


----------



## iron_ox

Hi Disco,

This is the same old stuff, some well said, but lots just regurgitated from "what the master says".

Most folks that trained with Choi, Yong Sul did so for only a few months, Ji for only three years (maybe) and came away with a giant amount of knowledge - a testiment to the prowess of Choi.

Choi, Yong Sul is the only REAL human among all the stories of monks and maternal grannies that are so widely claimed...frankly, if grannie was so psychic, and taught Ji this technique, it sure didn't help him see into the future to save getting busted and incarcerated.  I have a different history of events leading to Ji jail time, but it really doesn't matter - I mean hey, he's a "gold" belt right?

I have an issue with this TKD is really close to Hapkido stuff - pure nonsense from someone that clearly has little understanding of what real Hapkido is...hey, if your want to jump around kicking and call it Hapkido, fine.  To quote many others, a dog's  tail can be called a leg, and you can call it a five legged dog - but just because you call it something does not make it so.  Many have added lots of stuff to the core of techniques that were taught by Choi, Yong Sul.  When that stuff is no longer within the priciples taught by Choi, it is no longer Hapkido.  I think that you can call it what you want, just not Hapkido.

I have often heard that details are diluted like that above to make it easier to understand and more palatable for westerners - well, I say Hapkido is hard to learn and should therefore be hard to understand - it is after all a MARTIAL ART - not a sport - hey, make TKD easy to understand, sell it on every street corner, put folks in pads and play touch tag with your feet (at least in the sport version) - oops, that's already being done...

No dirsrespect to TKD folks here, I know lots of serious martial artists in the bunch - but also lots of sporty TKD folks too who I think have lost the martial edge in favor of palatability and marketability  from the need to make it easy for anyone to understand.

Sorry for the rant, but having just spent a little bit of time in Korea training at the dojang of Choi, Yong Sul's longest training student (some 22 years) - I have felt what Hapkido should feel like - and to a certain extent LOOK like - and it isn't TKD.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

I'm with you---- but from a little different point of view (wow--- BIG surprise there, right?). 

Of course, a lot of what is printed above is pretty well known oral tradition. And, of course, a lot of it gets validated in some direction related to the eyes of the beholder, right? I'm getting a little too old to go over this stuff time and again. However, one thing I would point up is that there are very definite and specific biomechanical and philosophical differences that always get ignored in responses like this. What makes this so bad are the generalizations (like the one you mentioned about similarities between, say, TKD and Hapkido) that proceed from these oversights. Frankly it makes no difference to me at all if people want to lay the origins of Hapkido at Chois' door or that of Ji. I know what I believe, and so do most of the other people who have been around a while. But as I say, what is getting lost is an intelligent discussion of what qualities of execution delineate one practice from another. Here are a few things that get glossed over. 

1.) Use of physical properties (weight/mass; speed/velocity; leverage; strength) in the yu sool aspects of the Hapkido arts versus neuro-muscular properties (timing; misalignment; loading; pressure-point/strike-point work) of the hapkiyusool aspects. 

2.) Incorporation and application of the Three Pillars including the Water Principle, Point-and-Circle (Circularity) Principle and Economy-of-Energy Principle. 

3.) Use of the legs as an assist to the execution of grappling techniques as compared to using the legs as a weapon in their own right. 

4.) Hapkido arts practiced as a Mu-Do to include a hierarchy of weapons whose practice is a harmonic to MThand work versus Hapkido as primarily MThand with use of weapons as a minor contribution to the main MThand curriculum. 

5.) Moderation of techniques in deference to the potential for damage to training partner or opponent as compared to modification of execution to allow for maximum performance at all times. 

I think the Hapkido arts are better served if we spend more time in these areas and much less time regarding personalities. For myself I have found that the Hapkido arts are far more than the people who tout them.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Disco

Kevin, thanks for the reply. You bring up an interesting, if not explosive, positional quandary. Choi vs Ji and just what is honest real hapkido? Since Ji added several elements to what he learned from Choi, who actually "is" founder and "what" is hapkido. Perhaps it's just a matter of semantics or does it really make a difference in the long run anyhow? To me personally, I have a difficult time understanding why anyone who trains, in any art, would purposely limit the availability of what they can use, as they have Choi listed as doing. Then again, Choi's background was jujitsu, so we are lead to believe. But even in the variations of modern day jujitsu, are there not styles that use all that's available to them and their still called jujitsu? Now Ji comes along and increases availability, gives it a new name and hapkido is born. Choi by all reports, never called what he was teaching hapkido, until after Ji penned the name. From an analytical viewpoint then, Choi never taught "Hapkido". Perhaps this is where the quandary lies?  

 :asian:  :asian:


----------



## SmellyMonkey

All three of you know more about hapkido's roots than the majority of students training.  

All I have to say is, keep this discussion going!  This is what the foreum is supposed to be for....discussion of different ideas.  

I love reading about this topic.  I only have my master- Mi Jung Jang - to give me this info.  I'd like to hear what you have to say and discuss it with my master.  

Keep this thread going!

Jeremy


----------



## Disco

Jeremy, I'll ask you a question, based upon what you've read so far, what would your consenses be on the subject? In addition, what does your master- Mi Jung Jang, say on the subject?


----------



## SmellyMonkey

I believe that I am studying hapkido and my base martial art will always be hapkido.  

Mi Jung Jang studied hapkido from an early age and majored? (don't know if it considered a major by western terms) in Hapkido at Yong-In University.

She also studied akido, karate, judo, kumdo, TKD, a little kung fu, and probably more martial arts.

Anyway, I am sure that other experience has influenced her.  But she considers herself a Hapkidoist first and foremost.

She also believes that martial arts should evolve and change.  She considers what she teaches "new-style" hapkido, and the traditional older stuff "old-style".  But both are hapkido.

Often she teaches us some of the "old-style" kicks/techniques to show us the base theory for the move.  She explains why the "old-style" kick/technique looks the way it does.  Then she shows us modern "variations" of the technique and why it does not look the same as the old style.

She often explains how we will change the techniques we learn from her someday and make them more our own style.  She doesn't think anything is wrong with that.  

I don't believe martial arts are something to be distilled for purity, labeled, and stored in the fridge to preserve them.  I believe martial arts should evolve and change.  But the history should be preserved and understood lest we forget our roots.

Jeremy


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Disco, I would have to disagree.  Choi most certainly called what he did hapkido - this information coming from the dojang where he spent the last ten years of his life.

A few other points:  Choi is rightly the founder of Hapkido, why? Well, lets look around a bit.  The argument that is being put forward is that Ji made hapkido well known, and added some stuff from unverifiable sources - and maybe created the name - so he is the founder - here I must say no way.  True, it seems that Choi was much more interested in what he taught than what it was called, but until 1986, Ji maintained he gave Choi the name to use out of respect (if you believe this...).  When it was confirmed that Choi had died, Ji suddenly flipped and became the "Founder" of Hapkido - now, Ji was only ever graded to third dan by Choi, and granted he moved to Seoul and became popular but consider this: 

Do we consider Nakayama Sensei the founder of Shotokan?  Surely, Nakayama was much more widely known than Funokoshi - Nakayama taught all over the world and is recognized as the man who really spread Shotokan internationally - so, for this is he the founder?  Of course not.  The founder lays the groundwork of technique from which all others come - e.g. Choi, Yong Sul layed the groundwork for Ji and countless others.  Just because they later added to the technique count (in many cases because they did not know more of the original material) does not make them the founders of the art - 

Now, did Choi just teach jujitsu, no I don't believe so.  He taught a synthesis of the technique he had amassed from 30 years of study in Japan.  Remember, Tekada was the head of some 7 or 8 ryu-ha - and Choi was taught a huge amount of material - as evident in the broad spectrum of his technique.

If, as Ji claimed, he created the name Hapkido, and gave it to Choi to use, then grabbing it back after Choi's death is suspect...moreover, Ji would have you believe that he "created" Hapkido at age 21 - I believe this continues to demonstrate the teaching prowess of Choi if he can in such a short time teach anyone enough to think they can start their own style...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## Disco

Kevin, just what was the broad spectrum of his technique's? If what has been said about Choi's lack of kicks and strikes is true, then what Ji fashioned, in my mind, is a totally different discipline. Which leads to the apparently unanswerable question; what is true hapkido? In the same vane, what would you say the percentage of people, under the hapkido banner, would be who practice Choi's method as opposed to Ji's method?  

 :asian:


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Disco,

I'll take a stab at this, an it is REALLY only a guess.  But in terms of a percentage, I would guess that about 70%-80% of the Hapkido seen today is of the Ji vein.  

Now, in terms of diversity of technique, Choi's material is for combat - plain and simple.  I am in my 25th year of Hapkido, and during my recent trip to Korea, I was overwhelmed at how a 125 lbs man standing no more than 5'6" and 76 years of age was able to move me around while smiling and talking (at 6'4" and about 300lbs, I aint light).  The number and ferocity of strikes seemed more than adequate - as did the incredible placement of strikes to the weakest parts of the body.

Now, kicking. True, Choi taught very few kicks, but again, this is a FIGHTING style, not a demonstration or sparring style, so low, fast, powerful kicks are the order of the day.  Many of the Korean masters I met were vey competant kickers, even showing high kicks - if only to demonstrate how easy they are to defend against,

One last thing, I have always been taught to train against non-compliant, resisting opponents - and my root is the Choi lineage.  The stuff I have seen not in that vein very often does not work against an opponent that is fighting back.  Simply, what I have seen of the Choi lineage is different from Ji material, not flashy, just really effective.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## iron_ox

Hello again,

In terms of the broad spectrum of technique, every type of grab to the body, every type of strike and kick and of course throwing defense are all hallmarks of the Choi material.

Frankly, I believe that Ji's material is not as "powerful" - it is basically the same type of technique, but from what I have seen the methodology behind excecution is different.  

In addition, I am still not sure how if all Ji did was learn a simple form of the art, and add some kicks, is it really different?  I can't tell ya.  I do know one thing, Choi's material works like NO other I have ever seen or felt - plain and simple.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

I think this is beginning to point up exactly the issue I mentioned. Lets' take a look at just this single piece. 

According to Dojumin Kim, Choi Yong Sul Dojunim taught 16 strikes and 17 kicks. Looking at the revamped curriculum that I use proceeding from KS Myung through Ji from Choi there are easily 50 kicks by the time one gets to BB. I conclude that someone added a whole bunch of kicks that were NOT originally Hapkido after the Choi tradition, and we know that both Ji and Kim Moo Woong were instrumental in doing this. But now--- what have we really figured out? That what Ji does is NOT identical to what Choi taught? Well, DUH!!

Now lets turn to a little different aspect of the discussion--- away from personality and on to execution. 

Hapkido at the Yu Sool level does not speak to working against a resistant partner. The fact is that yu sool does not work against someone who is in complete tonus with ever fiber in their body locked in, and nobody attacks this way. Typical training for yu sool level Hapkido is done with a standard firm grab. However, training must work up to that point at which the idea of being grabbed by someone who is stronger, larger or under some extraordinary influence (drugs?  alcohol?) in which case the technique must now be executed using the hapki yu sool principles. Essentially the same technique but executed in a slightly (?) different way. I believe THIS and not personalities is what we need to be focusing on. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Disco

Now, in terms of diversity of technique, Choi's material is for combat - plain and simple. I am in my 25th year of Hapkido, and during my recent trip to Korea, I was overwhelmed at how a 125 lbs man standing no more than 5'6" and 76 years of age was able to move me around while smiling and talking (at 6'4" and about 300lbs, I aint light). The number and ferocity of strikes seemed more than adequate - as did the incredible placement of strikes to the weakest parts of the body.

Now, kicking. True, Choi taught very few kicks, but again, this is a FIGHTING style, not a demonstration or sparring style, so low, fast, powerful kicks are the order of the day. Many of the Korean masters I met were vey competant kickers, even showing high kicks - if only to demonstrate how easy they are to defend against,

Now see, here I've learned something...... artyon: 
I was under the mis-information that Choi did no strikes or kicks. I had a hard time dealing with that concept. This puts things in a definitive setting now. In fact, it sounds like I am displaced from the Choi lineage. Everything that you have stated that Choi taught is what I do/teach. My original instructor, Qui In Baik (deceased) spoke lousy english and very little at that. We just smiled and nodded and hit the floor.  :wink: I've tried to find some information on him, but come up empty. Bruce gave a number in reference to strikes and kicks (thank you Bruce), that Choi used. The number of strikes and kicks we use is about the same. The variations and combinations is what drives up the total number of techniques available. Another aspect that Bruce mentioned was training against a resistant partner. I don't know if Choi dictated that every technique should be preceded by a strike, but that is the premise that we train under. Anyway, Kevin and Bruce thanks for taking the time to respond. Always appriciated............. :asian:


----------



## American HKD

Greeting

Kevin most of what you said about Ji Han Jae is ridiculous!

Ji may have received only a 3rd Dan directly from Choi before the formation of the Kido Hae and then the KHA. Choi was the 1st President of the Kido Hae and Ji was promoted to Master throught that Association by Choi and had a long tern student teacher relationship.

The technique Ji teaches are the same as Choi's addtional kicks aside. I will admit some of Ji's stuff is from other sources.

If you never trained with Ji for real ( not a seminar or two ) you would realize why Ji is considered the 2nd greatest Hapkido Master under Choi.

In my circles and with-in the KHF it's well known Masters Ji techniques are consider the best in the world, moreover 90% of the HKD practiced in the world today is of Ji's lineage.

With that being said I'm not taking away from what you do I highly respect that tradition.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Stuart,

No disrespect intended here, if the Ji style works for you thats cool.  The information I stated is partially from an interview conducted by Tae Kwon Do Times with Ji - where he states he only trained with Choi for 7 years.  My sources in Korea say it was more like three.

I would also question his "long term teacher student relationship" - why would Ji simply turn his back on such a relationship the same month Choi's death was reported - check any 1986 issue of TKD Times to see his flip-flop to "founder" of Hapkido.

Now, I know Ji is your teacher, and again, I don't want to start a war here - we've all been done this road before.  But much of this information is from Ji himself.  He does seem to jump around a bit with times and dates - and this most recent article in TKD Times even confirms that his training length with Choi was quite short even by his account.

I will admit that I have never trained with the man himself, but with MANY of his students and found their technique to be lacking.  Now, in saying that, this is not Ji himself - and maybe HIS technique is stronger - but perhaps my negative view of his students would be less strong if Ji were more conservative in his dispensing of rank.  Ji has lots of high dans grades with little or no Hapkido background - a shame really if his technique is that good.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

I must tell you in all honesty and all sincerity (and with no intended disrespect) that your position regarding GM Ji is fundamentally flawed---- and once again I will speak not from the basis of history or personalities but from biomechanics and execution. 

I had received GM Ji's techniques from him, and they are certainly effective. They are however executed at only the yu sool level of performance. There is nothing wrong with this as people such as my own teacher, GM Myung, have made a complete career of providing this instruction and it can be a very effective and complete art all in its own right. 

Now, moving to the next level of Hapkido arts--- hapkiyusool--- I have likewise had occasion to experience both Kim Yung Sang and Lim Hyun Su and must report to you that while the techniques are superficially the same at the gross motor level, the attention to detail is much greater with the hapkiyusool as these rely to a greater degree on exploiting the constructive weaknesses of the body---- what some people might characterize as "pressure point work".  Please allow me to pull these two sphere together. 

A person who is taught a more sophisticated art albeit more painful can always transmit that art by simplifying the material to make it easier, less demanding, more disposed towards retention or execution and so forth. Its not often that we see people do the opposite and make things more difficult but it DOES happen. My suggestion is that folks such as Ji and Kim probably learned the yu sool material and figured learning the same material at a more demanding level (hapkiyusool) was simply more trouble than it was worth and was less salable as a painful experience. I could imagine them dropping out of Chois' instruction once they hit 3rd dan and they had pretty much gotten most of the yusool stuff they needed. On the other hand, I can likewise imagine that people such as Kim Yun Sang and Lim Hyun Su probably saw the effective but painful material and figured "why even bother with the more primitive introductory stuff. Lets just focus on the hapkiyusool as a distinct art and only have to learn the material once under a single premise of execution."

I will close with one other thought. I have had a chance to work with people who perform both yu sool and hapkiyusool techniques and without knowing better they often mix and match them back and forth as though they are a single family of techniques. To some extent they ARE a single family of techniques but constellation of techniques that make up each practice are more like cousins than twin siblings. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Dear Bruce,

I see understand the points your making, and I'd like to have the difference explained and demonstrated.

I can tell you in Ji's classes from 1st gup on he teaches some "Very Effective" material that I personally haven't done with anyone else to date. Meaning it's not new tech. per se but the execution is done in a different way that really changes the whole tech. to what I'll call *"real combat effective material".*

I think with Ji's teaching it's both Yu Sool & Hapki Yu Sool, which brings up a good topic.

How can one really tell the diference between Yu Sool or Hapki Yu Sool?

Thoughts?


----------



## American HKD

Dear Kevin,

I'm not closed minded or to old to learn something new.

Yes, Ji's is my teacher and I trainined 12 plus years under Master Son Tae Soo (KHF) a very exacting Master. Ji however taught Master Son's teacher. 

I earned my rank over many years and much effort and have been training since 1979.

Personally I'm only interested real Hapkido. Techniques that WORK.

Over the years I learned techniques that I questioned as not being really effective in combat or self defense, but I would say 85 to 90% of what I learned really works.
The rest I dont want to practice either.

*The following is my own review no offense intended to anyone.*

I bought a couple years back the tape series by Rim and Sheya because I wanted to see what Choi (supposedly taught). Rim was supposed to be Choi's head instructor for many years who received a 7th Dan from Choi a Masters rank for sure.

I was totally unimpressed with that tape series. I don't even think half the stuff shown works. Also the previews of Rim doing self defense and knife defense was really poor and unrealistic. 

All in all I give the series a 5 out of 10 there was some Ok stuff but the rest was totally alien to me as the Hapkido I learned.

Any thoughts on Rims tape series and the techniques shown?


----------



## greendragon

Kevin  Sogor writes:


I will admit that I have never trained with the man himself, but with MANY of his students and found their technique to be lacking. Now, in saying that, this is not Ji himself - and maybe HIS technique is stronger - but perhaps my negative view of his students would be less strong if Ji were more conservative in his dispensing of rank. Ji has lots of high dans grades with little or no Hapkido background - a shame really if his technique is that good.

Thank you for stating you have never met or trained with him but still have a strong opinion about him.  Is this how men talk?  I wish you well on the mat...maybe you should find the time to actually meet him and train with him and THEN form your opinion on actual firsthand knowledge but hey this is a free country good luck to you and yours.....maybe one day you will see through the statement you made and be on the other side.

                                                                 Michael Tomlinson


----------



## greendragon

Bruce writes:

I had received GM Ji's techniques from him,

Isn't this strethching your one day in training with Ji Han Jae a little bit?  Come on now, this post sounds like you have worked out with him a lot and understand his Hapkido.... 
                                          Michael Tomlinson


----------



## iron_ox

Dear Stuart,

I have to agree with you about the Rim and Sheya tapes.  I have them as well and was basically asking myself all the way through "what am I watching"?

Mr. Tomlinson,

What do you mean is this how real men talk?  I have trained with at least 6 Ji trained instructors and MY personal evaluation of their technique was that it was lacking. Period. Been "on the mat" with them and found myself teaching them - not visa versa.  Why then would I go to him?  I think as I said that most of what I quoted was what he had said in iterviews - the rest was from my personal experiences with his instructors. 

As for the comment about issuing rank too freely, well, look around and see, I don't really think that calling out names here is useful - but I will say that Ji offered an 8th Dan to a prominent Chicago martial arts instructor saying they could "make lots of money together" - the Chicago instructor's reply was "sorry, I don't think I can even spell Hapkido...".

As an instructor of Hapkido, I think it is important to evaluate what I teach and ensure that it is the best for my students - so I have trained with a great many instructors - MEN form opinions based on their experience and values - YOU don't know me from Adam, haven't trained with me, or any of my students, and you want to question my "manhood" because you didn't bother to understand my posts - your statement is a contridiction and an insult.


Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## American HKD

Dear Michael,

Thanks for the help although I can't be offended by comments like that because there so out of context to any reality.

I don't understand Kevin's Hapkido style with out "actually doing it and studying it" and the same goes for Kevin understanding Ji's style. 
Kevin maybe better at what he does than the Sin Moo people he met so far.

It maybe true that Kevin saw some unskilled Sin Moo people but we all have seen unskilled MA in all styles and schools evenly across the board.


----------



## American HKD

Dear Kevin

You write.......I have to agree with you about the Rim and Sheya tapes. I have them as well and was basically asking myself all the way through "what am I watching"?.......

Is this close to the Hapkido you learned at all??? 

If Rim was as close to Choi as Lim Hun So was and other like master Jang etc. what were we watching and where did it come from?


----------



## iron_ox

Dear Stuart,

About the Rim Sheya tapes - I have NO clue what that stuff was...not at all close to the technique I have been taught.

In all honesty, I don't think I've spoken to anyone that has watched those that has a clue either.  People from a variety of Hapkido backgrounds hasd said that the set of tapes is to quote someone "bizarre Hapkido".

On an even stranger note, a friend of my senior student tells me that he has been training with Rim and has found the techniques not at all like what was on the tapes...I don't know, maybe an example of the same type of thing as the book by Han, Bong Soo?  The book hardly does justice to what he actually teaches...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Now, moving to the next level of Hapkido arts--- hapkiyusool.

I dissagree!!   Hapki Yu Sool is just the term GM Kim is reserecting to be different!  Advanced Hapkido or Hapki Yu Sool are one and the same.  Yu Sool = Soft technique, Hapki Do = Coordinating energy Way.

I have trained with Ji's students and have found some guys that really train hard and that are good guys but as far as the technique, It does leave one asking is this really Hapkido?

I would suggest to you Mike, try to make GM Lim's next US semminar series.  You would see the difference gaurenteed!  I think GM Ji's technique has some value but it is definately not as advanced as Doju Nim Choi and the few students that were with him for a long time.

I know we all have different ideas and veiws on this subject, I think the important thing is to talk and train together and maybe we all can learn somthing.

I all honesty and freindship.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## greendragon

Kevin Sogor
My comment is in the mode of judging someone you haven't met or seen before.  But whatever makes you happy, it is just I feel that your time woud be better spent being positive about people instead of getting on a message board and talking behind their back.. I guess I just view the world different than you, that is what I meant about being a man.  You have never met or trained with Ji Han Jae but you have this huge negative opinion of him.. I see this as pretty shallow.  Go to a seminar and train with  him and then you'll know.  But talking negative about him on here behind his back is really not akin to the kind of "men" I associate myself with. My two cents anyway.
                                                   Michael Tomlinson


----------



## Master Todd Miller

I wanted to mention that Rim was not the cheif instructor at Doju Nim Choi's dojang!  He may have been a member but he was not Choi's head instructor!

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## greendragon

Todd,
I agree with you getting together and training and sharing postive ideas is what is important.  I have never said anything negative about GM Lim, and if I get a chance I would love to train with him.....

The problem I have is when people get on here and criticize and talk poorly of GM Ji although they have never met him or trained with him... I feel this is inappropriate and childish.  Kind of like my toy is better than your toy..  Think what you will but by talking in this manner you bring disrespect and dishonor to yourselves and your organization.  I have never heard GM Ji Han Jae talk poorly of anyone practicing Hapkido.  He just says that it is good that everyone is practicing Hapkido regardless of who or what it is.  Maybe some of you should set a better example for your organization because it does reflect on you and your affiliation. Be positive and set a good example.
                                                  Michael Tomlinson


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Please: no dissrespect intended with this.

I think you are misreading this whole thing Mike!  I will and have been on the mat with many of Ji's students and I am not saying that they or Ji are no Good at all!  I am saying what they do IS NOT HIGH LEVEL Hapkido.  Some of it is not bad but as a whole from what I have seen it is not any thing like DJN Choi's original style.

You can call that childish all you want but it is true!

As far as making an organization look bad, Maybe you should talk to someone closer to home about the many things you have seen or herd about in the sin moo camp!

Look:  This will never be agreed upon on the internet so maybe it is time to move on?

Rather than talk why don't we plan an open training session and all that would like to train can come in a freindly environment and workout?

 :asian: 

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## American HKD

Dear Todd or Anyone,

I'm just trying to figure this out?

Rim's web site and other info about Rim describes him as being 6th or 7th dan directly under Choi and the chief instructor in Choi's dojang for 5 years or so? His technique looks like I don't know what!

www.rimshapkido.com/rim.html

Also Michael Wollmenhouser is certified as 8th Dan directly by Choi, however Wollmenhouser's techniques are of Ji Han Jae tradition not the Hapkido you or Kevin subscribe to. A HKD buddy of mine gave me a copy of his curriculum to 1st dan and it's Ji's style not Choi's.

Any info on these two things


----------



## American HKD

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Dear Stuart,
> 
> About the Rim Sheya tapes - I have NO clue what that stuff was...not at all close to the technique I have been taught.
> 
> In all honesty, I don't think I've spoken to anyone that has watched those that has a clue either. People from a variety of Hapkido backgrounds hasd said that the set of tapes is to quote someone "bizarre Hapkido".
> 
> On an even stranger note, a friend of my senior student tells me that he has been training with Rim and has found the techniques not at all like what was on the tapes...I don't know, maybe an example of the same type of thing as the book by Han, Bong Soo? The book hardly does justice to what he actually teaches...
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Kevin Sogor


Dear Kevin,

Go to Rims web site and look at the techniques shown there and tell me what you think? 

http://www.rimshapkido.org/splash3.html wait for this link to load go to techniques to see movies!


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Also Michael Wollmenhouser is certified as 8th Dan directly by Choi, however Wollmenhouser's techniques are of Ji Han Jae tradition not the Hapkido you or Kevin subscribe to. A HKD buddy of mine gave me a copy of his curriculum to 1st dan and it's Ji's style not Choi's.


Master Mike's only certification from DJN Choi was 1st dan.   :asian: 

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Disco

I am saying what they do IS NOT HIGH LEVEL Hapkido.

I realize that seeing is believing, but until everybody can gather to practice, all we have is this venue to exchange information. Todd if I may, what exactly is considered high level? Could you give us some kind of example of what you mean. Thanks in advance for your reply.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Stuart,  well, you've made me want to pull out the Rim videos again...two reasons - I don't remember most of the stuff on the web site on the tapes and I noticed on the site Joe Sheya is not mentioned at all...maybe something more deep than we know is at work here.

The techniques on the web site have a familiar look, but I execute them with much tighter circles and movements.  However, the web techniques may be exaggerated for illustration...not sure there.

Mr. Tomlinson,

Listen dude, if you can rebutt what I've said, feel free.  But your four posts look like whining to me.  When someone, anyone, makes a public statement, like saying "I am the founder of..." the statement is open to critique - I don't need to train with anyone to question their public statements.  Further than that, I use statments made by the subject himself, again open for critique.  I openly admit I have not trained with him, but some of his students - now, I did train (25 years ago) with a Sung Moo Kwan instructor who to this day I respect and speak to often.

I believe that students of black belt and above should be a representation of the school where they train.  With the very notable exeption of the Sung Moo Kwan instructor I have mentioned, the others have had technique that is not very strong - 

A review of your other posts reveals a strong inclination toward namecalling when you do not agree with the tone or content of a post (childish, eh?).  And frankly, Stuart and I (for example) were having quite a civil discourse before you swept in on your soapbox.  If you believe that a discussion where opposite view paoint are raised and dicussed, or even debated, about someone that is a "public figure" is talking behind their back and somehow those doing it bring "shame" to their organizations; I say this, I would rather be shamed in the truth than silent in a lie! 

To each his (or her) own, Stuart brings much information to light that I try to absorb, even calling me ridiculous is backed up with information.  I will say it here (again), Ji's technique may be awesome (it is obviously very good for some of you), but it seems that many of those graded in this technique didn't get it right, and additionally, Ji's public statements raise more questions than they provide answers.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Disco,

I don't know what Master Miller means by "high level technique" but I can say that just in my own training over the years, I have noticed that proper body mechanics and breathing control have made my techniques stronger and more fluid.

This type of change I think is only the result of repeating a technique until the action of the technique is less mechanical (e.g. thinking about it) than "natural".  Hows that for a meta-physical answer?  

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## American HKD

Dear Kevin,

You wrote.........To each his (or her) own, Stuart brings much information to light that I try to absorb, even calling me ridiculous is backed up with information...........

I never never called you ridiculus, I said " What you said was about Ji was ridiculus". you can double check the post. Big Difference!

Anyway,

Yes Rim's web site the techniques look like ones we do as well, however we seem to exucte them with much more precision & power. 

Also Rim's site posts many picture's of him doing techniques in Choi's Dojang most of those picture represent techniques we do too again they happen to look a bit on the sloppy side.


----------



## American HKD

Greeting,

Lugo brings up a good point!

We consider high level cirriculum wise over 1st Dan material such as:
Some more advanced level tech from a wrist grab. ( they execute faster than lower the Gup level stuff )
One hand techs, PP techs, more advanced punch, kick defence, Arresting techs and weapons etc.

Of course all material must be performed like a 1st dan, 2nd, 3rd, etc. and as Kevin said breathing, speed, power, smoothness all counts.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Folks: 

I know this is going to be tough because we are dancing on the edge of some pretty heavily energized subject matter, but we could truly do people a real a service here if we can just continue to keep clear what is experiential and what is opinion, as well as what is personality driven versus what is a technical observation. Michael, I am going to address my first comment to you because I think you are having the hardest time with this, though I could be reading something into your writing thats not there. 

I made the comment about GM Ji and receiving his technique because I HAVE had that experience. It was not an extensive experience. However, I note that the technique I received from him was the same that he was teaching, was the same that others were imparting to each other, was the same that he was coaching and very similar to the technique that I learned from GM Myung (Jis' one-time student). I feel safe in concluding that what I witnessed could well be characterized as typical of his approach to the Hapkido arts and can be clearly identified as "yu sool" in nature. 

To Stuart I would comment that I want to respect your response as well as possible so please take my following words not as a "smart-***" comment but a genuine suggestion. Should either Lim Hyun Su OR Kim Yun Sang come to the States I would encourage you to attend one of their activities and experience their technique as they apply it. You will find that the technique will superficially be similar to the yu sool version of the technique. Were one to execute the technique in this fashion the focus is on physics such as weight, velocity, speed, balance, mass and so forth. However, in receiving the hapkiyusool version you find that the focus is on impacting the neuro-muscular system of the body. Traditionalists would say that you are "controlling the partners' Ki". Whatever. I know what I felt when I was in Korea and coming from a Western philosophical position I won't romaticize the experience. 

One other comment regarding a past mention of striking in preparation for executing a technique. Pre-emptive strikes are certainly a part of the Hapkido arts at the yu sool level. There is nothing wrong with this. The reason that I was encouraged to execute the material I was learning in Hapkiyusool against a resistant person and WITHOUT a pre-emptive strike was that it forced me to be as absolutely accurate and attendent to detail as one could be. Certainly in a street situation I would probably use a strike against a larger, more resistant person. However, for training purposes and to get the very most out of my training, Dojunim Kim encourages people to eschew the strike and work against a resistant person to make them be absolutely as accurate with their execution as possible. BTW: I would not say that the Hapkido material at the yu sool level does NOT work against a resistant partner but only that the Hapkido material at the Hapkiyusool level works more readily and with greater ease than its yu sool counterpart. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Chris from CT

Man, where do I start!?    

I have been on the mat with a few of you who are discussing this.  Bottom line is that no one here (at least those who I have shared the mat with) are slackers in the Hapkido skill area.  _(Oh, and I have been on the mat with slackers too.)_

I have only been to a handful of GM Ji's seminars, but I was on the receiving end of his techniques in every one of them.  Besides that, I have been on the receiving end of others who have also honestly trained with Dojunim Choi (GM Lim, Hyun-Soo, GM Chang, Chin-Il).  From my limited experience, the basic principles in their techniques are very similar.  

One example being that in Jung Ki Hapkido, the physical off-balancing is critical to the entry of each technique.  What I am talking about here is movement of both yours and the opponent's center, not faking or striking to disorient the opponent to get into a technique.  

Getting back to GM Ji and Sin Moo Hapkido, it seems that the Sin Moo guys do the same thing as we do in Jung Ki Hapkido but they call it "stepping."  Mike or Stuart may be able to talk more about this, but from what I've seen when a Sin Moo guy talks about "stepping," they've showed me how their center has moved and the opponent's center has also moved, therefore putting the opponent in a precarious position to apply the technique on a resistant opponent without the use of brute strength.  This is the same principle we apply in Jung Ki Hapkido.  

As we have been told many times in Korea, "Same, Same, little different."


----------



## American HKD

Greeting,

Bruce I'm more than willing to come to a seminar with any of the Jung Ki guys and in fact look foward to in the near future.

Are you trying to tell me that the Hapki Yu Sool is more like Aikido vs Yu Sool/Ju Jutsu?


----------



## American HKD

Dear Chris

.........Getting back to GM Ji and Sin Moo Hapkido, it seems that the Sin Moo guys do the same thing as we do in Jung Ki Hapkido but they call it "stepping." Mike or Stuart may be able to talk more about this, but from what I've seen when a Sin Moo guy talks about "stepping," they've showed me how their center has moved and the opponent's center has also moved, therefore putting the opponent in a precarious position to apply the technique on a resistant opponent without the use of brute strength. This is the same principle we apply in Jung Ki Hapkido.........



What your saying seems to be true in fact in Sin Moo in general and more so in advanced the 1st step in fact puts the Opp. off balance in way that they cant resist before the tech. is executed.

In lower ranks esspecially in beginners they're to busy just trying to get the techs. together let alone make them actually work correctly, hense set up strikes and the like which to me is still good to do anyway IMHO.


I really have to meet you guys to see what all this different HKD stuff is all about, although I have a feeling it's more the same than different!


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Stuart,

Sorry, I was trying to say what you said, came out wrong in translation from brain to hands...thanks for the correction...sorry for the misunderstanding.

Started watching the Rim/Sheya Tapes again - another weird thing is that at the beginnning of each tape, Rim actually does techniques - different ones than Sheya then does - I don't get it...

Anyone got any info on the Rim/Sheya thng?

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## Disco

OK guys, when and where do we all meet?  :cheers:


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Disco,

Well, I'm here in Chicago.  I'll be in New England next June for the GM Lim Seminar series - hopefully with a busload of students.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

".....Are you trying to tell me that the Hapki Yu Sool is more like Aikido vs Yu Sool/Ju Jutsu....." 

Hopefully---- if what I am working to say is coming out at all right---- what I am saying exactly the opposite. If I had to put things on a line--- a continuum of difficulty (including pain discomfort) I think that the lowest end of the line would have some types of Aikido with a gradual growth to more authoritative Aikido to the yusool level of the Hapkido arts, to the more authoratatively executed forms of yu sool and finally to the hapkiyusool level of Hapkido arts. Even the Hapkiyusool level can be done with some grades of discomfort but it is almost entirely uncomfortable to learn at even its most basic level. All the groups I have met with and talked with agree on one thing regarding training: practice is going to be painful and for that reason a great many folks both Western and Korean don't stick it out for very long. At the end of my week--- training twice a day for 2-3 hours each training---- my wrists, hands and forearms were just beginning to adapt to the discomfort. The only way I found to be able to keep up with the schedule I submitted to was to simply put my mind "somewhere else" and participate with my partner as fully as I could. The second I started thinking about the pain ----everything stopped for me; being tired etc, etc----- everything stopped for me. It was a matter of just showing up, changing, getting out on the floor and doing the work. The moment I started to realize what I was doing, and what I was in for, learning stopped for me. There have been seminars and workshops that I have left early out of sheer disgust at what was happening.  I have to tell you Stuart that as tired and hurting as I was day after day you could not have dragged me away from the classes that Dojunim Kim taught. FWIW.

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Bruce,

I imagine you would be sore if you don't train that much all the time.

The training was only Ho Shin Sool mostly from wrist grabs or clothes, bear hug, etc.? 

Also you're saying the tech involve much pain and PP tech. as well as off balancing
that sounds like Hapkido to me. Not a different MA? 

If they did kick what types were used and how?


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Let me just say I am not saying that GM Ji's Hapkido is not good!  It just has lacked some of the things I consider important.  I will also say that my experience with Sin Moo is limited and am open to learning new things as long as they are in line with what I consider true Hapkido.

I will be holding a freindship training session at my dojang in November open to all who would like to join us.  I will post the exact date as soon as I look at my day timer.  There will be a small fee to help with the upcoming TKD Times interveiw with GM Lim.   :asian: 

In freindship and peace.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

"...I imagine you would be sore if you don't train that much all the time......" 

Actually I have to tell you that this was a perfect example of reaping what one sows. I have always advocated that a teacher should be participatory rather than directive, and having to get out on the floor and take falls on a regular basis from college students who may be trying to prove something has kept me in pretty decent shape for my age. When the students work out I am usually right there in line with them doing what they do as they do it. I think in some ways it sorta goads them on seeing an old fart twice their age popping through things while they huff and puff. At any rate, had I not subscribed to this approach you are probably right that I would not have been able to keep up. 


"......The training was only Ho Shin Sool mostly from wrist grabs or clothes, bear hug, etc.?...." 

Correct. We start with somok sool and progressed from there.  

"......Also you're saying the tech involve much pain and PP tech. as well as off balancing that sounds like Hapkido to me. Not a different MA? ...." 

No, not a "different MA". Its still Hapkido, just a different level of Hapkido art. It would be the same to say that when one moves up to the hapki sool level of the Hapkido arts that THAT level is as different from the hapkiyusool as hapkiyusool is from yusool---- some similarities, significant differences. 

".......If they did kick what types were used and how?....." The kicks are low, hard and fast; nothing above the chest (except one) There are only 16 and there are no spinning kicks, jump kicks or exotic gymnastic kicks. I can pretty much guarentee that you already know all of the kicks by the time you are a yellow or blue belt in any standard Hapkido school. The same goes for the 16 strikes (with probably one notable exception). FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Master Todd Miller said:
			
		

> Let me just say I am not saying that GM Ji's Hapkido is not good! It just has lacked some of the things I consider important. I will also say that my experience with Sin Moo is limited and am open to learning new things as long as they are in line with what I consider true Hapkido.
> 
> I will be holding a freindship training session at my dojang in November open to all who would like to join us. I will post the exact date as soon as I look at my day timer. There will be a small fee to help with the upcoming TKD Times interveiw with GM Lim. :asian:
> 
> In freindship and peace.
> 
> www.millersmudo.com


Dear Todd,

Your opening up that's good as am I, but your statement says "as long as they are in line with what I consider true Hapkido" 

That's closed again, you see if it's a new part of HKD that you never saw before or if you don't understand it you're already are condeming it! 

Just a thought.


----------



## American HKD

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Stuart:
> 
> "...I imagine you would be sore if you don't train that much all the time......"
> 
> Actually I have to tell you that this was a perfect example of reaping what one sows. I have always advocated that a teacher should be participatory rather than directive, and having to get out on the floor and take falls on a regular basis from college students who may be trying to prove something has kept me in pretty decent shape for my age. When the students work out I am usually right there in line with them doing what they do as they do it. I think in some ways it sorta goads them on seeing an old fart twice their age popping through things while they huff and puff. At any rate, had I not subscribed to this approach you are probably right that I would not have been able to keep up.
> 
> 
> "......The training was only Ho Shin Sool mostly from wrist grabs or clothes, bear hug, etc.?...."
> 
> Correct. We start with somok sool and progressed from there.
> 
> "......Also you're saying the tech involve much pain and PP tech. as well as off balancing that sounds like Hapkido to me. Not a different MA? ...."
> 
> No, not a "different MA". Its still Hapkido, just a different level of Hapkido art. It would be the same to say that when one moves up to the hapki sool level of the Hapkido arts that THAT level is as different from the hapkiyusool as hapkiyusool is from yusool---- some similarities, significant differences.
> 
> ".......If they did kick what types were used and how?....." The kicks are low, hard and fast; nothing above the chest (except one) There are only 16 and there are no spinning kicks, jump kicks or exotic gymnastic kicks. I can pretty much guarentee that you already know all of the kicks by the time you are a yellow or blue belt in any standard Hapkido school. The same goes for the 16 strikes (with probably one notable exception). FWIW.
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


Bruce 

Sorry to ask the same thing again but I can't imagine that big a difference.

I still dont get the different level of HKD you mean, granted this forum might not be the place to analyze this.

A friend shipwork out would be I'm sure, but see what you can do here.

Nothing you learned or saw from Myung, or H. Whalen or JR West is like the stuff you learned in Korea?


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

".....Nothing you learned or saw from Myung, or H. Whalen or JR West is like the stuff you learned in Korea?....." 

In a word? "No." 

I can imagine that someone might be teaching a yu sool level of a Hapkido art and someone grabs that person particularly hard. The result is that suddenly that yu sool level technique doesn't work as well. The response might be to use a strike to loosen the attacker up. Another response might be to use a pressure point to make the technique a tad more effective (read also "painful") for better pain compliance. But these are just stop-gap measures that proceed from a bruised ego. Now consider that someone takes the material at the yu sool level and reworks the ENTIRE curriculum such that EACH technique, even if resisted completely will still achieve its desired result and stop the fight. Now you have moved from the yu sool level to the hapkiyusool level of the Hapkido arts. But its NOT done by being stronger or tougher but by being more accurate, more precise. 

I will say again that what  Mssrs. Ji or Whalen or West do is not bad or awful or terrible. Its not "inferior" or somehow "lesser."  As I said before my own teacher has made a complete career of teaching at the yu sool level and is very happy with his curriculum as are his students. All I am saying is that if people want to move to another level in their Hapkido growth, the level is there for the investigation, thats all. Its the same as me and my sword training. I eclipsed, long ago, what GM Myung teaches for swordwork in the WHF. I wanted more and his introduction to the sword wetted my appetite for more. I bet Whalen would say the same about his interest in the cane, and others would probably say the same about their interest in the dan bong. The important point is that noone is going to bang on your door and beg you to grow. At some point you will hit a place where you want more. I hit that place a long time ago. I'm just regretful that it took so long to act on it.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

That's closed again, you see if it's a new part of HKD that you never saw before or if you don't understand it you're already are condeming it! 


I have always been open to doing things in a better more efficient way, This is how I have come to train at the Jungki Kwan.  I am open to good techniqe but I have been doing this for a while and can see pretty soon when there is good technique or not so good.  From what do I judge, from my teacher GM Lim and his teacher Doju Nim Choi.  I would not be rude but I will be honest.  I guess it depends on how one takes a critique as to wich one a person would feel.

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Kodanjaclay

Bruce,

How can you condemn Master Whalen's practice? The one time you went to his dojang, you did not finish. He has been to Korea countless times, and yet after one visit, you seem to be an expert. And yet, you make insinuations against me saying that I do not refer to vigorous training? Rest assured, I have had very vigorous training, and in fact with any luck will be training with Master Whalen later in this month...

In the interim, you might want to lighten up with the judging. Seems you have an opinion or judgment on everything, including people you have never met, and people you meet but don't train with.

What kwan did you train in, in Korea?


----------



## glad2bhere

".......How can you condemn Master Whalen's practice?...." 

Please identify where I condemned anyone or anything. 

I didn't, did I, Frank? But I can't say that I have ever seen you let facts get in the way of you introducing discord or bad feelings where none need be. What made it so damn necessary for you to make the post that you did? Had you paid ANY attention at all to the content of the exchanges on this string you might have learned something. In fact, my own joy stems from the affirmation my experience in Korean lent to what has been some years of research into the nature of Korean martial traditions within the context of Korean culture.  But learning is not what Frank is about, right? And Gawd forbid that you might sit by quietly while OTHER people learn, right? Do you know ANYTHING about what we are discussing? Doesn't really matter what the subject is, or whether you are versed in that subject or not, does it? Just leave it up to good ol' Frank to step in and say something to spoil an otherwise productive and rewarding conversation. Okay, Frank, you have done your little toxic routine. Now why don't you toddle back into the shadows and let the adults continue the discussion. 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd: 

"......That's closed again, you see if it's a new part of HKD that you never saw before or if you don't understand it you're already are condeming it!....." 

I'm not sure that logic necessarily follows. For a good number of years now I had suggested the progression of three levels of the Hapkido arts based in great amount on the parallel progression suggested among the various DRAJJ groups. What remained was actual hard evidence. If I had to draw a simile' I would say what I am speaking of is a little like the various indicators that are spoken of in astro-physics. A recent finding is that stars seen to "wobble" suggest the pull of an orbiting planet, though the planet itself can't be seen. Now, not EVERYBODY buys this but it is a popular position in that community. I would suggest that in like manner, people know that there is another level to their practice but have not actually seen the item itself. And naturally when someone comes along and points to a thing and says "there it is" a lot of folks are going to be reasonably skeptical. I think thats what I would call the response---- skepticism--- rather than condemnation. Lets face it, the US is a place where somebody is selling the Holy Grail for someone every few seconds, right? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

I would suggest that in like manner, people know that there is another level to their practice but have not actually seen the item itself. And naturally when someone comes along and points to a thing and says "there it is" a lot of folks are going to be reasonably skeptical. I think thats what I would call the response---- skepticism--- rather than condemnation. Lets face it, the US is a place where somebody is selling the Holy Grail for someone every few seconds, right?

I agree!   I have been saying the same thing since 1998.  The difficulty most people have is that the difference between the Yu Sool level and the Hapkido or Hapkiyusool level is very subtle and frankly most Masters recognize there is a difference but are not really sure what it is!  This makes sense to me as it takes a very long time and much practice to begin to understand the bio-mechanics and moovement associated with Doju Nim Choi's Hapkido style.  :asian: 

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd: 

And therein might lay the only reservation I might have about getting together for a "friendship event". Certainly not everyone can pack things up and go to Korea for a couple of weeks to learn from a master, first hand. Still, I wonder if it would be doing the right thing to get together in such a manner and just share material back and forth. Do you remember that old story about the tea master telling his visitor that he had to empty his cup before any more tea could be poured in? If there were a group of people who got together, what would help the folks who would come to experience the hapkiyusool method of doing a technique from simply say things like, "oh, we do that too" or "thats the way we do our technique except for..."? Do you know what I mean? In my own case, when I returned to my students I didn't start looking for ways to teach the hapkiyusool version of things intermingled with the yu sool approach. My sense is that were folks to want to have the hapkiyusool experience they would probably want to immerse themselves in it for a weekend to the exclusion of everything else. Nothing says they couldn't go back to doing things as they have always done it, right? And some people might take tips back to their yu sool classes and that may improve their own material, right? All the same, right now, for me, there is a very clear line between the two levels and I am afraid of seeing that line blur. In the US folks have such a propensity for wanting to collect information on the cheap, and all I see it do is cheapen the information. Look what happened with TKD!  Thoughts?

 Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

And therein might lay the only reservation I might have about getting together for a "friendship event". Certainly not everyone can pack things up and go to Korea for a couple of weeks to learn from a master, first hand. Still, I wonder if it would be doing the right thing to get together in such a manner and just share material back and forth.

The Freindship training sessions I have hosted are not meant to teach everybody advanced Hapkido!  If 4 different Master's and 2 Instructors come I only will allow the Master level practitioners teach or share what they do.  What these training sessions are for is to promote good will and freindship among all mudoin nothing more nothing less.  I somone asked a question I will answer as best as I can.  We all know that working out for a couple of hours will only give advanced students a taste and this is all I will do for those that are not members of GM Lim's Jungki Kwan.  :asian: 

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## American HKD

Greetings,

I would like to see or expirience the difference between Yu Sul and Hapki Yu Sool?

Who's in a central area of the east coast maybe New York where we could all meet up for a day?


----------



## Disco

The difficulty most people have is that the difference between the Yu Sool level and the Hapkido or Hapkiyusool level is very subtle.

Does the subtlety stem from the amount of time given to perfect techniques or would it be based upon the natural talents of the individual?


----------



## American HKD

Dear Bruce,

You seen this another form of HKD for a week in Korea and have been training in Hapkido for how long? 
Master Whalen mentioned the style to me and it doesn't sound like the end all Hapkido style although he said it was good style with hard training.

Your Master Myung proudly tells all how Choi was his teacher when we all know it was Ji Han Jae. The point I'm making is Master Myung should have shown you and all his students this superior type of Hapkido unless he keeps it for himself as secret techniques.

The reason I'm having a hard time with all of this is many people are Choi's direct students not just Jung Ki Kwan how do they only know the alleged better form of Hapkido then people from the Ji tradition and many ohtes who trainned with Choi too. 

Ji Han Jae 
Kwan Sik Myung
Bong Soo Han
Hwang in Sik
Wollmenhauser ( 3rd dan Choi Yoong Sul )
Rim Jung Bae ( 6th dan Choi )
Many other Etc.

Somethings smells bad here if all these people have low level tech and only the Jung Ki Kwan know the true Art?


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

I'm not altogether sure I know what you are asking but I can venture a guess about what I think you are asking because I have thought about it myself for sometime. 

Arguably Ji has been the root of a great number of branches of the Hapkido arts. I don't think he is at all shy about identifying various people (including KS Myung) as his students. Now there is a lot of pride to be found in that, but there is also a limit. Ji trained with Choi for a goodly number of years before steping out and starting his own tradition called the Song Mu Kwan. What that tells me is that everyone who descends from his tradition could learn no more from him than what he learned from Choi in the time that he was a student. Nothing wrong with this and as I have said a number of times people like Myung, Kwang Sik and Bong Soo Han and Myung Jae Nam etc etc etc have made full careers following the yu sool level of the Hapkido arts. People can stay at that level for their entire career and not "miss-out" as far as I'm concerned. (And if the personalities in this country DID learn EVERYTHING that Choi had to teach, and purposely kept this material underwraps for the last 25 years from even their top students I figure they have a LOT to answer for!) Where the difference comes in is when someone gets towards the top of the Hapkido pyramid and starts looking around for the next mountain to climb. As I mentioned before my sword work is the same thing. I COULD have stayed at the level that Myung teaches sword, but decided I wanted to take my practice up another level. Its the same thing with the Hapkido arts. hapkiyusool is not the "be-all-&-end-all" of Hapkido. There is still "hapki sool" after "hapki yu sool". What it takes is a willingness to start over. By this I mean that progress through the Hapkido arts is a spiral. You come around full-circle and find yourself at a new leve, thats true, but you still have to approach it as a newby. I was only the 3rd person to be allowed to tape the hapkiyusool opening curriculum by Dojunim Kims' report. People who have viewed that tape get a real kick out of seeing me in a white uniform and a white belt after 19 years of Hapkido training. When I left I was given a Black Belt. It DOES'NT MEAN I have a Black Belt in Hapkiyusool. What it means is that Dojunim Kim recognized my background and acknowledged that I wasn't a White belt and that he was willing to accept me into the kwan. But, when he awarded me my certificate at the end of the week---- it was for 8th guep. Thats how its done. Make sense? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Dear Bruce,

I think you understand my question. 

How could this allegedly superior level of Hapkido been kept under wraps for all this time by many so called students of Choi. 

Would so many be so narrow minded to abandon this side of the Art?

It seems hardly possible that only a few people are seaching for a higher mountain to climb in this Hapkido Tradition.

It's much more logical to believe that the material presented to you was also presented to Ji, Myung, and many others who trainned with Choi.

So again what happened! It really seems strange to me?


----------



## glad2bhere

Ouch!!  I have to tell you, Stuart, you sure don't make it easy to have a disspassionate discussion about this. 

"..... allegedly superior level of Hapkido......"  

".....be so narrow minded......" 

Add on Franks' "condemned" to the list and a guy could be forgiven for thinking that the name of the MA game here in the States is "contention". I was wanting to respond to your question but understandably I expect that no matter what I say or how I say it someone is going to be looking for a reason to strike-out at someone else, yes?  Anyhow--- here goes. 

Warning!! Personal Opinion Follows!! 

I can think of four ways things could have produced what we are looking at right now. 

1.) In the late 50-s people wanted to cash in on the efforts to define a martial tradition for the Korean nation. People who wanted to lead their respective movements were impatient to wait until they had garnered the necessary high ranks, or pursued arts where high ranks simply didn't exist. Therefore various people learned various skill sets depending on how long they gtrained, when they trained and how Choi felt about them. 

2.) It is possible that various personalities, in turn taught various skill levels to THEIR students while still saying that they taught the way Choi taught them. Ji and Kims' introduction of Kicking techniques is pretty well-known. Why could they have not likewise deferred to a less demanding way of teaching the techniques, as well as a less demanding way of executing those techniques? 

3.) Curriculums were reshaped to make the classes more friendly to general consumption not unlike the way Ueyshiba reshaped DRAJJ to produce a kinder/gentler Aikido. In this way marginal combat effectiveness might be lost but at the gain of having a more salable product for public consumption.

4.) Lastly, there is the possibility that Choi taught only the yu sool level and that people have been tacking stuff onto the stuff taught them by Choi and authenticating the add-ons by invoking the name of the great man himself.  

Now---- do I know that any or all of these things happened? No, not for sure. However, if you take a look at the way people relate to MA in the US, I think its pretty easy to see that folks can easily say one thing, while knowing another and while practicing yet a third.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

This may be a stupid question, but...

Can you translate "yu sool", "hapki yu sool" and "hapki sool" for those of us who haven't used those Korean terms before?

Thanks,
Jeremy


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Wollmenhauser ( 3rd dan Choi Yoong Sul ).  

Master Mike's only promotion from DJN Choi was 1st dan this was after he had already been promoted to 6th dan from Dr. Park.

The hard thing for many to deal with in this disscussion is that GM Ji and many others did not learn everything from Choi.  Choi did not have that many students that trained with him for a long period!  Hapki Sool , Hapki Yu Sool as Bruce puts it takes many years of dedicated practice under a qualified Master.  GM Ji only trained with DJN Choi for 3 years as a very young man it only stands to reason that he would not be at the Hapki Sool or Hapki yusool level as a high school student.  I am sure he was and is very skilled but not in the truest for of what DJN Choi taught.

I will be holding a Hapkid/Guhapdo Freindship meeting at my dojang on Saturday November 20th From 10:00 - 3:00,  There will be a $25.00 charge for all.  Those that hold the rank of 4th dan & above will be allowed to share some of what they do if they would like.

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Can you translate "yu sool", "hapki yu sool" and "hapki sool" for those of us who haven't used those Korean terms before?

Sool = technique
Yu = Soft

Hapki = coordinate spirit & body into one roughly

Hope this helps.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy: 

If you end the conflict by virtue of applying skills based on mass, leverage, balance, strength and speed you are using yu sool skills. 

If you end the conflict by viture of impacting or manipulating a neuro-muscular system you are using hapkiyusool. 

If you end a conflict by dint of your own personality, persuasion, psychology and personal power you are practicing hapki sool. Here in the West most people forgoe practicing hapkisool because a person who seeks to reason his way out of a situation is considered something of a wussie. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Jeremy:
> 
> If you end the conflict by virtue of applying skills based on mass, leverage, balance, strength and speed you are using yu sool skills.
> 
> If you end the conflict by viture of impacting or manipulating a neuro-muscular system you are using hapkiyusool.
> 
> If you end a conflict by dint of your own personality, persuasion, psychology and personal power you are practicing hapki sool. Here in the West most people forgoe practicing hapkisool because a person who seeks to reason his way out of a situation is considered something of a wussie. FWIW.
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


I guess you are right when you said you had to see/feel the difference between "yu sool" and "hapki yu sool" to believe it.  

Is "hapki yu sool" something that can be taught?  It sounds...well...like something that will come naturally so long as the hapkidoist continues to grow and mature as a martial artist.  How can you teach this?


----------



## American HKD

Dear Bruce & others,

My comments are not personal, just trying to dive deeply into these situations.

Moreover the comments about superior etc. is how this level of Hapkido is being spoken about either directly or with undertones meaning such.

That's Ok, everyones comming from there own expiriences which are all different.

Bruce per your explanation which is feesable, I guess this is why so many variations of HKD exist today all comming from Choi one way or another.


----------



## whalen

Master Todd Miller said:
			
		

> Wollmenhauser ( 3rd dan Choi Yoong Sul ).
> 
> Master Mike's only promotion from DJN Choi was 1st dan this was after he had already been promoted to 6th dan from Dr. Park.
> 
> The hard thing for many to deal with in this discussion is that GM Ji and many others did not learn everything from Choi.  Choi did not have that many students that trained with him for a long period!  Hapki Sool , Hapki Yu Sool as Bruce puts it takes many years of dedicated practice under a qualified Master.  GM Ji only trained with DJN Choi for 3 years as a very young man it only stands to reason that he would not be at the Hapki Sool or Hapki yusool level as a high school student.  I am sure he was and is very skilled but not in the truest for of what DJN Choi taught.
> 
> I will be holding a Hapkid/Guhapdo Freindship meeting at my dojang on Saturday November 20th From 10:00 - 3:00,  There will be a $25.00 charge for all.  Those that hold the rank of 4th dan & above will be allowed to share some of what they do if they would like.
> 
> Take care
> 
> www.millersmudo.com



You are wrong on this one Todd.

I met mike in 1980 and he had his third dan from Choi young sool I saw it in his home when i stayed with him his dojang was on Page Boulevard in springfield.

About two years later mike was promoted to 5th Dan By J. Park at one of the J. Park tournaments at the Civic center .He had skipped fourth 

Several years later he was promoted to eighth Dan skipped both 6,7 dan i was there when he made the announcement at his Tournament during the Black Belt meeting , i was sitting next to chester Holibecki an issihn ryu master .

 There was a lot of grumbling in the room about that move .

This not to disrespect the dead but Do not sell him short for years he was good enough to be your Teacher, All these promotions were before you were in Hapkido.

If it was not for him the doors would never have been opened for you.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Hi Stuart,  I really think that a lot of the difference that some of us have seen in technique is a direct correlation to the amount of time and actual training that some masters did with Choi, Yong Sul.  Many who claim long term relationships were there only for a few months, and this only on a week to week basis.  

There are very few that stayed for more than a few months, fewer a few years and only a tiny amount that stayed for many years in Taegue.

I think that is the main difference.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy: 

"......Is "hapki yu sool" something that can be taught? It sounds...well...like something that will come naturally so long as the hapkidoist continues to grow and mature as a martial artist. How can you teach this?....." 

This IS a VERY tricky point and I have to tell you in all honesty I'm not sure exactly HOW this shakes out. I know from experience that Dojunim Kim instinctively executes his techniques and they are right on the button every time. But, then again, he has been doing hapkiyusool since December, 1974 and was training in Hapkido up in Seoul before that. Figure with that kind of water under the bridge one would expect no less, right? 

Now lets take your average American raised with the idea that there is always some easier way to get something. He might hang with hapkiyusool for a while. Then, with time, he might start thinking that the "marginal" improvement in his technique (if he even realizes such) might not justify the added workload and regular and severe discomfort. So he goes back to doing things the old yu sool way which is still a sound method of practice. I see this all the time with sword work. People come and learn to swing a sword and for the first few monthes they see huge gains. In time, though those gains slip from being by the foot to being by the inch. From what I witnessed and what every student conveyed to me, hapkiyusool, after years of yu sool level hapkido asks an awful lot of the student. I mean, think about it for a second. If you already had a decent art, and then decided to take a comparable art but at the expense of great discomfort how long would most people stick with it, right? Sometimes I think the people with the advantage were the newbies who came into hapkiyusool directly from the street or another different MA. They had no basis for comparison so they just dug in and took their lumps.  

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Chris from CT

American HKD said:
			
		

> How could this allegedly superior level of Hapkido been kept under wraps for all this time by many so called students of Choi.
> 
> Would so many be so narrow minded to abandon this side of the Art?



There was a topic on another website about some of the traditional styles of Hapkido that are practiced and why they are not prevalent in the USA today.  So I responded...

_Let me ask, is another reason because it's "too rough?" The principles that Dojunim Choi (the founder of Hapkido) taught takes time to learn, but also takes time for the body to be conditioned to train in them.

One of the things that seems "rough" is the strong wrist grabbing during practice. If the principles are applied you will be able to release the strong grip and apply your technique without the use of a strike or a fake. Constant repetition of this can wear on a person's wrists very quickly and cause redness, swelling and/or bruising. Many people here in the USA do not want to put up with this, but these people are not thinking that it is only temporary if you continue training. For the average person (that I have seen) if you continue this training for only 3 weeks, 2 times a week for approximately 20-30 minutes at a time, the bruising and tenderness goes away and does not return during training. From there you build a good foundation and can increase your conditioning.

Another thing that people think is rough is the "off balancing" that is used in traditional Hapkido. When you are actively moving a resisting person around without them having the ability to respond can be a little unnerving and let's just say uncomfortable. Here in the USA, the average person, who has to be in control, is getting man-handled and put in positions that is setting them up for a big fall. It ain't pretty and it ain't subtle, but it is efficient.

Another poster here mentions about how many Hapkido schools are too compliant during their training and that they are ineffective in a real confrontation.  The quote above are just a couple of thoughts I had about why some of the traditional styles of Hapkido are not taught so readily here in the US, while also addressing the point of the ineffectiveness in what the other poster had experienced when visiting other Hapkido dojangs. _ 


The above thought is more along the lines of Bruce's #3 reason...


			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Curriculums were reshaped to make the classes more friendly to general consumption...



I feel this theory is very probable in the "immediate gratification," "I'm not responsible," "litigation crazy" society we live in.

Thoughts?

Take care  :asian:


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Chris: 

Just a quick comment regarding the pain and abrasion, and only because I asked Dojunim Kim about this point blank. 

During my training my wrists and forearms became very tender and swollen to some degree and I thoroughly expected to start losing the skin off my wrists. Dojunims' comment was that I could expect that my arms would begin to accustom to the training by just about the time I was getting ready to go back to the States. He was right on the money. Regarding the skin on my wrists though, he mentioned that if a person executes the techniques correctly this never becomes a problem. Apparently the only people who have this problem are the folks who can't seem to shake-loose of their own way of doing things. It is the struggling, not the correct execution, that does the damage. If it is of any testimony at all, I can share that on the first night I went through what is something of a rite-of-passage in which I was allowed to do any technique I wanted against a completely resistant partner. The object, as you know, is not to embarrass but to provide an object lesson from which a person can open their mind to an alternate way of doing techniques. That night was the only night that the skin on my wrists was rough and raw. Regardless of how much training I did the rest of the week the damage to the skin on my wrist was nothing like that first night.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Chris from CT

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> And therein might lay the only reservation I might have about getting together for a "friendship event". Certainly not everyone can pack things up and go to Korea for a couple of weeks to learn from a master, first hand.  Still, I wonder if it would be doing the right thing to get together in such a manner and just share material back and forth. Do you remember that old story about the tea master telling his visitor that he had to empty his cup before any more tea could be poured in?



When I have shared at the past three "Hapkido Friendship Seminars," I have taught principles (not techniques) with the main focus being on how to move from your center.  First explaining the benefit, then doing drills and finally showing how to apply it to specific techniques.  This way a person can leave and apply it to their own techniques if they so choose to.  

One of the reasons I feel a person would want to try and apply it is that I show them how it generates so much more power and then with the use of specific angles, that are weak to the human anatomy, can be used to execute techniques on a strong, resistant opponent without the use of strikes or fakes. The main focus is applying the technique without striking!  It may sound to some that this is somewhat advanced, but this is basic skill that needs to be developed right from the beginning.

Empty cup or not, the "Hapkido Friendship Seminars" are an ego-free way to get together, hang out, get on the mat and meet some brothas and sistas in the Hapkido community.  

But what do I know, I'm just a "martial arts junkie"  Where did that number go for M.A.A.?

Take care  :asian:


----------



## Chris from CT

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> During my training my wrists and forearms became very tender and swollen to some degree and I thoroughly expected to start losing the skin off my wrists. Dojunims' comment was that I could expect that my arms would begin to accustom to the training by just about the time I was getting ready to go back to the States. He was right on the money. Regarding the skin on my wrists though, he mentioned that if a person executes the techniques correctly this never becomes a problem.



The main thing here is that "it never becomes a problem."  This is more of a mindset.  It doesn't mean that the area won't get red and worn, but it is the continuation of the training, knowing that it's only tempoprary that there is not a problem.  The problem arises when a person gets it in their head that there is no benefit to the conditioning and therefore stops... therein arises "the problem."

Take care  :asian:


----------



## Master Todd Miller

I met mike in 1980 and he had his third dan from Choi young sool I saw it in his home when i stayed with him his dojang was on Page Boulevard in springfield.


I mean no dissrespect to Master Mikes memory but Master Mike was given a first dan by choi in 1979.  DJN Choi never gave Master Mike any other rank and this is a fact!  

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Master Todd Miller

This not to disrespect the dead but Do not sell him short for years he was good enough to be your Teacher, All these promotions were before you were in Hapkido.

If it was not for him the doors would never have been opened for you.

The time that Master Mike was my teacher was good for the most part.  As far as things that happened before I was in Hapkido.  This does not mean I cannot find out what truly happened!

I will always be thankful that Master Mike introduced me to GM Lim.  Now GM Lim is my teacher and I have had many conversations about Hapkido and the events of the past and without going into detail things are not always what they seem.

Enough said!

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Disco

This post kind of got overlooked a while back, so we'll prop it up again.

The difficulty most people have is that the difference between the Yu Sool level and the Hapkido or Hapkiyusool level is very subtle.

Does the subtlety stem from the amount of time given to perfect techniques or would it be based upon the natural talents of the individual?


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Does the subtlety stem from the amount of time given to perfect techniques or would it be based upon the natural talents of the individual?

The subtlety comes from much correct practice.  An important detail that I tell my students is understand the key point of a technique and then after much practice you will develope an understanding of the technique but more important you will have an understanding of the priciple wich is much more important.

Take care


www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

The technique most definitely proceeds from consistent practice that focuses on accuracy and detail. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

I have been thinking about this seperation that we are making and I fear that it is very artificial.  There is only Hapkido.  The difference is in how and to what degree techniques are excecuted.  In a wierd nutshell, here is how I see it:

If you need some glue, you head to the hardware store.  There, you might find two glues that are made by the same company, come in essentially the same package, and cost the same.  The difference is that one says it holds 10lbs.  the other says it holds 1000lbs.  Now, which will you buy?  I would opt for the 1000lbs.,  it will hold 10lbs., plus so much more.  

Here is how I seperate these techniques or techniques levels.  One level (the 10 lbs.) works with deceptions in the dojang on a semi-compliant  opponent, the other level (1000 lbs) works on a fully resistant opponent using true body mechanics.

Now, for those of you that think that real confrontations do not involve fully resistant opponents, well I'd say stop beating up guys that are sleeping...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

I really liked your metaphor and I would bet 3M probably didn't mind either.
 

Yes, its true that to some degree an arguement can be made that drawing a line between yu sool and hapkiyusool is somewhat artificial. On the other hand there IS a difference albeit subtle and hard to identify in many ways. I would bet the historians who traced the development of Aikido through Ueyshibas' career probably had the same problem characterizing his major stages of development. We could go on and on about how one kind of practice is a refinement or an improvement or a refocusing or a ?????? but I just like to view it as an alternative. For many years I have heard people report that they had gotten just so far in their Hapkido arts and then had to turn to some other art to continue to progress in some way. The current approach seems to be to take on ground-fighting (IE. Tu-de, BJJ, NHB) and try to integrate that material with their Hapkido. I suppose that is still an option. For myself, I like the fact that I can move on to another level of challenge within the Hapkido arts themselves. This espeically important to me in that the mission identified by the four tenents of the Yon Mu Kwan (Training, Research, Integrity and Service) are readily served by staying within the Hapkido arts rather than stepping outside of them. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

I thought about posting this in a new thread, but since this topic is related I guess I'll post it here.

To my surprise, my master Mi Jung Jang has a relationship with Han Jae JI.  He was in Chicago a week or two ago for a seminar and he went to dinner with Mi Jung Jang.  I think they are working out plans for Han Jae JI to do some seminars at my school in the future.

I don't know much about Han Jae JI besides the interview I read in Tedeschi's big old book on Hapkido and forum members' posts.  But I think I will have the chance to meet with him during his future visits to Chicago.

What do you all think would be interesting topics to discuss with Han Jae JI?  I don't want to sound like a moron, nor do I want to bring up topics that are too "sensitive".  

Thanks,
Jeremy


----------



## Disco

Jeremy, good question and really smart on your part to ask it. Perhaps asking his opinion on if he feels there are specific levels of Hapkido. Much like part of the discussion here. On a more generalized note, you may want to ask him about his role in Bruce Lee's movie. The name escapes me at the moment, but it was the one where he (Lee) had to fight his way up the 5 levels of the building. Good fight scene between Ji and Lee.


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Disco said:
			
		

> Jeremy, good question and really smart on your part to ask it. Perhaps asking his opinion on if he feels there are specific levels of Hapkido. Much like part of the discussion here. On a more generalized note, you may want to ask him about his role in Bruce Lee's movie. The name escapes me at the moment, but it was the one where he (Lee) had to fight his way up the 5 levels of the building. Good fight scene between Ji and Lee.


Movie name was "Game of Death", I believe.  They had cut Ji's scene from the original movie.  But it was shown on the History channel this summer when they did a show about Bruce Lee.  It was pretty cool!

I was rooting for Ji.  Alas, he lost to Bruce.  ;-)


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Jeremy,

An easy way to approach any interview is to find stuff in print attibuted to the person you are going to meet.  Try to get copies of the articles, read them then ask questions that might better help you understand what issues that person was covering in THAT interview.  Always a good way to start, and helps avoid taboo subjects...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## American HKD

Dear Jeremy,

As a student of Doju Ji's, I can tell you just be sincere he can tell right away.
Also he likes serious students who train hard that's the best way to get his respect. 

In the beginng he wont talk to you that much meaning one on one but once he starts to know you and see what your all about, he becomes very approachable.

He will talk about Bruce Lee when he meets a new group for the first time or he'll say whens he's teaching a tech. this I did in the Bruce Lee movie or something like that.

Take advantage of the opportunity when you can it's a great expirience.


----------



## glad2bhere

Regardless of how much work a person puts into developing a trusting relationship, there remains the opportunity to present an intelligent question to a person who is arguably one of the major figures in Hapkido history and the Hapkido community. That said, were I in such a position, I would like to hear his views on the nature of succession as it is practiced both in modern Hapkido arts as well as traditionally in Korean martial science. Certainly he must know that succession has been a painful area of controversy in the KMA for many years. Likewise I am sure he is familiar with some of the comments made at the same time as his interview a while back. Perhaps he might provide some guidance, as a senior KMA personage regarding how he would like to see such matters handled in the future. Thoughts?  Comments? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

Having attended the training at Mike McCarty's excellent dojang last May.  We had quite a few days over some hardcore training and plenty of meals to actually ask GM Ji some of these questions.  I specifically remember him telling a few of us that when he passes away he doesn't want anyone to succeed him in Hapkido.  He told us that we should get together and train hard and be happy just like we were doing then.  He said that the training was all that should matter.

  He said that the biggest problem in Korea was that everyone wanted to be the head or in charge of something instead of just wanting to work hard and train.  He said that when he trained people in Korea they were always concerned with having to work out with someone that was there junior, etc. etc. too much worrying about protocal and he thought they missed the point of just learning, training, and having fun with their Hapkido.  He told us that once we learned his Hapkido we should make it our Hapkido and then we were good to go.  I heard him tell me this information directly and I did not hear any of this through anyone else...so the stuff that was written in the tkd times article isn't what he has in mind for Hapkido, he said that the brotherhood of Hapkido we have developed is how modern Hapkido should be. regardless of anyone's opinion of him he is a great man and I am a much better person for having spent some serious quality time with him over the years...
                              Michael Tomlinson


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Thank you all for great advice.





			
				greendragon said:
			
		

> too much worrying about protocal and he thought they missed the point of just learning, training, and having fun with their Hapkido. He told us that once we learned his Hapkido we should make it our Hapkido and then we were good to go.


I heard master Mi Jung Jang speak the same words many times.  She says she mainly cares about teaching a technique until you "feel" it.  Once you can "feel" the technique, it is your technique.  You then change the form in small ways to make it work better for your body.

I like that concept.


----------



## glad2bhere

Thanks, Michael. 

DJN Jis' response is completely in keeping with the traditional approach to Korean martial tradition. Its really too bad that approach has been so badly eclipsed by the more commercial need for having someone in charge. To read the history of kwan organizations its very plain that the "leadership" was not necessarily in a single person or small group of people in whom power resided. Rather, a group essentially accepted that there was a single person, or small group of people whom people looked to to help keep the kwan on track towards whatever goal and method was espoused by the group. I remember Todd Miller (or was it Kevin Sogor?) who mentioned that at the Taegu kwan of DJN Lim the upper ranking individuals interacted as a collective to accomplish training among the lower ranks. If there was any talk of someone being "senior" to another that must have been worked out among themselves rather than divulged to the general knowledge of the kwan. I have to say that during my short stay in Korea this year there was little (if any) talk of rank or standing. It wasn't until I got back to the States or when I got back on one of these Nets that people were making a big thing about who was in charge and who "ranked" whom. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

You know that when you here the high ups like GM Ji, and those like him tell you not to put anyone in charge but just get together as friends and learn and practice then you just become that much more enamored with the art.  GM Ji vehemently stated this to us, there was Mike McCarty-Conn. Todd Deninger-Colorado, Sean Bradley-Washington, Javier Agosto and me-Florida, and a few others that he was directing this to and we all got it. He just wants people to love Hapkido and practice hard. Every time I have trained with him he is adament about stating that he also wants his Hapkido to become your Hapkido. 
                               Michael Tomlinson


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

Could you please elaborate on the KMA tradition that believes that systems be turned over to a non-cohesive group instead of a single individual?  Never heard of that before.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

Its actually simpler to start out and go the opposite way as far as explanations go. There has never been a tradition of patrilinear succession in the Korean martial tradition--- period. Until the eradication of the Civil Service exam in the 1800-s martial training was for all intents and purposes a cottage industry in which folks were taught material as a function of monastery security, sport or competition (in the sense of Taek Kyon or earlier as Soo Bahk), or local (community) security. Commoners were drilled as conscripts against internal strife. People who sought positions of responsibility based on their martial skills could apply to the Civil exams or hopefully inherit a titled position as a member of the Yangban. There simply is no case of a Korean tradition of a father passing the title to leadership of an art to his son or other relative. Yes, I know people make a BIG thing of it now and gawd how I wish they didn't but unfortunately thats life in the KMA. The closest one come to anything like this are the kwans ("frats") of which a number of folks got together to share a common interest in something. Usually a person "mentored" the group and thats about as close to the Japanese Ryu-ha system the Koreans ever got. That doesn't mean that people didn't later-on see the commercial benefit of being the single person in charge, but that gets into a whole other ballgame. BTW: See Palais' CONFUCIAN STATECRAFT (ISBN: 0-295-97455-9  
or
SOURCES OF KOREAN CIVILIZATION by Lee (Vol 1&2-ISBN: 0-231-07912-5). Good stuff.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

I will have to dig up those works, but what do they have at all to say about genuine martial traditions that exist today?  As I understand, Tae Kyon is a revived thing that died out long ago - as for the vast majority of Korean martial arts today, their roots are Japanese (not generations ago - but from the 1930's and 1940's).

I think that it is a little suspect to ascribe "Confucian" tradition to martial systems that never had any or from whose founders never created these traditions.

ALL current Korean martial arts run on a simple hierarchy system - even the current vision of Tae Kyon - the "Confucian" model you are looking for is non-existant in KMA of 2004.  You practice an art bound up with Japanese tradition - maybe not what you want to hear, but trying to add philosophies to the mix that are simply not there may be very confusing to many.  That is not to say that Hapkido is not uniquely Korean - and Confucianisam is a larger part of Korean heritage - just not a model in the same terms as you describe.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

I know we have disagreed about this in the past and I can imagine we continue to agree to disagree for a good while to come. 

Traditions such a Taek Kyon were not and are not dead. They never died out. This is a huge amount of dung propagated by the modernists who wanted to be THE folks to shepard the nature of Korean Martial Tradition after WW II. Korean archery is another tradition that goes back for generations. Korean Ssireum has endured through generations as well. What I see is that the Neo-Confucianists were identified as holding martial matters in distain. The Japanese came along and added insult to injury by pressing a case for Japanese traditions. Modernists coming back to Korea after WW II pressed their own hybrids (with them in authority, of course) while discounting both the original Japanese AND Korean traditions. 

The single greatest contributing factor to this was that the Koreans did NOT have a tradition of succession. With such a "casual" approach to martial traditions it was easy for the Japanese and the Modernists to simply say that Korean martial tradition died out. There are still Japanese  nationalists and Japophiles who preach this stuff every chance they get. The Koreans have traditions of grappling, sword, archery, Buddhism, Pottery, metalurgy, Politics, Education etc etc etc. The Korean people did not have to have someone else come along and tell them how to run their government, or schools or use a sword or make a vase. What I see happening is that only a very small group of afficianadoes are taking the time to find and protect these traditions. Most folks would rather take a more commonly found tradition and represent it AS Korean. Not only is this misrepresentation but it also detracts from further investigation into the genuine traditions. 

If I may, I would also like to point out the manner in which you are approaching this subject. 

"......I think that it is a little suspect to ascribe "Confucian" tradition to martial systems that never had any or from whose founders never created these traditions....." 

By virtue of the way you are framing the subject you are presupposing that there was sonme identifiable "founder" some single authentic origin from which the art proceeds. This is very much a Ruy-Ha sort of approach to the subject and is simply not a part of Korean tradition. Rather it is an institution started by modernists to funnel revenues one way or another. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

In Hapkido, there is a single founder, Choi, Yong Sul.  NO one prior was doing this stuff, and he is the only real human among the monks and maternal grandparents that actually existed...

As for other Korean Martial arts, cannot speak to those...


Sicerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

I think we both know where this discussion goes. It will come down to how "hapkido" is defined and by whom. We can talk about who was the first person to use the term. We can talk about the nature of Soo Bahk. We can talk about the relationship among Choi and his students, or those students and THEIR students. Choi brought traditions from Japan to Korea. What about the folks who brought Chinese traditions to Korea during the 1700-s and 1800-s? How about the folks who brought monastic tradition to Korea before that? And what about the Sa Do Musool traditions before that? Rock throwing as an art and as a celebrated festival was practiced and recorded up until about 1905. Koreans have consistently been top finishers in archery for generations. Various polearms have been recorded for several hundred years as the mainstay of Korean military as has both archery and the sword. So exactly what Korean traditions are we speaking of? I have no problem whatsoever putting Choi Yong Sul at the top of a pyramid. I just want to make sure that pyramid is very accurately identified and is positioned correctly relative to the much greater Korean MA spectrum, yes? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

I have to say that Bruce has a valid point here.. 
I too recognize Choi as the father of Hapkido.. heck I spent 8 hours on a pencil drawing of him to give to Master Whalen back in 1992 when he visited us here in Florida.. I probably know Choi's face better than most people on the planet... I will also note that in all my dealings with GM Ji Han Jae he has talked highly and lovingly of his time with Choi Yong Sool, he NEVER says anything bad about him and wouldn't stand for anyone else doing it either, GM Ji always refers to Choi as "his teacher".  I think a common misconception about Ji Han Jae is that maybe people think there is some animosity from him about Choi, there isn't at all.. 
but as Bruce alluded to... once we peel back the layers of who came first then we can go back to Adam putting Eve in an outward wrist lock!!!  Where does it go in the future??? 
                   Michael Tomlinson


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

Again, what you have said is quite valid, here is how I define Hapkido - the art taught by Choi, Yong Sul - that no one else in Korea ever taught before him.

Itsa great to have other traditions, they are not Hapkido.  Chinese kung fu is not hapkido, nor is wrestling or archery.  The issue here is Hapkido, from a Japanese root, does not have a Confucian hierarchy.

It is great that others learned some Hapkido and mixed it with other stuff, or just made stuff up as it came to them, these generally have different names and are other martial arts, Kuk Sool Won, Hwa Rang Do - not Hapkido.  I do not believe that Hapkido is a generic title for any Korean art that is not Tae Kwon Do.

It may be a great idea to create a pyramid of traditions, but the Hapkido tradition is quite seperate from other you mention - frankly, the "greater Korean MA spectrum" should have their own pyramids...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

.... and therein lies the rub. 

I believe that Choi taught Hapkido. I believe that he also taught hapkiyusool and hapkiyukwonsool. I believe he also taught hapkisool. I also believe that he called his material "yawara". And I can feel completely comfortable believing all of these things at the same time. People can still point at Choi and say that he taught these arts, or levels of arts. People can still say that Funakoshi taught Karate even though the term has long-since expanded to include arts not taught by Funakoshi. People still say that Kano taught Judo even the the term has expanded far beyond the science that Kano taught. The question becomes a matter of do we want to focus on the individual or do we want to focus on the art? In the most specific definition of Hapkido one could say that Ji Han Jae invented the term and the art that goes with it. In the next most general definition one could say any tradition that descends from DRAJJ through Choi. In the most general definition one can say any grappling art filtered through Korean tradition. It becomes a matter of choice regarding ones' perspective. For example, some people like sports, and some people like Baseball-- which is a sport--- and some people like a particular Baseball team among all teams--- within the sport. For me, I follow Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido. I can safely say that Choi probably had no idea that there was a Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido. Our curriculum follows a Mu-Do approach including 6 weapons that Choi probably did not teach but which are an integral part of Korean Martial science and tradition. Now I can tell you, Kevin, that spending those days with Dojunim Kim has already caused me to rethink bits of what I know about the material the Yon Mu Kwan follows. However, I won't be dropping the Yon Mu Kwan curriculum, nor the weapons material, my passion for sword nor my loyalty to GM Myung. I will continue to grow my KMA experience, though I may not do it the way other people do. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

One of the things that I have tried to do in my travels to Korea is to ask questions and interveiw Founder Chois students.  The thing that is always consistant is DJN Choi called his art Hapkido, Yu Sool, Hapki-Yu sool, Hapki-Yu Kwon Sool, Dai Dong Ryu Hapki-Yu Sool.  They were all the same thing, the martial art he learned.  You see Founder Choi did not care what it was called, to him it was more what you became by following his style of teaching.  This subject is very interesting the more you dig into what the students say about there time with the Founder.

It does not really matter what history you believe or follow both DJN Choi and GM Ji have important spots in Hapkido history!  :asian: 

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## American HKD

Greeting,

I think Todd maybe right here, but let me qualify this statement.

1. According to Doju Ji, Choi called what he learned Yawara! 
2. Ji being one of Choi original students would certainly know this fact!
3. Ji said he heard it was Daito Ryu but couldn't prove it!
4. Ji coined the name Hapkido & Choi used it! 
5. Why because as Todd said I too believe choi didn't really care what it was called just follow the teachings.
6. There are older student of Choi who pre-date the Jung Ki Kwan before Ji coined the name Hapkido who dont use the name Hapkido but Hapki-Yu Sul.

What's all this mean, not much just do the Art 

This is how I see this controversy.


----------



## Master Todd Miller

6. There are older student of Choi who pre-date the Jung Ki Kwan before Ji coined the name Hapkido who dont use the name Hapkido but Hapki-Yu Sul.


Who would this be?

I know GM Kim, Yun Sang studied with DJN Choi around the same time that GM Lim did.

Thank you.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd and Stuart: 

Somewhere along the line I think we are going to have to get past this particular issue and it seems this is beginning to happen. A couple of years back this discussion would have gotten stuck at just this political point and not gone past it. Now, it seems that we are beginning to allow for a variety of terms and views and maybe the stage is being set to move on to WHAT we are doing rather than WHO is doing what. For instance, I really like the idea that people can accept that there are a variety of terms or levels---- or whatever you want to call it---- and that different people were involved in different levels of development. For myself I am more intrigued with Kim Moo Woongs' take on kicking that Ji Han Jaes but then we are moving to talking about the dynamics that make one sort of kicking different from another and THATS where I see some real growth coming out of this discussion. 

Another place where I see a need for discussion is not so much WHO is teaching right now but rather WHO is LEARNING right now. Follow my logic here for a moment. 

As we talk about these various personalities such as Ji, Kim and Lim we can discuss their relationship with Choi and that makes for good coffee klatching, yes? But consider that each of these personalities is having people of varied backgrounds come and train in the particular art that they teach. Maybe its just me but I see a problem here. When a TKD person, say, comes and takes some training in a Hapkido art, therte is nothing to prevent that person from going back and teaching that material to their students. But what about saying that they now teach "Hapkido". Does anyone see a problem with this? Personally I see this as a topic more in need of discussion than various relationships and conflicts of the past. I teach Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido but its taken almost 20 years of my life to be able to make that statement. What about the person who trains for a few monthes and then puts up a sign in their window? I know the short answer is that eventually people will see the shallowness of his teaching but what about the damage such misrepresentation does to the art in general?  Thoughts?  Anyone? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

"......6. There are older student of Choi who pre-date the Jung Ki Kwan before Ji coined the name Hapkido who dont use the name Hapkido but Hapki-Yu Sul......" 

Its really easier just to refer to Kimms' book and his fine history of the early years of Chois' teaching prior to, say 1957 or so. There are about 15 or so individuals listed if folks want to take a look.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Its really easier just to refer to Kimms' book and his fine history of the early years of Chois' teaching prior to, say 1957 or so. There are about 15 or so individuals listed if folks want to take a look. FWIW. 

There are alot more people that studied with the Founder than Dr. Kims book states.  I am more talking about DJN Choi students that continued with him.

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

"......There are alot more people that studied with the Founder than Dr. Kims book states. I am more talking about DJN Choi students that continued with him......" 

Then I guess I must just be missing the point. 

The fact is that people came and people went and some people got taught one thing and other people got taught something else. And then there were people who whipped-stitched things together and ascribed it to Choi. There were also people who trained with Choi but gave him only a little acknowlegment. What I seem to be hearing is a subtle position being made for the same old "one true way" for an art proceeding from a nation that never had such a place in its culture for proprietary information. 

Twenty years ago the big name was Bong Soo Han. If your training didn't proceed from him it wasn't genuine. 

Then it was Ji Han Jae. If your training didn't proceed from him it wasn't genuine. 

Then the KHF had there little mess and if you weren't sanctioned by them you weren't authentic. 

Now we're back to Choi Yong Sul and if you can't trace back to him you are just not authentic. And we still have the split between Kim Yong Sang and Lin Hyun Su. Are we going to argue over whose the more authentic THERE? 

And nobody wants to go back BEFORE Choi Yong Sul.

And nobody wants to talk about a peer such as Jang Im Mok. 

So what is REALLY being said here? Its beginning to sound like "First there was Choi, and then there was ------- (fill in your choice) and then there is ME. Don't bother me about other traditions, sources or histories. I know what I want to believe because it makes me feel good to believe it."  Is this about accurate? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Now we're back to Choi Yong Sul and if you can't trace back to him you are just not authentic. And we still have the split between Kim Yong Sang and Lin Hyun Su. Are we going to argue over whose the more authentic THERE? 
 :whip: 
 Who is arguing here Bruce?  What split are you talking about?  Bruce, You are reading things into this that are not there!  Authentic Hapkido is from Choi, Yong Sul and there is no evidence of any Hapkido that was alive in Korea in 1944 when Choi returned there.  The only thing I try to point out is that GM Lim was with the Founder day in and day out for a long time.  Most others would travel on weekends to visit Choi.  This is just a fact plain and simple!  No dig or disrespect to anyone.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd: 

"......Who is arguing here Bruce? What split are you talking about? Bruce, You are reading things into this that are not there! Authentic Hapkido is from Choi, Yong Sul and there is no evidence of any Hapkido that was alive in Korea in 1944 when Choi returned there. The only thing I try to point out is that GM Lim was with the Founder day in and day out for a long time. Most others would travel on weekends to visit Choi. This is just a fact plain and simple! ......" 

You are quite right. There is no contention here. What I am speaking to is a narrowed view of things. If its alright I would use your post as an example to underscore my position in the previous e-mail .

1.) If there is no "split" between Kim and Lim why are there two entities? Does it come back to who teaches a more authentic version of Chois curriculum or is it something as simple as who is going to be "the boss"? 

2.) The there is no evidence of "hapkido" before Choi Yong Sul because everytime I point to the evidence people say that "its not evidence". We just got finished pointing out that what people are calling "hapkido" now was formerly called hapkiyukwonsul, hapkiyusool, yu sool, and yawara. People are choosing to stop at Choi because they don't want to give chin na, kwon Bup and Soo Bahk their recognition. Why? Because then those same folks lose the authority they have as being the sole source of the Korean arts we NOW call hapkido and may, quite likely be called something else later. 

3.) And what is to be made of Lim being with Choi for a long time? I've been with Myung since 1990. What does that mean? I've been with KJN Koo for five years. What does that mean? DOJUNIM Kim was with Choi since 1974---- what does that mean? Dojunim Lim studied sword and DRAJJ in Japan. What does that mean? What is it exactly that you would have the readership here believe for having read your post? See this is why I just don't think we go anywhere talking about personalities. It does not expand our awareness of the arts, nor does it offer anymore insights other than from a propaganda point of view. I think we are making a real mistake.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Greetings,

Chin Na is where all the or most of the locking techniques come from and Shou Jiao or Chinese wrestling is where most of throwing come from. 

I'm friendly with a very good local Kung Fu Master and it's interesting to note that according to him there's no style on Chin Na alone until the last 20 years or so. 

Chin Na techniques where part of or sub-sets of most Kung Fu systems. Therefore some systems taught certain technques of Chin Na while other styles would teach totally different Chin Na techniques. 

Throwing is not part of Chin Na also if you research carefully you will also not that Yawara is closely related to Chin Na (a locking only type system). Nage or (throwing) was seperate school of techniques.

Today it seems that mosts Yu Sool, Jujitsu styles are a mixture of Yawara (locking) and Nage (throwing) along with other things such as Atemi waza (striking) and so on etc.

Last note I dont really care who started what as Bruce says it's a coffe table discussion. My exposure to Hapkido was through Ji Han Jae line and that's my roots and was Bruces, Todd and others from different lines and that's thier roots.

I think we can all get along and share regardless of these difference.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Folks: 

".......Last note I dont really care who started what as Bruce says is a coffee table discussion. My exposure to Hapkido was through Ji Han Jae line and that's my roots and was Bruces, Todd and others from different lines and that's thier roots.

I think we can all get along and share regardless of these difference......" 

Which brings us back around yet one more time to the same spot. 

We can keep going over "whose roots," and "his roots" and "their roots" over and over again but how is that giving us greater insights into what we DO. As I mentioned before, for example, in the kwan to which I belong we do the six traditional Korean weapons. There is nothing to say that I HAD to learn anything more than the kendo-esque sword material GM Myung taught me if I wanted to meet that part of the curriculum. Now we could talk about whose sword work is more authentic Myungs', or Ji's or Lims' or ????? but how does that help the individual do Korean martial practice better? And what if I stayed only with the Ji tradition as filtered through Myungs instruction? He made a career out of teaching what he teaches and noone says a person can't do that. But what if a person wants to delve deeper into the art. Are we not required to exceed our teachers? Is what we pass on to our students not to be more than what was passed to us? How are we approaching this responsibility in this discussion? 

 Is anyone understanding what I am asking? 

Are people  willfully choosing not to discuss this aspect of Hapkido? 

Please let me know if all you want to do is go round&round about personalities. There is a great deal of information out there and things to consider as regards ones' practice. However, if peoples' greatest expectancy for their practice is to simply regurgitate yet one more time Hapkido household names it would be a great help to me to know this up front. I don't want to be the party-pooper who rains on everybodys' party if thats what folks want. Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Bruce 

I'm not sure what you mean exactly but if we are to do more than our teachers we need to exceed thier levels and introduce alternatives to what is being done now.

But what I am seeing here is most of us seem to be happy finding our individual paths regardless of the root anyway!

If you want to disscuss Hapki Yu Sool vs Yu Sool that's really hard to do in this written forum.

And yes I do agree with you that the Chinese has much influence into Korean MA esspecially the North.

I learned with a Hapkido Master KHA 6th Dan back in the early 80s was head instructor in my teacher school for 1 year. He used to show us Northern Korean Kung Fu I don't know much about it but the Chinese connection was in Korea.


----------



## Master Todd Miller

We can keep going over "whose roots," and "his roots" and "their roots" over and over again but how is that giving us greater insights into what we DO.

I agree there is only so much that can be done on a keyboard.  Greater insight comes from training!  Thye thing is Bruce, we all have differing opinions so it is important to not get to wound up by it.  BTW I am only pointing to things that are true.  Each can take it however they like.  

I agree that there was a Hapkido style art in Korea before Choi but there are no unbroken lines to proove it!  It only stands to reason Mudo traveled through China into Korea then on to Japan so in a way Hapkido came from the Chinese. :asian: 

Relax Bruce I do not think this is worth getting upset about. JMHO

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## howard

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> 1.) If there is no "split" between Kim and Lim why are there two entities? Does it come back to who teaches a more authentic version of Chois curriculum or is it something as simple as who is going to be "the boss"?


i don't believe that master lim holds himself out as anything like a "boss" figure.  he simply says that he teaches exactly what he learned from choi young sool.  i have never heard or seen any statement attributed to him that disparages any other hapkido style.  in fact, he believes that martial artists should unite rather than bicker.



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> 3.) And what is to be made of Lim being with Choi for a long time?


well, for one thing, that he absorbed a tremendous amount of information about choi's art.  that is readily apparent to anybody who has ever watched master lim demonstrate technique.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Folk: 

Please. I'm not upset about anything. I DO think that people are beginning to appreciate the view that I am presenting. 

a.) The Japanese have the ryu-ha system and that makes for a lineage of authenticity. Even THEY do not always abide by this, but it is part of their culture. 

b.) The Korean culture does NOT have such a system of successive lineage. The Koreans DO have a martial tradition and that tradition HAS been passed from generation to generation. Where people seem to get caught up is that in the passing, there is not always a specific individual to identify as the authority for doing the passing. 

c.) I think that what folks would like to do is  apply some sort of "proprietary information" or "intellectual properties" rule to the Hapkido arts and therein starts the fussing. To my mind we are discussing Korean traditions of which the Hapkido arts are but one expression. What I am hearing other people say is that we are discussing specific sets of practices handed down from one individual to the next through a clearly defined succession of leaders. The Koreans have not had this in their culture. It was imported from Japan. Why anyone so badly damaged by the Japanese for some 60 years would want to mimic their organizational system beats the heck outa me. 

d.) AND IF people want to play the "proprietary information card"---- after all of the talk about Choi training in Japan------ how is it that we are not giving proper credit to the DRAJJ people and paying them fielty? How is it that things pick-up rather conveniently at the Korean border and only through a single person who happens to be the source of authentification for the traditions represented here? As a student of DRAJJ, as alleged by many, should not have Choi done the proper thing and connected all of his students, through his position, back to the DRAJJ tradition in Japan? Seems like some pretty selective thinking going on here to the otherwise. 

Lastly, let me say that the Chinese arts have made as much influence for the Korean traditions (maybe more) than the Japanese arts. The fact that most people are pressing the Japanese connection is that is the source of their material. This all well and good and I truly wish them well in their efforts. Where I have trouble is when people say they practice KMA, press the traditions that stem from Japan and then ignore or even discount the other half of the Korean traditions. Whats up about that? Once again it seems as though people are taking the easy way, yes?  Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Howard: 

"......well, for one thing, that he absorbed a tremendous amount of information about choi's art. that is readily apparent to anybody who has ever watched master lim demonstrate technique....." 

Thank you. Your response was exactly why I made the original (and somewhat rhetorical) comment. 

If you will note the subjectivity ("....tremendous...", "readily apparent") in your comment you will see why such discussions simply do not add to the wealth of Hapkido information. One persons' "tremendous" is easily another persons' "adequate". One benefit of using a medium such as a Net like this is that we contributors are forced to convert into black&white those emotional issues that bubble around inside. For instance, can you give an exact number for the techniques Lim learned? (IE. Kondo Sensei (DRAJJ) has organized a curriculum of 118 techniques as the introductory part of his art. )

My sense is that very shortly this string will begin to wind down and the reason will be that with a call for more objectivity people will begin to lose interest in the discussion. My personal experience in these discussions is that people enjoy the freedom of being able to spout out opinions without having to actually validate what they are saying. I have seen this time and again. I wonder if we are making as fine a use of this medium as we might. Am I expecting too much of the Net participants in this? Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Kumbajah

> As a student of DRAJJ, as alleged by many, should not have Choi done the proper thing and connected all of his students, through his position, back to the DRAJJ tradition in Japan? Seems like some pretty selective thinking going on here to the otherwise.



This is the point that sticks with me - why say you are practicing "Hapkido" when by the "pure" Choi defenition it is DRAJJ ie the art Choi learned in Japan - unchanged. If some one practices Judo anywhere in the world it it still Judo. Karate came to Korea was changed/developed/evolved and became Tae Kwon Do. You still have the TSD practicioners but TSD is just the Korean Pronuciation of Karate. So why the name change to HKD instead of (whatever the prunuciation of Daito-Ryu)Hapki-yu-sool. How come there hasn't been more effort to reconnect with DRAJJ.

Brian


----------



## Master Todd Miller

(IE. Kondo Sensei (DRAJJ) has organized a curriculum of 118 techniques as the introductory part of his art. )

GM Lim has organized the JKHKD curriculum into 101 up to 1st Dan.  Bruce: You act like you are the ONLY ojective Hapkidoin on the planet!  You have seen GM Lim, GM Ji and GM Kim what kind of things did you notice?

MT is a great place to discuss things but there is only so much you can do with a keyboard.  I think Bruce will be known in the Hapkido world with developing some of the most advanced Hap key-Sool  (keyboard).  

Lets keep the discussion going.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## howard

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Howard:
> 
> "......well, for one thing, that he absorbed a tremendous amount of information about choi's art. that is readily apparent to anybody who has ever watched master lim demonstrate technique....."
> 
> Thank you. Your response was exactly why I made the original (and somewhat rhetorical) comment.
> 
> If you will note the subjectivity ("....tremendous...", "readily apparent") in your comment you will see why such discussions simply do not add to the wealth of Hapkido information. One persons' "tremendous" is easily another persons' "adequate". One benefit of using a medium such as a Net like this is that we contributors are forced to convert into black&white those emotional issues that bubble around inside. For instance, can you give an exact number for the techniques Lim learned? (IE. Kondo Sensei (DRAJJ) has organized a curriculum of 118 techniques as the introductory part of his art. )
> 
> My sense is that very shortly this string will begin to wind down and the reason will be that with a call for more objectivity people will begin to lose interest in the discussion. My personal experience in these discussions is that people enjoy the freedom of being able to spout out opinions without having to actually validate what they are saying. I have seen this time and again. I wonder if we are making as fine a use of this medium as we might. Am I expecting too much of the Net participants in this? Thoughts?
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


bruce, sorry, but i don't agree that saying that master lim absorbed a tremendous amount of information from choi, and that it is apparent, is subjective.  i believe that anybody with even a passing knowledge of any martial art would conclude the same thing from watching the man.  individual observers may come away with different impressions, but it's difficult to imagine that anybody could conclude that master lim is not very knowledgeable about his art.  one might call his knowledge "tremendous", "adequate", or any other adjective, but the knowledge is there - that is indisputable.

as for the exact number of techniques he learned from choi, no, of course i cannot give a number, but what possible relevance does that have to the simple point i was trying to make - that master lim is a very knowledgeable martial artist who teaches what he was taught by a specific individual?

i believe you have misunderstood me.  the only reason i made the short post above was to try to point out that master lim does not claim to be the only source of anything, to my knowledge.  i meant this as a positive statement about him.  i'm not trying to say anything subjective about master lim or anybody else.  as i've said, his knowledge is apparent (objectively so, if you will), and he claims to teach as he was taught - that's black and white.  as for "adding to the wealh of hapkido information", i really dont' know what to make of that comment.  my brief post was intended to communicate 2 small bits of information to anybody that might find it useful, not to add to an existing corpus of information.  there's a chance that somebody could read it, and it could influence them in a decision to seek out master lim for training some day.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

Yes, I think we can quantify technique for many people.  I believe you were at the seminar with Grandmaster Lim when he said he had been taught some 1800 or so techniques, and that his beginning curriculum has 100 techniques in it.

Now, you continue to return to why we do not fall at the feet of DRAJJ, well, simple, the art Choi taught is different, period.  Dojunim Choi said his whole life that he was the only person made privy to certain levels of technique from Takeda Sokaku.  He reiterated this in an article reprinted in Black Belt Magazine in 1999.  As fas as having to retrace patronige back to DRAJJ, well, maybe they need to go to Korea, since not one person in the current DRAJJ camp from Japan ever learned as much as Choi.

Even so, what Choi taught had only one link to DRAJJ, with its founder, when that was severed, it was unnecessary to return to that organizational root because Dojunim Choi had been told by Takeda to teach in Korea and stay there.  Now, you mentioned Jang Im Mok.  According to a published interview, Jang mentioned that he knew of Choi in Japan during his stay.  Now, a high ranking member of the Hapkido community in Soeul, GM Hur, Il Oung trained with Jang and was certified as his highest student and he has never tried to assume any mantle of contol with this technique.  I would suspest because it is different than that of Dojunim Choi.

Chinese influence, yes I am sure that there is Chinese influence in Korean martial arts.  Just NONE in Hapkido.  Dojunim Choi trained in Japan, returned to Korea and never trained with anyone else in Korea.  That doesn't meant that some didn't take Hapkido and add Chinese stuff, most notably Suh, In Hyuk who I believe added Northern Kung Fu to his self-styled Kuk Sool Won. Now, you make a continued cry for proof, well, show us the money - where is the evidence (and it can be as simple as a style, technique group, real tracable human) that Hapkido has ANY Chinese influence.  I think there is enough evidence that MA travelled from China through Korea and down to Japan, then back up rather than the other way around, but OK, enough with the supposition that the rest of us just don't get it, provide evidence that even as early as 1948 there was an active Chinese martial influence in Korea - at least you can bring it to the same year that Dojunim Choi first taught.  I'll even settle for the name of a monk or wandering Chinese MA master.  It is confusing to others that may not have the same grasp as you when you state that people will not stand on documentary evidence - then provide none except references to Historical lifestyle books...

I am interested in Korea from 1943 forward, when Dojunim Choi returned there permanently to live.  I certainly believe that Korean culture would mold any person that live there - hey, some rubbed off on me in a week, that does not mean that what we learn in Hapkido was modified to underscore a deep rooted Chinese MA influence - don't see evidence for it, did't see evidence of it when I was there (really didn't look hard though).  

Now, I have one other line of interest here, Bruce I DO understand the need to have a person interested in the academic approach to things and you have brought much to the table, but you mention that to understand the deeper aspects of Hapkido, we must look at other arts - huh? If I want to understand the deeper roots of Shotokan, I practice Shotokan, not Wing Tsun - now Kanazawa Sensei stunned the world by training in TaiChi - but he did this he said for his own refinement, no the refinement of the art - e.g. personal, not Shotokan technique refinement.  Now, if the study of material outside of Hapkido is to expand YOUR mind, great, but to bring it to the table and say that we all need to know about Mantis Kung Fu from Nothern China to understand the "ki" element of Hapkido - I think not.

And for those that still don't know, I have the greatest respect for Bruce, we train together often, and he has powerful technique.  Despite what many may think of others rants offered here and elsewhere, I have never found Bruce to be disrespectful, and to the contrary, even with those that would offer unkind words he rarely speaks out against his detractors - publicly or privately off these boards.  In saying all that, I offer the above with a smile, cause I know the response will be blistering.   

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## American HKD

Greeting,

Can we be sure of Choi's Daito Ryu connection it seems to be only hear say because it seems that in all the material I read, Choi refered to Takada as his teacher but never specified what style learned.

As I already mentioned Ji Han Jae said Choi called what he taught only Yawara!

Does anyone have any sources to know what Choi called the system he learned in Japan?

If we are all doing some unknown brand of Yawara so what it's dood stuff! 

The Daito Ryu records don't seem to prove anything about Choi connection to Daito Ryu anyway and I think that in itself says alot. 
Because many of the Daito Ryu Senior Master would have surely known Choi as well to prove Choi studied in that school. 

Also I have seen some Aiki-Jujutsu (not Daito Ryu) and we are doing the same techniques more or less.

I know many will disagree here but to me this seems to be much more of a believable and realistic theory IMHO.


----------



## Master Todd Miller

What Founder Choi taught went through name changes but the essence of what he taught was always the same.  You can call it Yawara, Hapki Yu Kwon Sool, Hapkido.  They all came from Choi and they are the same.  What GM Ji teaches is a little different though.

An interesting point is that the term Yawara is what the Japanese call the Dan Bong stick.  A stick about 9.5 inches long.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## American HKD

Todd 

I agree Choi always taught the same thing my question is what system did he really learn or do you think it's really unknown to say for sure.

Yawara stick probably a main weapon of Yawara hence the name.


----------



## howard

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Yes, I think we can quantify technique for many people. I believe you were at the seminar with Grandmaster Lim when he said he had been taught some 1800 or so techniques, and that his beginning curriculum has 100 techniques in it.


kevin, i can clarify the second part of your comment definitively. if my math is correct, there are 104 techniques in the jungkikwan curriculum required for first dan, if you count the second variations of 2 of the techniques. there are 35 techniques for 2nd dan and either 35 or 40 for third dan. i don't know about the higher dan ranks, but i took part in a 5th dan test (as the testing partner, not the person testing) in which the person testing was asked to perform a selection of technique sets from a number of different parts of the curriculum through 3rd dan.

if anybody would be interested in what the 104 techniques are, i would be willing to share them here.


----------



## howard

American HKD said:
			
		

> Todd
> 
> I agree Choi always taught the same thing my question is what system did he really learn or do you think it's really unknown to say for sure.
> 
> Yawara stick probably a main weapon of Yawara hence the name.


hi stuart, i doubt that we'll ever know definitively exactly what choi studied in japan.  we know that he swears it was daito ryu, under sokaku takeda.  we also know that there are many daito ryu people who swear that this is all nonsense, that there is no evidence in japan of choi ever having studied under takeda, and that none of the people who spent time around takeda, including his son tokimune (who took up the daito ryu mantle when sokaku passed away) remember choi.  finally, we know that choi was a very formidable martial artist when he returned to korea from japan.

many of us also believe that chois' art is an effective system of self-defense and is a beautiful martial art as well.  that's enough for me.


----------



## American HKD

Howard,

I know Choi had great MA techniques no arguement here! 

I can only confirm from my research to date that Choi learned a form of "Yawara" of unknown origin. 

Choi only said Takada was his teacher without ever qualifing teacher of WHAT?  He may have only learned from Takada briefly or never was ranked from Tadaka or studied from various Teacher  and called Takada his teacher because he learned the most from him etc.

Of course what I'm saying is speculation on my part but, I'm throwing out the question, does anyone have evidence of anything other than hear say?

My current teacher Ji Han Jae said all he could ever confirm was "Yawara" per Choi and never could prove any Daito Ryu connection either.

Any thoughts out there?


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

I think what is interesting about Takeda Sokaku is that HE created what today is known as DRAJJ.  Check the history section of Kondo Sensei's site and it is interesting to note that Daito-ryu was considered "dead" until Sokaku revived it...and did so with a combination of all the arts he learned in his life including seperate weapon (Hozoin spear) and sword schools (itto ryu).

I have heard on several occasions that Dojunim Choi called what he taught Dae dong ryu hapki yusool (the Korean translation of DRAJJ) - I'll try and locate a definitve source here.  

What we know about Takeda Sokaku is that he was a paranoid, that taught lots of people (as his enrollment books show) - but some, like John Denora indicate that there are substancial gapas in those books - indicating pages were changed and removed.  It is even indicated that Dojunim Choi's name was one such removed name.  One question that does linger is whether Takeda made a big issue of the name of what he taught?  

We know that Taked'a third son Tokimune assumed the mantle of head after 1943, but how much had he been able to learn?  Tokimune was born in 1916, and Sokaku died in 1943 - so if we assume the Tokimune started training at 10, he would have had only 17 years with his father.  In addition, we know that during most of the latter part of his life, Sokaku travelled around daily, never sleeping in the same spot twice - not really a conducive learning environment for a ten year old. Dojunim Choi's life experience here sounds completely plausible here... 

Just a thought.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

My sense is that whatever Choi learned out of that period was closer to some product resulting from Takedas' reconstruction of DRAJJ rather than some set curriculum. I had badgered a number of people some time back to provide a definitive DRAJJ curriculum and was told repeatedly that there was no such thing. Apparently Takedas' son and Kondo are the only two who actually have worked to structure a curriculum. Prior to their efforts there were a constellation of techniques and maybe some vague order whose logic was known only to the teacher. I can see where Choi would have come back from Japan and characterized his skills in the simplest manner possible ("yawara"). 

Oddly, there is kind of a parallel story in Korea in which Dojunim Kim and a couple of other students began to record techniques in pictures along with notes so as to produce a systematic approach. I was priveleged  to be allowed to examine the notebooks and was very appreciative and respectful of what such an effort takes having been down that road myself. Its not as easy to do as some might think, and they were doing it with a 35mm camera and a ballpoint pen. At least I had computer technology on my side! 

In this particular area I keep going back to what happened between Ueyshiba and Takeda for some guidance regarding what it must have been like to be a student to that person. Another piece is that while there are a number of folks of later fame who purportedly studied DRAJJ, there are simply not a whole lot of people who actually walked away with rank from Takeda himself. Jang Im Mok got his license after Takeda died--- from one of Takedas' students. Whole lot of loose ends. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Hello all,
> 
> I think what is interesting about Takeda Sokaku is that HE created what today is known as DRAJJ. Check the history section of Kondo Sensei's site and it is interesting to note that Daito-ryu was considered "dead" until Sokaku revived it...and did so with a combination of all the arts he learned in his life including seperate weapon (Hozoin spear) and sword schools (itto ryu).


hi kevin,

i'm not sure it's accurate to say that sokaku created what is known today as drajj.  drajj had existed in the aizu clan, which included takeda's family, literally for centuries, supposedly dating back to the emperor seiwa.  sokaku probably learned drajj from his father (sokichi), who probably learned from his grandfather (soemon).  there may have been some non-family instructors involved as well; seems that the most commonly mentioned is chikanori hoshina, aka tanomo saigo.  even the daito ryu loyalists debate this point. as with choi young sool's story, the documentation is incomplete to say the least.

sokaku is sometimes referred to as the "reviver" (chuko no so) of drajj.  he undoubtedly had quite a role in teaching the art to a much larger group of people than the aizu clan.

the primary sword art that sokaku studied, ono-ha itto-ryu, is considered essential in learning drajj.  sokaku apparently taught that drajj techniques were derived from sword techniques.

you might have heard a parallel story in daegu.  i certainly remember the instuctors there telling us that the jungki movements derive from sword technique.

regards, howard


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Howard, I have heard that Hapkido is a "sword art without the sword" for 25 years, since the day I started, but it certainly got reinforced in Taegu.   

Something struck me over the last several hours as I taught class, which was just how humble Dojunim Choi was.  He maintained a story all his life that he spent 30 years training in Japan under Takeda Sokaku, but had his certificates stolen.  Even so, he never tried to claim any position of authority in any art.  He simply said that he would teach what his teacher had taught him.  He never claimed rank, or title - these were given to him by others.  It is quite amazing when one considers that Dojunim Choi was one of the most influencial men in recent times in the martial arts, yet was so modest that he never sought out the limelight or accolades that so many of his students have.  

That level of modesty is one thing that I did find refreshing in Korea - something sorely lacking here...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

"......Now, I have one other line of interest here, Bruce I DO understand the need to have a person interested in the academic approach to things and you have brought much to the table, but you mention that to understand the deeper aspects of Hapkido, we must look at other arts - huh? If I want to understand the deeper roots of Shotokan, I practice Shotokan, not Wing Tsun - now Kanazawa Sensei stunned the world by training in TaiChi - but he did this he said for his own refinement, no the refinement of the art - e.g. personal, not Shotokan technique refinement. Now, if the study of material outside of Hapkido is to expand YOUR mind, great, but to bring it to the table and say that we all need to know about Mantis Kung Fu from Nothern China to understand the "ki" element of Hapkido - I think not......." 

Sorry, Folks, but its becoming clear that there is simply a much greater entrenchment in what is desired to be right and correct. I am finding it difficult to share information when it seems to me that folks only want to operate within a very narrow definition of what is under discussion. 

1.) I will say again that we are going to go no-where discussing personalities. These various histories that people keep citing have been processed over and over again and its quite plain to anyone who reviews the many strings over a range of Nets that such histories are heavy on "he said- she said" and short on documented facts. Each and every one of the comments made here has been made on near identical strings on E-BUDO and AIKIDO JOURNAL and they came to nothing. 

2.) If folks want to believe that the be-all and end-all of Korean grappling arts--- presently called "hapkido"---- is found only in the traditions proceeding from Choi Yong Sul and the Japanese thats fine. Kevin reports that he does not understand the need to consider another art to gather additional insights into the art that he practices. Likewise, this OK with me. I will share that the Japanese in general, and Choi Yong Sul in particular did not have the market cornered on Korean grappling. You will find the same techniques in Chinese Chuan Fa--- specifically in the Chin Na tradtions of individual arts--- and those have likewise been introduced to Korea. Questions regarding timing, footwork, combat distance, focus etc etc etc can as much be addressed through these contributions to Korea martial traditions as have come through the Japanese influences. 

I can honestly report that Dojunim Kim has opened my eyes to a whole other way of viewing what I have learned so far in my Hapkido career. However, that does NOT obviate the Chinese influences that contributed to the Korean arts OR the weapons work which is likewise part and parcel of this study. If people want to look at only the Japanese influences, and of those influences only those that proceed from Choi, and of those only those that are shared through a particular personality I think you are cheating yourselves of a much richer learning experience. 

BTW: I would also like to say to Todd that your gross Characterization of me as regarding myself as a sole source of objectivity was unworthy of you and is the sort of thing I would expect from people no longer able to express themselves on this net. Noone here has taken you to task for you particular view and I won't characterize it here, now, either. I can't see how that sort of contribution made the discussion better.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

2.) If folks want to believe that the be-all and end-all of Korean grappling arts--- presently called "hapkido"---- is found only in the traditions proceeding from Choi Yong Sul and the Japanese thats fine. Kevin reports that he does not understand the need to consider another art to gather additional insights into the art that he practices. Likewise, this OK with me. I will share that the Japanese in general, and Choi Yong Sul in particular did not have the market cornered on Korean grappling. You will find the same techniques in Chinese Chuan Fa--- specifically in the Chin Na tradtions of individual arts--- and those have likewise been introduced to Korea. Questions regarding timing, footwork, combat distance, focus etc etc etc can as much be addressed through these contributions to Korea martial traditions as have come through the Japanese influences. 


Hello Bruce, OK, I'll bite, which arts, who teachs them, what is the heritage of these arts...you continue to invoke "Chin Na" which according to David Chow was not originated as a system until Tung Tsung Nee started teaching the public his art in 1934. (Kung Fu, Chow and Spangler, p78)

Sicerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## iron_ox

Hello again,

Bruce do you me arts like the one taught up the street from us like "Chung Do Mu Sool Won" - the one at Northern Illinois University?  It that the sort of outside tradition you are looking for - I'm trying to get it here.


Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

"......Hello Bruce, OK, I'll bite, which arts, who teachs them, what is the heritage of these arts...you continue to invoke "Chin Na" which according to David Chow was not originated as a system until Tung Tsung Nee started teaching the public his art in 1934. (Kung Fu, Chow and Spangler, p78)...." 

Lets start with the great granddaddy of them all.  Taizu Long Fist. 

Adam Tsu seems to be the single greatest modern proponent but thats only if you want the most modern material. If you want to trace the lineage from TLF to General Qi to the MYTBTJ (Kwon Bup Chapter) thats one string. If you want to trace the same lineage through Chen TCC to modern Korean practice thats another lineage. And if you want to trace the same lineage but a bit differently as far as application there is Yang TCC and that could even take you through Hwang Kee to TSD. I'm not TSD so I can't speak to that last. 

What if you don't want to do Taizu Long Fist. OK, then lets go to Plum Blossom Praying Mantis. There is an entire Korean branch of this art documented through the Praying Mantis people and introduced to Korea in the early last century. Wang was the head-water of this lineage. 

Don't want to do PM? Okay then lets go to Tam Tui. A separate art in its own right as well as an incoporated exercise pattern in most Chinese Boxing styles these 12 streets can be interpreted as the obvious concussive techniques as well as the more subtle grappling applications. 

There are also the Ship Pal Gi and Kyong Dang people as well as a significant Chinese Boxing style unique to Korea which I can dig out if anyone is interested. 

All of these traditions have a Chin Na aspect. The tradition that you mention in David Chows' work is a relatively new art. It was not originated by this  gentleman mentioned  but descends from an even earlier person who organized an art of 72 techniques from the chin na material of a number of boxing styles just prior to 1900. 

Now. I've done my part and have given you the information. Don't have any names, addresses and phone numbers but I bet I could find these---- and so could you all. My question is why noone is particularly interested in giving these contributing influences to Korean martial science the sort of attention you are giving the Japanese material. Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

OK, we have a bit of a start, but now make this connection to Hapkido please, I am positive there are kung-fu schools all over Korea, but how do they tie into Hapkido - and not in the sense of Chin-na has techniques that look like Hapkido, but specifically, how do these arts relate themselves to Hapkido?  I would be willing to bet you could find reference in the Suh, In Hyuk self styled Kuk Sool Won - 

Thanks.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## howard

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Something struck me over the last several hours as I taught class, which was just how humble Dojunim Choi was. He maintained a story all his life that he spent 30 years training in Japan under Takeda Sokaku, but had his certificates stolen. Even so, he never tried to claim any position of authority in any art. He simply said that he would teach what his teacher had taught him. He never claimed rank, or title - these were given to him by others. It is quite amazing when one considers that Dojunim Choi was one of the most influencial men in recent times in the martial arts, yet was so modest that he never sought out the limelight or accolades that so many of his students have.
> 
> That level of modesty is one thing that I did find refreshing in Korea - something sorely lacking here...


kevin, you could also be speaking about master lim, wouldn't you agree? he is very modest and humble, yet very dignified.  he doesn't say he's the one true source of choi's art, or anything similar.  he simply teaches what he learned.

it's interesting that when somebody is that knowledgeable, yet that humble, they inspire even more respect from you than if they tried to impress you.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Howard,

I couldn't agree more.


Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

"......OK, we have a bit of a start, but now make this connection to Hapkido please, I am positive there are kung-fu schools all over Korea, but how do they tie into Hapkido - and not in the sense of Chin-na has techniques that look like Hapkido, but specifically, how do these arts relate themselves to Hapkido? I would be willing to bet you could find reference in the Suh, In Hyuk self styled Kuk Sool Won - ....." 

Actually I think you need to turn that around and ask the opposite question. How does what Choi Yong Sul and all of the Japanese influences relate to the Chin Na traditions? As I said earlier, if folks want to narrowly define the Hapkido arts as ONLY proceeding from Choi Yong Sul and since Choi Yong Sul purported studied only material derived from Japanese traditions you cannot technically call what you are practicing a "Korean martial art" anymore than Koreans playing Baseball make Baseball Korean. However, Chinese Boxing through the Mu Ye Tobo Tong Ji is an integral part of Korean martial tradition. Chinese influnce on staff work, sword, knife and truncheon are all documented. Hapkido has become the general term for Korean grappling as produced by folks who are intersted in grappling such as Choi did. But the Chin Na traditions of the Chinese Boxing I have mentioned pre-dated Choi and his in-put is apparently solidily from Japan. There does not seem to be anything particularly Korean about it except that there were Koreans who practiced it for a number of years. 

So---- what do we have. 

a.) Since 1567 with General Qi we have traditions of Boxing which found their way into Korean martial science. Call it whatever you want to call it. Give it any name you want to.  Lets call it "ABC". Its still a tradition of martial science and it owes much of its history and origins to Chinese sources. Its not dead. It never died. Ignoring its existence or the fact that there is not patrilinear succession makes it no less authentic. 

b.) After WW II a Korean ex-pat came back to Korea and started teaching things he learned in Japan. No history that he ever knew anything but what he learned in Japan. 

c.) Now advocates of what that ex-pat taught want to say that Korean grappling started with this ex-pat, and when people speak about Korean MA noone questions that "hapkido" is a Korean MA. Except along comes this curmudgeon from the Midwest and starts to question some of the thinking and many of the conclusions and finds that things are simply not adding up a certain way except that is the way people want to see (regardless of the facts). 

d.) And now you ask me how does the history of Korean MA fit into the mold defined by this particular Korean ex-pat and his Japanese material. I have to say that I find Korean martial traditions just a little too big a dog to be defined by this bit of the tail, yes? FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Hello all,
> 
> I think what is interesting about Takeda Sokaku is that HE created what today is known as DRAJJ. Check the history section of Kondo Sensei's site and it is interesting to note that Daito-ryu was considered "dead" until Sokaku revived it...and did so with a combination of all the arts he learned in his life including seperate weapon (Hozoin spear) and sword schools (itto ryu).
> 
> Kevin Sogor


Dear Kevin,

You mean mostly unpracticed not totally extinct?

Who knows really what's the differance between Daito Ryu and the Run of the Mill for lack of a better term Aiki-jujutsu?

I know people who trained in the Miyama Ryu system by Antonio Pererra and Aiki-jujutsu with Miguel Ibarra two big figures in the Jujutsu and Aiki-Jujutsu Arts comming out of New York City.

They bassically do what we do in Hapkido with some stylistic variations allowed and in my opnion either system can plug right into the other with-out missing much in between.


----------



## Chris from CT

Bruce, you make some good points on how the Chinese influenced Korean arts as a whole, but here are my questions...



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I am finding it difficult to share information when it seems to me that folks only want to operate within a very narrow definition of what is under discussion...
> 
> 2.) If folks want to believe that the be-all and end-all of Korean grappling arts--- presently called "hapkido"---- is found only in the traditions proceeding from Choi Yong Sul and the Japanese thats fine.



Why is it that you need to define Grappling arts of Korea with the term "Hapkido?"  There are other korean arts that have grappling within their "scope of practice" such as Sserium which is definitely not Hapkido. Sure there were people throwing other people around and I'm sure there were people doing jointlocks influenced by the chinese use of Chin Na, but that leads me to my next question...



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> 1.) I will say again that we are going to go no-where discussing personalities. These various histories that people keep citing have been processed over and over again and its quite plain to anyone who reviews the many strings over a range of Nets that such histories are heavy on "he said- she said" and short on documented facts.



Would you please cite any sources that can confirm a connection between the Chinese and Choi, Yong-Sul?

Here's my reasoning for this question... My lineage comes from Dojunim Choi to Grand Master Lim, Hyun-Soo so there's not alot of room to play with there. I can only think of a connection that would predate Daito Ryu.  You may consider me to be narrow minded, but that's all we have in our lineage.  Once again, to stay away from your above quote, please cite any sources that can confirm a connection between the Chinese and Choi, Yong-Sul.

Thanks  :asian:


----------



## American HKD

Greeting,

.......Would you please cite any sources that can confirm a connection between the Chinese and Choi, Yong-Sul?

Here's my reasoning for this question... My lineage comes from Dojunim Choi to Grand Master Lim, Hyun-Soo so there's not alot of room to play with there. I can only think of a connection that would predate Daito Ryu. You may consider me to be narrow minded, but that's all we have in our lineage. Once again, to stay away from your above quote, please cite any sources that can confirm a connection between the Chinese and Choi, Yong-Sul..........

Chris that's make the most sense out of every said here and really cuts through all the stuff Bruce was talking about. I'm sorry Bruce but it made little sense to me as well.

My lineage is from Choi to Ji there is no other influences are at work here except as Chris saya back through Japan a 1000 years ago!

Ji acknowledges other influences in his HKD other than Choi with kicking, some weapons and Taoisism.

Bruce you have the same lineage as me only through Myung and it's a very narrow pathway.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Struart, Chris et al: 

There is no Chinese Connection that I can find with Choi Yong Sul. Thats as plain as I can state that. 

I am using the term Hapkido to identify Korean grappling because thats the term that YOU folks are using. I don't know why people had to invent a new term for Korean grappling to include striking, kicking, joint-locks and throws. I am using your term. 

I don't know why you are calling an art made up of Japanese traditions a Korean martial art. People have yet to be able to even identify exactly what it was that was studied by Choi and under whom.

I don't know why you are choosing to call an art made up of Japanese traditions a Korean martial art and then ignore the actual Korean traditions that came before. There are traditions which go hand in hand with the material that you study which are selectively being ignored. Why, for instance, do people train in the Japanese sword that Lim is teaching, yet still call what they are doing a Korean MA? Why not just call your stuff a Japanese art and be done with it? 

To me, what I am seeing are a group of people who want facts and information to come together a particular way bonly because thats they way they would like reality to come together. LOOKING AT THE HISTORICAL FACTS, reality does not support that the conclusions that you all are drawing. 

The Choi tradition IS a very important influence on Korean martial traditions just like Karate was an important influence on TSD/TKD and Kendo is an important influence on Korean sword. BUT Karate is NOT TKD/TSD, and Kendo is NOT Kum Bup. Chois' traditions are NOT the sum total of Korean grappling. 

Maybe someone can explain to me why folks are holding so tightly to such a very narrow view of a narrowly defined scope of MA traditions.  Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Chris from CT

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> There is no Chinese Connection that I can find with Choi Yong Sul. Thats as plain as I can state that.



Thank you for your clear answer.




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I am using the term Hapkido to identify Korean grappling because thats the term that YOU folks are using. I don't know why people had to invent a new term for Korean grappling to include striking, kicking, joint-locks and throws. I am using your term.



No one is here using "Hapkido" as a generic term for the grappling arts of Korea.  Tang Soo Do has all of the above you mentioned, but no one is considering that Hapkido.  So by definition it would be more appropriate to say that, "many of Koreas grappling arts have a significant Chinese influence."  This is the reason you find that people do not agree with you're point of view on this.




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I don't know why you are calling an art made up of Japanese traditions a Korean martial art.



I see what Choi, Yong Sul taught as a Korean art because...
1. He was Korean
2. He was the first to bring this collection of techniques and principles to Korea as a whole, not just a couple of techniques here and there.
3. The Japanese wanted no part of being associated with a Korean or a Korean Art.

Now here is where we may agree Bruce...
I feel that Hapkido is NOT a traditional martial art.  It does not have the centuries of history that people want when finding something relevant or substantial.  The traditions that you arte looking for are still in its beginning stages.  What we do and how we act is what those traditions will be made of for future generations.




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Why, for instance, do people train in the Japanese sword that Lim is teaching, yet still call what they are doing a Korean MA? Why not just call your stuff a Japanese art and be done with it?



For reasons #1 and #2 posted above.  If GM Lim wanted us to call Chung Suk Kuhapdo a Japanese art, that would be fine by me.  That would not change what we do.    _(Even if he got permission form GM West to call it Tibetan Gopher Throwing)_  

In one of my acupuncture classes a teacher said to us, Bobs my uncle.  I asked him to explain what he meant by that and he said, Its a figure of speech that I may not like Bob for what he is or isnt, but he is still my uncle and part of the family and I have to accept that.   So lets extrapolate it to this scenario Hapkido will be Bob and I would love there to have been a Chinese influence to the art, but there isnt and I have to accept that.




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> To me, what I am seeing are a group of people who want facts and information to come together a particular way bonly because thats they way they would like reality to come together. LOOKING AT THE HISTORICAL FACTS, reality does not support that the conclusions that you all are drawing.



With my above statement about your use of the term Hapkido, your previous quote is how I, for one, view what you are trying to get across to people.  




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Chois' traditions are NOT the sum total of Korean grappling.



You are absolutely correct.  Now if you take Choi, Yong-Sul out of the picture entirely, you would not have Hapkido today, but you would still have grappling arts of Korea. As a result, by using the term Hapkido as a broad classification would be incorrect.  I know you have spent many years in Hapkido looking for the connection between it and the Chinese, but with all of these great sources you have cited you would be able to prove your points a little better by not using Hapkido as generic term for grappling arts of Korea.

Take care   :asian:


----------



## howard

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> ...There are traditions which go hand in hand with the material that you study which are selectively being ignored. Why, for instance, do people train in the Japanese sword that Lim is teaching, yet still call what they are doing a Korean MA? Why not just call your stuff a Japanese art and be done with it?


just for the record, master lim uses a korean term (kuhapdo) to refer to the sword art that he practices and teaches, but he acknowledges that it is japanese.  also, it is public knowledge that his sword teacher is japanese.  there are numerous photos of this gentleman (sekiguchi) on the jungkikwan website.


----------



## American HKD

Geetings,

Bruce it seems that the Art we learned through Ji Han Jae has more Korean influeneces than the Jung Ki Kwan Folks have. What we do has more Chinese influence through Kicking, Praying Mantis, etc. 

I for one have no problem with where the techniques came from and I beleive the Japanese and Chinese Martial Traditions have been kept in tact infinatly more than the Korean MA for obivious reasons of wars and occupations.

I think we can learn alot from the Japanese side of things that would enhance our own understanding of HKD.

I think the way Hapkido evolved today is mainly because of Ji Han Jae and it is a Korean Martial Art with roots in Chinese and Japanese tradtions.

*Choi's Art should still be called Yawara or something Japanese because according to his followers he never devitated from the Japanese Art he learned and has no Korean influences. But we know how the koreans feel about the Japanese so keeping the Japanese name would be unlikely.*

IMO Hapkido is Ji Han Jae's Art rooted in the teachings of Choi Yong Sul along with newer additions of the Kicks, weapons, mental training that Ji developed. That's *"KOREAN HAPKIDO" *

To the Jung Ki Kwans folk Ji's techniques lack some higher parts of thier Art but I'm also sure they lack some of Ji's methods as well. 

In the end who care because Ji's Art is still a great world class Art.


----------



## howard

hi stuart...



			
				American HKD said:
			
		

> ...it seems that the Art we learned through Ji Han Jae has more Korean influeneces than the Jung Ki Kwan Folks have. What we do has more Chinese influence through Kicking, Praying Mantis, etc.
> 
> I think we can learn alot from the Japanese side of things that would enhance our own understanding of HKD.


i think you're right about master ji's hkd having influences that jungki hapkido does not have.  particularly the large kicking repertoire in his style.  jungki kicking is much more basic, and generally stays away from high kicks.




			
				American HKD said:
			
		

> ...I think the way Hapkido evolved today is mainly because of Ji Han Jae and it is a Korean Martial Art with roots in Chinese and Japanese tradtions.


i'd agree with that.  i happen to be a jungkikwan student, but i'll defnitely acknowledge that master ji's style is far more prevalent, and that the most widely practiced styles of hapkido today are probably ones that he influenced.



			
				American HKD said:
			
		

> *Choi's Art should still be called Yawara or something Japanese because according to his followers he never devitated from the Japanese Art he learned and has no Korean influences. But we know how the koreans feel about the Japanese so keeping the Japanese name would be unlikely.*


yeah, as a generalization, i'm afraid i have to agree with you.  but master lim is a nice exception.  he trains with a japanese sword teacher.  he seems to believe that martial artists are martial artists first, then koreans, japanese, americans or whatever other nationality they might be.



			
				American HKD said:
			
		

> To the Jung Ki Kwans folk Ji's techniques lack some higher parts of thier Art but I'm also sure they lack some of Ji's methods as well.


hmmmm... actually, i don't think us jungki people claim that our style is superior to master ji's, or that his style lacks some of our higher methods.  i've never heard anybody i know say that.  in fact, imo it's likely that if you take out the kicking and look only at the "grappling" techniques, jungki and shin moo are probably very similar.

once again, i'd like to say that anybody that has met master lim knows that he is NOT about making claims that his style is better than anybody else's.  he simply lets you know that he teaches what choi young sool taught him, and that he keeps it as faithfully close to the original as he can.



			
				American HKD said:
			
		

> In the end who care because Ji's Art is still a great world class Art.


yes sir, i agree with you.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Folks: 

I commend you for the clever way you bend things to produce the results that suit you, but unfortunately what you are constructing is not a reality. It is only what you WANT to be real. 

1.) You folks are using a term ("hapkido") which didn't even exist 50 years ago. However it suits your purposes to use it only in the narrowly defined manner in which you do because it suits your purposes. Why are you so careful not to use terms like Soo Bahk, and Kwon Bup? Is it because by using terms in a broader sense you losing some of the elite authority you would like to garner to yourself? Outside of this discussion there are people who are using "hapkido" to describe only Ji's tradition. There are other people who use it only to define traditions proceeding from Choi. Yet others are using it as a generic term for all of Korean grappling. Sorry, I don't make the news but I think you all have a vested interest in keeping the term "hapkido" defined ONLY the way you see it. I don't know what TSD people or TKD people do or say. I am talking about Hapkido and I am using it in its most generic application. My sense is that people are using the term as a way of protecting only a narrowly defined perspective on Hapkido which is arguably self-serving. 

2.) You can make all the talk about Choi being Korean, but that does not make what he did a Korean art. He learned it in Japan. The techniques and the biomechanics and the philosophy are all Japanese. The Korean government, the Korean educational system and the Korean culture at large did not absorb his material. The only people who are identifying this material as a Korean martial art are folks who have a vested interest in doing so. Once again this is not reality but a simple self-serving effort. The fact that Chois sources are vague, what he taught was vaguely recollected and that there are a wide variety of representations of his material make it easy to represent something as a cohesive art without much to hold people accountable for what they teach or how its organized. The fact that Lim can admit that he teaches Japanese sword under a Korean name and that people still consider that they are learning a Korean martial art borders on the ludicrious. It is not just a matter of what you call it. Its also a matter of what it is. 

3.) Stuart has raised the issue that my teacher, Myung, learned from Ji who learned from Choi. All very accurate. Now what do I make of that? Do I take a position of slavish adherence to only what Myung teaches and how he teaches it? That means I never touch hapkiyusool, Korean sword or a host of other traditions either. I think it is very clever for people to use lineage not as a jumping off point for deeper investigation of Korean traditions but as a limit that keeps them from having to dig deeper into Korean materials and culture. Its the same way that folks conveniently avoid looking at the way Chinese arts contributed to Korean martial development. In this way they need never be held accountable for not looking at Chinese material which might provide greater insight into what they do and why they do it. I must own with no small amount of regret that this is a very American approach to things.

4.) Your statement about taking Choi out of the picture is completely wrong, Chris. With Choi out of the picture you would not have the WORD "Hapkido". We would be using a different word and speaking about other personalities but the art would still be there. It would probably be descended from other Japanese or Chinese influences but the art would still be there. It suits your purpose to say this because by establishing Choi as an authority, it authenticates what you do. If you take Choi away what you train in would not stand on its own by Western standards and thats what we are really discussing. Korean culture distorted as its made to fit a Western mold. 


Lastly, in response to Stuarts' comment 
("In the end who care because Ji's Art is still a great world class Art.")

may I say that I--- for one---- care. I care that people play fast and loose with facts and misrepresent things.
I care that people do this sort of misrepresentation for solidly self-serving reasons. I care that the larger portion of Korean martial science is ignored and that people take a single Japanese influence and represent that as a Korean tradition simply because it suits their purpose to do so. I care when people teach Japanese sword and leave Korean sword to be ignored. I think it says a lot for what I am sharing when people can own that Dojunim Lim teaches Japanese traditions but uses a Korean title and people represent that material as Korean material.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Chris from CT

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I commend you for the clever way you bend things to produce the results that suit you, but unfortunately what you are constructing is not a reality. It is only what you WANT to be real.



Come on Bruce you can't be serious? Youre just being ridiculous.  



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> 1.) You folks are using a term ("hapkido") which didn't even exist 50 years ago.



Exactly, so why would you use it to describe an entire genre of Korean grappling arts that predate the Muye Dobo Tongji?




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Outside of this discussion there are people who are using "hapkido" to describe only Ji's tradition.



Absolutely




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> There are other people who use it only to define traditions proceeding from Choi.



Absolutely




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Yet others are using it as a generic term for all of Korean grappling.



You have been the only one I have seen so far.  




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Sorry, I don't make the news but I think you all have a vested interest in keeping the term "hapkido" defined ONLY the way you see it
> 
> My sense is that people are using the term as a way of protecting only a narrowly defined perspective on Hapkido which is arguably self-serving.



It disappoints me to hear you say that.  When have you heard me put down a style of Hapkido?  I have been known to not talk highly of JP, but that is because of his ethics, not his style.  I have many friends in other styles of Hapkido, including people from Sin Moo, the USKMAF, AHA, Combat Hapkido, KHF,  GM Jong-Bae Rims, etc and continue to have their open friendship even after I have been on the mat with them.  

Playing the vested interest card is just silly because I, like you Bruce, do not teach Hapkido as my source of income.  




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Your statement about taking Choi out of the picture is completely wrong, Chris. With Choi out of the picture you would not have the WORD "Hapkido". We would be using a different word and speaking about other personalities but the art would still be there.



Maybe the art would be somewhere, maybe here, maybe not, but that word defines us, just as a neurosurgeon differs from a cardiologist from a gynecologist.  All do different things and are differentiated because of it  

See, the thing is that everyone who studies Hapkido (as I am proposing it) can realistically, physically and scholarly document and show some connection to Choi, Yong-Sul.  (Jung Ki guys, Sin Moo guys, KHF guys, etc.)   I know you want to have a scholarly discussion with sources and not just he said/she said stuff so I figure you would appreciate this.



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> It suits your purpose to say this because by establishing Choi as an authority



Of course Choi is an authority, just as Ji is. So if thats the case, how is that a narrowing self-serving view?  




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> If you take Choi away what you train in would not stand on its own by Western standards and thats what we are really discussing. Korean culture distorted as its made to fit a Western mold.



If it was that big of a deal I wouldnt even have mentioned it.  This is very similar to the certification issue, which is another area I couldnt care less about.  If someone told me that I didnt have a real certificate that would in no way change the years of training that I went through and the knowledge I have.

Once again, who am I trying to be superior to or where is my vested interest?




			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I think it says a lot for what I am sharing when people can own that Dojunim Lim teaches Japanese traditions but uses a Korean title and people represent that material as Korean material.



Nothing is created out of thin air, then when would something become traditional?  Everything has an influence.  How long would a Chinese martial art brought to Korea take to become an indigenous style?  10 years?  100 years?  1000 years?  More?  Would the original person have to be Chinese that taught it? 

Something to think about.   :asian:


----------



## Master Todd Miller

BTW: I would also like to say to Todd that your gross Characterization of me as regarding myself as a sole source of objectivity was unworthy of you and is the sort of thing I would expect from people no longer able to express themselves on this net. Noone here has taken you to task for you particular view and I won't characterize it here, now, either. I can't see how that sort of contribution made the discussion better. FWIW

Bruce:  I meant no dissrespect to you and did not intend for you to get all upset!  You have your view, I have mine GM Ji's guys have their take on it all.  I am more than willing to look at hard evidence but you just do not have any!  This is not worth being angry about.  

The Founder of Hapkido was or is Korean!  Therefore Hapkido is a Korean Mudo, plain and simple.

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Thats true enough. But if you take away all of the fancy two-stepping that is occuring here, what do you really have? 

I am responding to other peoples' questions, but how come nobody is responding to MY questions? 

a.) Based on Chris' logic am I to conclude that had Choi emigrated to Canada what he taught would have been a Canadian art? Or would it have been a Japanese art? Or would it have been a Korean art? 

b.) And what about WHAT he taught. He learned a Japanese art--- whatever it was. So going across to Korea makes it a Korean art? Or his being Korean makes it a Korean art? Or do folks just like lining things up this way because thats what they have gotten used to? 

c.) And what about people going to other countries and bringing back other traditions. Am I to understand that if I go to China and learn Chuan Fa that when I bring that to America it becomes an American art? 

Excuse me but a guy could be forgiven for wondering just WHO is being ridiculous here. 

And how come nobody wants to talk about the huge space between what people are calling a Korean MA--- Hapkido--- and the fact that there is actually (apart from Chois' nationality itself) little or no  Korean content in the art. 

And how come people are so quick to disparage the MYTBTJ which at least was organized along Korean military lines and for the use of the Korean military and by order of the Korean government. How come people are so quick to jump on the Choi bandwagon which arguably cannot be consistently documented at all? Which is actually and historically the greater claim to being a legit martial tradition? 

And how come people are so quick to adopt the idea of a binding patrilinear succession (IE Choi to Ji to Myung to Sims, for instance) when they can't even understand the nuances of the more traditional Korean kwan system? 

And if vested interest is NOT whats going on here why is it that people are making such a deal about having the most direct tie back into Choi through this or that personality. Why are people so keen on being able to identify the cleanest line directly back to Choi himself --- and no further.

IMVVHO I believe that the Koreans know and accept something that Westerners do not. That is that lineage is an indicator but not a binding organization. This is why folks will not understand and accept the kwan system here in the States. A kwan is bound by the dedication of the individual to a like-minded group--- and they to him. You can't buy a membership; its by invitation only and acceptance to a kwan is a heavy thing. Contrary to Stuarts' assertion a little earlier I am not bound to some lineage of Choi to Ji to Myung. Myung is my teacher and I am a member of his kwan. Dojunim Kim is my teacher and I am a member of his kwan. And if I am to believe that people are at least half as sincere as they are making out to be you will be dedicated to you immediate teacher and let the rest of this go. 
For the past few posts I have tried to get you to see how illogical your positions are if you apply the least bit of reasoning. Some how the result is that I am one who is ridiculous. Todds' right that its not worth getting upset about but neither can I quite get my fingers around that. FWIW.  

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

bruce,



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> ...I care when people teach Japanese sword and leave Korean sword to be ignored.


who are you referring to here? master lim?  if you are, how can you simply assume that he "leaves korean sword to be ignored"?

does it offend you that he, as a korean, teaches a japanese sword art?  could you please explain exactly what you mean.



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I think it says a lot for what I am sharing when people can own that Dojunim Lim teaches Japanese traditions but uses a Korean title and people represent that material as Korean material. FWIW.


two comments:

1. i cannot fathom how master lim's teaching a japanese sword art but using a korean word for it "says a lot" for what you are sharing.  it seems to me that you are reading WAY too much into this.  before taking others to task for forcing the "truth" to fit their views, might you not consider that you could be seeing the mote in your neighbor's eye, but not the beam in your own?

2. who is representing kuhapdo as purely korean?  certainly not master lim.

on another point, i have no vested interest in anything related to hapkido.  the only things i have posted here are facts that can be objectively verified.  as for where hapkido came from, i don't give a tinker's damn if it came from mars.  as i said earlier, i believe it's an effective system of self defense, and that it's a beautiful martial art.  i happen to learn it from a korean source; at the same time, i personally believe (but cannot prove, nor can anybody else that we know of) that it comes from a japanese art.  but if somebody gave me conclusive evidence tomorrow that choi actually spent 30 years learning the source of hapkido in north carolina, rather than japan, it wouldn't change my views about hapkido, nor my commitment to continuing to train as long as i'm physically able.


----------



## American HKD

Greetings

Bruce,

I for one have little idea what your talking about or trying to get across? 

It seems that the rest of us are having a similarly hard time as well because you are saying nobody's answering your questions.

You wrote:
..........I am not bound to some lineage of Choi to Ji to Myung. Myung is my teacher and I am a member of his kwan. Dojunim Kim is my teacher and I am a member of his kwan............... 

You learned from Myung for how long and Kim for a week what's your point.
You cant change your past but you are free to learn whatever from whoever will teach you.

Bruce I have learned from two primary sources of Hapkido Son Tae Soo and Ji Han Jae. I also learned from a couple of other people which all in all wasn't that significant but it was all of them were from the Ji tradition.

I for one respect all my teachers for what they taught me some more some less but my real loyalty is the Art itself rather than a person or Kwan esspecially because in this day and age Associations are all kind of Bogus.


----------



## American HKD

Howard,

Your Master Lim is right it's MA first and where it came from secondary. Wise move!


----------



## howard

American HKD said:
			
		

> Bruce,
> 
> I for one have little idea what your talking about or trying to get across?


stuart, i have to say that makes at least 2 of us.  i'm pretty lost as well.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart and Howard: 

I will make this as simple as I possibly can. 

1.) The Korean culture was terribly abused by the Japanese and their policies. 

2.) The Koreans have martial traditions of their own. Those traditions did not die out. They are still around. 

3.) I have no problem with people studying whatever it is that they want 
    to    study. 

4.) What I have a problem with is:
       a.) People studying one thing but calling it or representing it as another. 
       b.) People importing the culture of a former aggressor culture and     
           making a case for focusing on THAT material rather than the 
           material of their own culture
       c.) Furthermore I have a problem with the introduction of a 
            Japanese hierarchical system to country where it is an alien concept
            while the indigenous kwan system is avoided.
       d.) People using terms such as "hapkido", "grandmaster", as well as a    
            host of transliterations from Japanese in order to suggest a system
           of standing without historical evidence to support it. 

Lastly, I will say that I don't think anyone is having any trouble understanding where I am coming from with this line of reasoning. Rather I suspect that it is a much better defense of the amazing little intellectual cocoon you have constructed to pretend that this line of questioning is extraordinary. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Howard: 

"....I cannot fathom how master lim's teaching a japanese sword art but using a korean word for it "says a lot" for what you are sharing....." 

Why doesn't he use the Japanese term for it. Why not identify it for what it is "Eishin Ryu Kenjutsu". If he is so good at sword why is he not directing his efforts to support Korean sword at home in Korea? 

"....2. who is representing kuhapdo as purely korean? certainly not master lim."

Why is he using Korean terms for a Japanese art? 

"........, i have no vested interest in anything related to hapkido. the only things i have posted here are facts that can be objectively verified. as for where hapkido came from, i don't give a tinker's damn if it came from mars. ...." 

I bet you don't and there in lies the problem. The Korean culture is not just something that you can cherry-pick what you like and ignore what you don't like. You don't get to play fast and loose with titles, and terms and arts as though anything goes. Westerners have been showing this sort of disrespect for Oriental culture, religion, philosophy, medicine etc etc etc for a few centuries and it has never gotten any better. What makes it even worse is that for a week I sat and enjoyed the very sort of camraderie that I have always known there could be in a kwan while at the same time listening to Westerners whine and ***** on various Nets. Mike Dunn (Fla) made a pitch for Hapkido players getting together in an organization of support and fraternity. I don't see it happening and the sorts of energies that drive the positions and the perceptual defense in this discussion are exactly the reason why. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Paul B

Soo....you have a problem with people using the term "Hapkido"?

Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido....hmmm....

Or,rather than take it for what it is or isn't, recognize that it came from Japan,China,or India through Mesopotamia,and Eygypt,maybe even from Greece.....pancrase.....wherever, you pick,it probably has some influence.

Koreans put their spin on it. Hence....Hapkido.

You could make the same arguement for every MA on the planet. It's only as pure as you make it. Even a lowly blue-collar professional like me can see and understand it,and I sleep fine knowing that it really doesn't matter where it came from,it only matters where it's going. JEESH. It needs no "validation".Period.

It looks like you may have picked the wrong art to study if you want a "pure" art. Let me know when you find one. Go.Train.Be Happy!!


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Paul: 

Excuse me for saying so but your arguement is rather immature. My position is not against the use of the term "hapkido" (as I am sure you are more than aware). Rather, it is against a narrowly defined use of the term so as to lend a sort of authenticity to a particular version of the practice. By keeping things so narrowly defined one guarentees that practitioners of other versions of the art are automatically excluded. How convenient for the members of the very exclusive and narrowly defined Hapkido. 

Further it matters not at all if one can make the same arguement for all the rest of the MA on the planet or not. We are discussing Hapkido here. 

".....It looks like you may have picked the wrong art to study if you want a "pure" art. Let me know when you find one. Go.Train.Be Happy!!"

Nor is anyone making any arguement for a "pure" art or not.  

Nor is anyone deriding you for not caring where it came from. 

What I AM saying is that when people take something NOT Korean and represent it as Korean, especially to the detriment of things that ARE genuinely Korean then perhaps we need to take a look at what we are doing. 

If people want to take Karate and change the name to TSD and market it as a Korean MA. Fine 

If people want to take ju jutsu and market it as yu sool. Fine. 

Where I draw the line is when someone like me comes along and asks why noone is paying any attention to other traditions such as are found in the MYTBTJ and I get a "who cares".  Or when I ask about Korean sword and what I get is that there IS no Korean sword--- that its all just Japanese sword by another name. Or when I go on a Net and people are telling me that Korean martial traditions all died out and if it weren't for Japanese traditions there would be no Korean MA. To my way of thinking, if you guys like Japanese arts so much why don't you just go study Japanese MA. The Daito Ryu people already have a system already set up. They have patrilinear succession, a set curriculum and a ridgid hierarchical system. Why try and make Korean culture into a bad copy of their system? Is it possibly because you can't snow them quite so easy. Is it because the art of DRAJJ is more clearly and distinctly defined and one simply can't stoll into a DRAJJ school and introduce themselves as a 5th dan without being able to support their statement?  Just maybe some people like having the sort of muddled identity that Hapkido has, yes? FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Paul B

Hi Bruce,

As such,it was not an arguement,but a statement. Furthermore,I don't see anyone else here besides you trying to put Hapkido in a box. Maybe I don't get it,but Hapkido comes from a Japanese source,first and foremost. 

There is nothing you or I can do about it,either. I do understand the veiwpoint you have about it. Following the end of Japanese occupation,Korea was struggling to find herself again,a process that I think is still ongoing. Kudo's for your own veiwpoint,but the facts are the facts,and no matter how many Korean grandmasters say Choi learned under a mountain(yes,I know),it doesn't change anything. 

The MYTBTG is ancient,a bit like trying to reconstruct pankration,or Nito Ryu from the Go Rin no Sho(even though the Ryu exists,some people have tried).

Good call on the DRAJJ,but that's apples to oranges. Do you not condone the spreading of Arts? Kuhapdo has never claimed(to my knowledge) to be anything other than a Korean interpretation of Kenjutsu/Iaido. So are you a "purist" or not? If so,great,and good luck. If not,why the rub?

In answer to the "why don't you study JMA?" question....I have,and will continue to. I hold Hapkido in it's prominent position in my studies. One question....why do you think Hapkido is being "defined" as to exclude? One more....is your identity "muddled" somehow? I am just trying to figure out why this seems so complicated. I don't think it is at it's root.


----------



## American HKD

Dear Bruce,

When I first started Hapkido I knew nothing but I was learning a Korean form of MA.

There was an american guy teaching HKD in town named John Maberry (you might have heard of him he published a few books and wrote many acticles for Karate Illustrated, BB mag. in the 70's 80's etc.)

Me and a friend of mine went to his school I was a 1st gup or 1st Dan at the time or something.

Anyway he taught HKD using only Japanese terms with only low kicks. Needless to say I was floored to watch what was going on being called HKD.
I argued with Mr Maberry for quite sometime and couldn't believe what I was hearing.

I started to question my Korean teachers they would never admit to me that Hapkido was anything but Korean and they mainly spoke of Ji Han Jae as founder of Hapkido not Choi Yong Sul. 

Master Tae Soo Son my main teacher to this day whole heartedly believes that Ji's system is much better than Choi's because of the added kicking aspects. Mine you Master Son was a world class kicker in his day. 

This took place around 1981 or so in Philadelphia I just thought that would be interesting to post here as my first introduction to the origin of HKD.

It seem that Shihan Maberry as he's currently called had it right all along!


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Why doesn't he use the Japanese term for it. Why not identify it for what it is "Eishin Ryu Kenjutsu". If he is so good at sword why is he not directing his efforts to support Korean sword at home in Korea? 

".

Why is he using Korean terms for a Japanese art? 

Bruce, GM Lim has studied MJER and Korean Kumdo and he developed Chung Suk Guhapdo in 1986.  CSGHD is a Korean style with influences from Japanese Iaido.

BTW, Guhapdo is the Korean term for Iaido.  You need to do a little more research before you start criticising people!  Your style of Kumdo is heavily influenced by the Japanese.  I do not see why you have such a problem with the Japanese influence on Korean Mudo?

In the 1960s there were no strictly Korean sword styles!  This is according to Koreans who were there at that time!


----------



## American HKD

Greetings,

It basically seems as if most so called Korean MA that are popular in Korean Today are of Japanese origin.

Tae Kwon Do /     Karate with High Kicks
Tang Soo Do /      Karate   "      "      "
Hapkido /            Yawara/Jujutsu/Aikido with high kicks for some
Kumdo /              Kendo Japanese Chinese influence
Guhapdo /           Kenjutsu 
Yudo /                Judo

Native Korean MA

Tae Kyon / Chinese influence
Sirum      / Chinese Mongoloia influence

Others I can't think of any right now? 

Who can name any strictly native Korean MA that are practiced today!


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd: 

".......BTW, Guhapdo is the Korean term for Iaido. You need to do a little more research before you start criticising people! Your style of Kumdo is heavily influenced by the Japanese. I do not see why you have such a problem with the Japanese influence on Korean Mudo?........" 

I can't help but feel that you are being purposely obtuse regarding this subject. 

The line is very clear in my mind between Japanese as an influence and teaching a Japanese art as a Korean art. The Koreans do have some rapid drawing techniques but never to the extent of making it a separate art such as Iaido. Why go to Japan to study sword? Why bring Japanese sword back? Why call it a Korean art or use Korean terms for it? If you reread my posts you will see that I keep coming back to the same themes over and over again. You will also notice that people are carefully avoiding addressing those same points--- over and over again. 

If people want to follow a Korean art which is heavily influenced by another culture there are a range of such skills to found and the MYTBTJ is one such source. 

If people want to follow a Japanese art but study it in Korea thats OK too. Please make a point of identifying it AS a Japanese art and not representing it as a Korean art. 

As far as Choi Yong Suls' material it is a great introduction--- a doorway--- into what could be deeper studies of the KMA. If people want to spend their MA careers standing in the doorway, I am in no position to quibble with their choices. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

".......Kumdo / Kendo Japanese Chinese influence
Guhapdo / Kenjutsu "

You have just made my exact point. 

Kumdo is NOT Kendo. Some, even most Kumdo is Kendo, but some Kumdo is Kum Bup which is much closer to the Korean equivalent of the Japanese art of Ken-jutsu. 

Furthermore, guhapdo is NOT ken jutsu though it is ONE form of Kenjutsu and does not exist as a separate art in Korea. 

This is exactly the sort of playing fast and loose with traditions and terms that I have been talking about. This is the standard position that most people produce in discussions like this. Missing from the list you provided are such arts as the wol-do, the hyup-do, the staff, the cudgeol, spear, bow and a variety of other items. Furthermore missing from the list you provided was the distinction among the various swords used by the Koreans of which there are at least four separate architectures. But rather than be accurate with your assessment of Korean MA you have elected to re-publish the same stuff which is the standard fare for discussions like this. I submitt that you falks continue to hold onto your narrow view of the Hapkido arts because it is convenient for your purposes and not because it is accurate. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

hi bruce,



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Howard:
> 
> "....I cannot fathom how master lim's teaching a japanese sword art but using a korean word for it "says a lot" for what you are sharing....."
> 
> Why doesn't he use the Japanese term for it. Why not identify it for what it is "Eishin Ryu Kenjutsu". If he is so good at sword why is he not directing his efforts to support Korean sword at home in Korea?


sorry, you'd have to direct that question to him.



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> "....2. who is representing kuhapdo as purely korean? certainly not master lim."
> 
> Why is he using Korean terms for a Japanese art?


again, you'll have to ask him.



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> "........, i have no vested interest in anything related to hapkido. the only things i have posted here are facts that can be objectively verified. as for where hapkido came from, i don't give a tinker's damn if it came from mars. ...."
> 
> I bet you don't and there in lies the problem. The Korean culture is not just something that you can cherry-pick what you like and ignore what you don't like. You don't get to play fast and loose with titles, and terms and arts as though anything goes. Westerners have been showing this sort of disrespect for Oriental culture, religion, philosophy, medicine etc etc etc for a few centuries and it has never gotten any better. What makes it even worse is that for a week I sat and enjoyed the very sort of camraderie that I have always known there could be in a kwan while at the same time listening to Westerners whine and ***** on various Nets. Mike Dunn (Fla) made a pitch for Hapkido players getting together in an organization of support and fraternity. I don't see it happening and the sorts of energies that drive the positions and the perceptual defense in this discussion are exactly the reason why. FWIW.


bruce, with all due respect, are you a worldwide arbiter for what is and is not part of the korean culture?

for the final time, i'm not "defending" anything.  it is you who is defending a personal point of view.  i have stated facts.  if you have objective information that refutes anything i've said, please post it for all to see.  if i'm proved incorrect, i'll readily acknowledge it.

furthermore, imo you are in no place to judge whether any of us disrespects the korean culture, whether we "cherry-pick" or whether we "play fast and loose" with anything.  we may from your personal viewpoint, but that's as far as it goes.  how can you know what any of us knows or feels toward the korean culture beyond what we post on this board?

you are correct that the japanese were brutal during their occupation of korea.  but is that reason to shun all things japanese forever?  a different generation inhabits both countries now.  if a man like master lim can build bridges with today's japanese people, and some of the rest of us find it approporiate to follow his example, i think that's something you'll just have to reconcile yourself to.

i am a dyed-in-the-wool southerner.  if i follow your line of reasoning, should i shun all things and people from north of the mason dixon line?

that would make my world pretty small and insular.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Howard: 

I said it before I will keep saying it. People are conveniently side-stepping what I am saying. 

Side Step # 1: "  bruce, with all due respect, are you a worldwide arbiter for what is and is not part of the korean culture?". 

No I am not and I never represented myself as such. I am a Hapkido practitioner who is asking many of the same questions that non-Hapkido practitioners over the years have asked and were ignored or told to shut-up because they didn't know Hapkido so they could not speak to the subject intelligently. Well I CAN speak to the subject and what I am finding is that people are dodging the points I am bringing up. 

Side Step #2: "....furthermore, imo you are in no place to judge whether any of us disrespects the korean culture, whether we "cherry-pick" or whether we "play fast and loose" with anything. we may from your personal viewpoint, but that's as far as it goes. how can you know what any of us knows or feels toward the korean culture beyond what we post on this board?...." 

What goes on in your hearts is none of my concern. What behaviors get exhibited--- especially in the name of the Hapkido arts IS my concern. Whether you like it or not you are part of the same community that I am. What is said about the Hapkido arts reflects on me one way or another. From that standpoint I have a right to hold people accountable, one way or another, just as was done not so long ago with another person who misrepresented the arts. We police ourselves or someone will do it for us. 

Side Step #3: "...... you are correct that the japanese were brutal during their occupation of korea. but is that reason to shun all things japanese forever? a different generation inhabits both countries now. if a man like master lim can build bridges with today's japanese people, and some of the rest of us find it approporiate to follow his example, i think that's something you'll just have to reconcile yourself to...." 

Nobody said anything about not building bridges or letting the past bury the past. What I AM saying is that if that bridge is made of Japanese material then identify it as such. Think of it as a kind of "truth in packaging" issue. And, no, I won't be calling DDJN Lim up and asking him "why". He is NOT my teacher and I carry no currency with him. But there ARE people here who can ask him "why" they just seem rather reluctant to do it. I posit that this reluctance stands in sharp contrast to the pro-active approach people take when holding other practitioners accountable. 

Step Step #4 ".....that would make my world pretty small and insular...." 

Which is amazing coming out at the end of your post when this is the issue that started this discussion going in the first place. I am advised on many occasions to make room in my life for the likes of Ji Han Jae, Bong Soo Han, and a host of other personalities. These are all suppose to be great men with much to offer. We have at least five major organizations and a host of small ones in the Hapkido community. Some of these organizations take a Mu-Do approach and some don't. Some use a lot of kicks and some don't. But I raise the question of why peoples take on the definition of Hapkido must be so limited that it rules out investigating the impact of Chinese traditions on Korean Martial Science, or why it can ONLY define the material of a certain personality and suddenly there is no room for that. On the DOCHANG DIGEST people don't seem to have a problem mixing BJJ, Tude, and all sorts of other things into the KMA and sometimes even call it Hapkido. Whats up about that? FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

howard said:
			
		

> furthermore, imo you are in no place to judge whether any of us disrespects the korean culture, whether we "cherry-pick" or whether we "play fast and loose" with anything. we may from your personal viewpoint, but that's as far as it goes. how can you know what any of us knows or feels toward the korean culture beyond what we post on this board?
> 
> you are correct that the japanese were brutal during their occupation of korea. but is that reason to shun all things japanese forever? a different generation inhabits both countries now. if a man like master lim can build bridges with today's japanese people, and some of the rest of us find it approporiate to follow his example, i think that's something you'll just have to reconcile yourself to.


I've been on a business trip for a week and just read quite a few posts in one sitting.  

I don't think Bruce is against Japanese influence.  I don't think Bruce is being narrow-minded.

I think Bruce is challenging other people's beliefs.  

People appear to be taking excerpts of the discussion and missing the broader picture.

I asked master Mi Jung Jang if Hapkido is DRAJ with a new name and more kicks.  And her answer was interesting.  She gave a brief history of martial arts, saying they started with monks in India.  Add a few hundred years and the arts moved to China.  Add a few more years and the martial arts moved to Korea, then to Japan.  

So she wasn't very specific.  But I understand her point.  To say that an art is Chinese or Japanese or Korean is a narrow view.  Martial arts are a living, breathing, evolving organism.

When I asked her if I was learning JHJ's style of hapkido or CYS, she said I am learning Jang's style.  Her own style.  

The more I think about it, how could it be any other way?  Mi Jung Jang is a human.  HJH is a human.  CYS is a human.  No matter how hard a human tries, they cannot force themselves to be an exact clone of another human.  You can't learn your master's art exactly the way they learned the art.  You can't teach your art to another person and have them exactly understand the technique the way you do.  You can't get rid of your filters you have imposed, just as others can't rid of their filters.

So what am I studying?  I am not studying one martial art.  I am studying a martial tradition that is more than any one person or group of people.  It is more than one nationality.  It is the sum of all human knowledge relating to fighting, as interpreted by my master, and as I learn more, interpreted by myself.

Now if you will excuse me, I need to go meditate under a tree.  ;-)

Jeremy


----------



## American HKD

Dear Bruce,

I see you point here and I really do know what Kumdo is my teacher Master Son is a 5th Dan in Kumdo and I've seen alot of it although I dont train in it myself.

I don't know alot about actual Traditional Korean MA, but I did briefly study Tae Kyon in the 80s.

What are you trying to say about HKD it's in large part a Japanese Art and that's a fact not a loosely thrown around term?


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy and Stuart: 

Thanks for the thoughts. If I was going to fit what you shared into the general pattern of the discussion I would make it the next step after people move away from the idea of narrowly defining Hapkido. There is a very good reason that I eschew the ideas of "grandmaster" and "linear succession" and a huge piece of that is not just that there is no actual historical provenance for it in Korean culture. There is also the matter that such artificial things detract from what people are actually trying to do. I think its important to remember that ranks and grades and certificates and so forth are relatively new issues. We can see how they have taken on a life of their own  in many of the discussions that people have on these Nets. If you start adding to that such things as what is an authentic art, and then who among the practitioners of that art is doing the REAL deal pretty soon you have people more worried about the WHO-s rather than the WHAT-s. How this discussion got started was a good example. Talking about WHO-s is much easier and a few folks have said as much. Talking about WHAT-s is much tougher and taxing and tedious. For the good of the arts, though, we simply can't continue to go over this same stuff time and again just because its easier and gives the illusion that we are actually doing something to improve our arts. This is why I stated that if such is all people really want to do in discussions such as this, please let me know and I will back off and let you folks continue unencumbered. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Bruce-

I think many people think of martial arts like they would a religion.  

You will have some people who are Christan, yet accept that Christianity is just another branch on the tree of religion and shares similarities with Judasim and Islam.  One the other side of the spectrum, you will have people who are Christian who say that Christianity is the only way, and if you don't agree then you are not going to heaven.  There is no way to "interpret" Christianity.  You either accept the bible as the word of God or keep quiet.

You can't use reason and logic to change religious beliefs.  Just as you can't use reason and logic to make (some) people accept a different view of their art.  It is just too personal of a belief for some people to change.  


Jeremy


----------



## howard

SmellyMonkey said:
			
		

> I think many people think of martial arts like they would a religion...
> 
> You can't use reason and logic to change religious beliefs. Just as you can't use reason and logic to make (some) people accept a different view of their art. It is just too personal of a belief for some people to change.


well smelly monkey, i haven't seen much logic directed at anything i've posted, so i wouldn't know from this thread.

i post that one teacher in korea teaches exactly what he learned from choi young sool; bruce posts that i "side step" his totally unrelated points.

i post that i don't believe bruce is in any position to judge how any of us approaches korean culture; bruce somehow goes from there to respond that he has an apparently universal obligation to "police" the hapkido community.

look, gentlemen, i will post 3 more FACTS, reiterate one point that should be implicit in what i've said previously, and bow out of this increasingly illogical thread, unless any of you can logically refute any of them.  here they are.

1. master im hyun su teaches the art he learned from choi young sool.  he calls it jungki hapkido.  he maintains that he teaches exactly what he learned.  he does not claim that there are not other valid styles of hapkido.

2. the same gentleman teaches a sword art he calls kuhapdo.  it definitely is heavily influenced by a japanese sword art.  he has never claimed otherwise.

3. choi young sool learned a martial art in japan and taught it when he returned from korea.  it might have been daito ryu, but the history is not documented and therefore inconclusive, not to mention controversial.  what he taught when he returned to korea forms the roots of modern hapkido.

finally, i do not have a single, narrow definition of what qualifies to be called hapkido.  does jungki hapkido? yes.  does shin moo hapkido? yes.  do the other kwans recognized by the large organizations in korea qualify? yes.  does hapkido have chinese influences? given the diversity of today's art, it wouldn't be surprising.

farewell.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Jeremy, no disrespect intended here at all, but the assessment that we each have our own Hapkido is a fallacy.  There may be different variations of application that relate to body type and preference of technique, but the techniques themselves, quite separate from the applications should and must remain constant.

I believe that applications remain in constant flux, but the technique from which they spring remains unchanged - this is often what separates living arts from dead ones - when application is no longer able to stay useful, the art of the technique becomes useless and falls out of favor...

Bruce,

I think the one thing that many of us struggle with is what arts are you speaking of?  How do they interact, not generally, but specifically.  My own definition of Hapkido is the supposition that Dojunim Choi taught an art that became known as Hapkido, a name he was even confortable using before the end of his life - in saying that, I realize that many of his students went out and did their own thing - here is where I would expect you would include Chinese influence - so where is it?  Obviously, the Suh brothers talk of Northern Mantis...etc.  You mention some weapons, where does one find these outside of book references?

Stuart,  just a quick question, wasn't Kim, Moo-woong also responsible for adding kicks to the curriculum used by Ji and himself?  Any talk of that in the Sin Moo camp?

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## American HKD

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Hello all,
> 
> Stuart, just a quick question, wasn't Kim, Moo-woong also responsible for adding kicks to the curriculum used by Ji and himself? Any talk of that in the Sin Moo camp?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Kevin Sogor


Dear Kevin,

I never asked Master Ji about it but I think they both developed to kicking curriculum together.


----------



## glad2bhere

Sorry, Kevin, but you are skewing the discussion before you have even finished asking your question. 

You are hung up on "Hapkido = Choi Yong Sul". What you don't want to hear is that Choi Yong Sul AND the term "Hapkido" are just a new personality and a new name in a long line of personalities and names for an old Korean practice. You seem to want me to accept that because Choi Yong Sul came along and because the "hapkido" label came after that, the art of wrist-locking, pinning, striking, throwing, kicking and striking didn't exist before Choi Yong Sul. I keep invoking the MYTBTJ but nobody wants to talk about that. I invoke the Chin Na of four different traditions of Chinese Boxing in Korea and nobody wants to hear that either. I keep hearing about how people come from different traditions to train with Lim and Kim and that there is undoutedly some mixing and matching going on when they go home but nobody wants to talk about that either. They keep asking for evidence and I keep giving it and people keep saying thats not evidence. Seems as though I will have to go along with Jeremy because its becoming apparent to me that what I said before was pretty accurate. People only want things to come together a particular way. I think Howards' response is a good case. 

You will note that Howard mentioned that I had identified myself as some sort of sole authority. When I said that I wasn't I made it very clear that I DID as a Hapkido practitioner have a responsibility to speak up when I saw something out of place. Howard wrote back to say that I had characterized myself as "Hapkido police". Now, thats not what I wrote, and Howard can reread my post to see thats what I wrote. You all can do the same. Fact is though that is not what Howard is interested in and I suspect that is not what a number of people are interested in. 

Oh and BTW---- the dynamics you are witnessing here on the thread is the reason that Mike Dunns' idea of getting folks together here in the States is not going to work. Its simply beyond their ability to tolerate something other than the way they see things coming together.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello All,

Bruce, again I want to hear about the other traditions - WHERE are they? That's what I want to know - I think I identified one by saying that Suh, In Hyuk probably added Mantis to his other stuff to get to Kuk Sool Won, can you please identify any others.

Also, this is not a personal discussion, so I think we can get along to an extent.  I think there is room for the Choi, Ji and other groups  - I think we benefit from being together to suppress the real jokers who practice bogus stuff under the name Hapkido...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## American HKD

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Hello All,
> 
> Bruce, again I want to hear about the other traditions - WHERE are they? That's what I want to know - I think I identified one by saying that Suh, In Hyuk probably added Mantis to his other stuff to get to Kuk Sool Won, can you please identify any others.
> 
> Also, this is not a personal discussion, so I think we can get along to an extent. I think there is room for the Choi, Ji and other groups - I think we benefit from being together to suppress the real jokers who practice bogus stuff under the name Hapkido...
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Kevin Sogor


Dear Bruce,

I think we all know that Koreans logically every MA system had some form of locking, throwing etc. including Karate, Kung Fu, Tai Chi, had a few locks or throws hidden in it's systems or Katas.

So what in our times Hapkido stands out as a Yu Sul type system in Korea.

You should stop this agruement if you cant produce anything of substance to say there was another form native to Korea that's practiced today regardless of what was practiced in past and unknown times.

Other wise I still don't see your point of all this.


----------



## American HKD

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Hello All,
> 
> Bruce, again I want to hear about the other traditions - WHERE are they? That's what I want to know - I think I identified one by saying that Suh, In Hyuk probably added Mantis to his other stuff to get to Kuk Sool Won, can you please identify any others.
> 
> Also, this is not a personal discussion, so I think we can get along to an extent. I think there is room for the Choi, Ji and other groups - I think we benefit from being together to suppress the real jokers who practice bogus stuff under the name Hapkido...
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Kevin Sogor


Dear Bruce,

I think we all know that Koreans logically as well as most MA systems have some form of locking, throwing etc. including Karate, Kung Fu, Tai Chi, had a few locks or throws hidden in it's systems or Katas.

So what in our times Hapkido stands out as a Yu Sul type system in Korea.

You should stop this agruement if you cant produce anything of substance to say there was another form native to Korea that's practiced today regardless of what was practiced in past and unknown times.

Other wise I still don't see your point of all this.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

"....Other wise I still don't see your point of all this......" 

OK. Lets stop right here. I have stated my point in this at least three times and possibly more. Its not my fault if you don't want to hear what I am contributing. 

1.) I have identified at least 6 "traditions". I put that term in quotes because, based on the way you folks are defining things you only want a very narrow definition of what you do and you only want to look at that through a very narrow lens. 

2.) You want me to point out a discrete intersect between what one person is doing and another person is doing so to produce yet a third result. For example, Choi's tradition intersects with "TKD" at the point where Ji shows up and produces the Sin Mu Hapkido line.  Korean traditions simply do not work that way. What you are asking for is an alien system that people have imposed on Korean traditions in much the same way as Kano imposed the belt system on Judo where in Japanese arts belt ranks were never used before. 

3.) You folks seem to have a vested interest in holding on to a tightly defined discipline, and tightly defined ranks, and tightly defined organizations where there simply was no such traditions in Korean martial science. These are things that you want to be true about Korean culture because it is convenient to YOU and not because it is traditionally true. 

4.) You folks want what you are learning to be Korean and not Japanese, even when the teacher tells you he is teaching Japanesde material. You want the traditions to start with Choi and not go further back. You want the curriculums to include some material and not other material all because its convenient to you and not because there is historical provenance for any other option. 

5.) And in the end, when you are not able to tolerate continual challenges to how you see things. Instead of asking yourself to broaden your view you ask me to stop asking questions. How wonderfully American, Stuart, not to have to change but to ask reality to change in deference to you. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Folks: 

Since the original intent of this string was for Hapkido Q&A and since we have pretty much clarified where people stand on personalities how about we try some technical questions? Lets start easy. 

Dojunim Kim states that he teaches what Dojunim Choi taught him. The introductory material to Dojunim Kims take on Chois material begins with 17 strikes and 16 kicks. Does anyone want to compare their kicking or striking material to see how they matchup? I can use the "Americanized" terms that we use to identify the kicks and strikes that I saw and/or include the Korean romanized name. Any Takers? FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Dear Bruce,

I asked you in a post when you came back from Korea to list the kicks and strikes I'm really interested and you said I would know them all but maybe one.

Please list them now if you will.

I stated several times that Hapkido is from Japanese origins and Ji mixed that with other Korean material, so to me HKD is a combination of the two what else is there to say?

Lastly Master Ji fully admits the Japanese origins of HKD as well so there we have it. 

A part Japanese Art in Ji's case taught with a Korean attitude!


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Dojunim Kim states that he teaches what Dojunim Choi taught him. The introductory material to Dojunim Kims take on Chois material begins with 17 strikes and 16 kicks. Does anyone want to compare their kicking or striking material to see how they matchup?

Bruce:  I am much more interested in this because there is stuff to compare.

Share with us please.


----------



## glad2bhere

Well, all-righty, then. I was originally going to list Myungs' kicking but I will hold off with that for the moment. I did include the Korean names if it will help with the identification. 

1. Scoop Kick         An Da ri Cha Gi 

2.) Low Point Kick        Chok gi Cha Gi 

3.) Side Kick        Ha Dan Yop Cha Gi  

4.) Outside-Inside Swivel Kick        Chok Do Hoo Ri Gi  

5.) Inside-Outside Swivel Kick        Dwee Chook Bok eu ro jji gi 

6.) Heel Hook Kick        Dwee Chook An eu ro jji gi  

7.) Descending Knee        Ho Bok ji Mu Reup ji reu gi  

8.) Heel Thrust Kick        Dwee Chok Cah Gi  

9.) High Point Kick         Sang Dan Jji O Cha Gi 

10.) Axe Kick          Up Hoo Ri Gi 

11.) Double Slap Kick        Yop Jji O Cha gi 

12.) Double Side Kick         Yop Yop Cha Gi  

13.) Back Kick and Middle-knuckle Strike        Dwee Cha Gi  

14.) Oblique Back Kick and Middle Knuckle Strike        Dol A Dwee Cha Gi  

15.) Knee Strike        Mu Reup Jji Gi  

16.) Front Kick/Back Kick.        Up Cha go Dwee Cha Gi.  

These 16 are an integral part of warm-ups before every class. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

See:  Myung, Kwang Sik; HAPKIDO- Art of Masters pps 74-92

1.) Front Heel Kick        aup Cha Gi 

2.) Side Kick         yup Cha Gi 

3.) Inside (crescent) Kick  an da re Cha Gi 

4.) Outside (cresent) Kick       pak kat da re Cha Gi 

5.) Center Toe Kick        jok ki je ru ki

6.) Inside Low Scoop Kick  an da re met Cha Gi 

7.) Low Circle Heel Kick        de kum chi met cha dol re ki 

8.) Low Curve Kick          jok do met cha dol re ki 

9.) Knifeedge Down Kick        jok do cha na re gi

10.) Knifeedge Push Kick         jok do cha nuk ki 

11.) Knife edge Front Kick        jok do aup cha al re ki 

12.) Heel Down Kick        de kum chi cha na re ki 

13.) Cover Kick       bal mak ki 

14.) Heel Down Hook Kick    de kum chi da re Cha Gi 

15.) Heel Inside Hook Kick      de Kum chi de Cha Gi 

16.) Roundhouse Kick      jok ki no pe Cha Gi 

17.) Heel High Hook Kick    de kum chi no pe cha dol re ki 

18.) Slap Kick      be kyo Cha Gi 

19.) Back Kick       de Cha Gi 

20.) Knee Lift Kick   mu rup chi gi 

By way of extension I suppose we could also take the opening or introductory kicking techniques of Ji, Suh, Kimm and Lee just to see how they match-up.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> 1. Scoop Kick An Da ri Cha Gi
> 
> 2.) Low Point Kick Chok gi Cha Gi
> 
> 3.) Side Kick Ha Dan Yop Cha Gi
> 
> 4.) Outside-Inside Swivel Kick Chok Do Hoo Ri Gi
> 
> 5.) Inside-Outside Swivel Kick Dwee Chook Bok eu ro jji gi
> 
> 6.) Heel Hook Kick Dwee Chook An eu ro jji gi
> 
> 7.) Descending Knee Ho Bok ji Mu Reup ji reu gi
> 
> 8.) Heel Thrust Kick Dwee Chok Cah Gi
> 
> 9.) High Point Kick Sang Dan Jji O Cha Gi
> 
> 10.) Axe Kick Up Hoo Ri Gi
> 
> 11.) Double Slap Kick Yop Jji O Cha gi
> 
> 12.) Double Side Kick Yop Yop Cha Gi
> 
> 13.) Back Kick and Middle-knuckle Strike Dwee Cha Gi
> 
> 14.) Oblique Back Kick and Middle Knuckle Strike Dol A Dwee Cha Gi
> 
> 15.) Knee Strike Mu Reup Jji Gi
> 
> 16.) Front Kick/Back Kick. Up Cha go Dwee Cha Gi.


 
Thanks Bruce

One more thing can you cross reference with Myungs kicks which I'm fully familiar with and add any other describtion to make the others understanable.


----------



## glad2bhere

See:  Lee, Joo Bang; The Ancient Martial Art of Hwa Rang Do pps 98-124

1.) Front Kick Ap Cha Gi 

2.) Side Kick    Yup Cha Gi 

3.) Chop Kick  Chick a Cha Gi 

4.) Back Kick   Dwit Cha Gi 

5.) Half moon Kick  Ban Dal Cha Gi 

6.) Outside Full Moon Kick  Man Dal Cha Gi 

7.) Inside Full Moon Kick  Nae Man Dal Cha Gi 

8.) Chin Kick   Jok Gi Cha Gi 

9.) Instep Kick    Bal Dung Cha Gi 

10.) Heel Hook Kick  Kum Chi Dol Ye Cha Gi 

11.) Front Heel Snap Kick  Kum Chi Olya Cha Gi 

13.) Spinning Heel Kick  Dora Cha Gi 

14.) Roundhouse Kick  Dol Ye Cha Gi 

15.) Low Spinning Heel Kick  Ha Dan Dora Cha Gi 

Interesting there is a section following the last kick listed above wherein a number of kicks are simply identified as "low kicks" more than a few of these are reflected in the earlier two listings as invidiual kicks yet are un-named individually in this WHRDA curriculum from 1978. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

See: Suh, In Hyuk; KUK SOOL WON: Traditional Korean Martial Art 

1.) Straight Leg Kick     Ahp Cha Ohl Li Ki 

2.) Front Kick      Ahp Cha Gi 

3.) Knee Kick      Moo Reup Cha Gi 

4.) Inside Kick    Ahn Dah Ree Cha Gi 

5.) Outside Kick  Bah Gaht Dah Ree Cha Gi 

6.) Roundhouse kick    Bahl Deung Cha Gi 

7.) Side Kick      Yuhp Cha Gi 

8.) Back Kick    Dee Cha Gi 

9.) Hook Kick    Bahl Koom Chi Cha Gi

10.) Axe Kick    Jik Uh Cha Ki 

11.) Reverse Roundhouse Kick   Yuhk Bahl Deung Cha Gi 

12.) Turn Inside Heel Kick   Ahn Koom Chi Dohl Li Ki 

13.) Side  Front Kick      Yuhp Jik Ki

14.) Turn-back Side Kick    Dee Doh Rah Yuhp Cha Ki 

15.) High Spinning Kick    Sahng Dahn Doh Rah Cha Gi 

16.) Low Spinning Kick    Hah Dan Doh Rah Cha Gi 

Now that makes four introductory kicking curriculums to compare and at first glance they may seem awfully different. I can tell you that though the names are much more different than the execution, if I gave the same name to all the kicks that are similar and lined them up I think you would be amazed at how similar all of these curriculums are. Maybe I'll just do that. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Kim      Myung    Lee  Suh


1.Scoop Kick                                
                                                    X        X           LK    X 
2.Low Point Kick                            
                                                    X
3.Side Kick                                   
                                                    X        X           X      X
4.Inside Swivel Kick                      
                                                    X        X           LK
5.Outside Swivel Kick                    
                                                    X        X           LK
6.Heel Hook Kick                          
                                                    X        X           LK
7.Descending Knee Strike              
                                                    X
8.Heel Thrust Kick                         
                                                    X        X           X
9.High Point Hick                           
                                                    X        X           X      X
10.Axe Kick                                  
                                                    X        X           X      X
11.Double Slap Kick (Includes single Slap kick)                       
                                                    X        X           X 
12.Double Side Kick                       
                                                    X 
13. Back Kick                                 
                                                    X         X          X      X
14.Oblique Back Kick                      
                                                    X
15.Knee Strike                               
                                                    X         X          X      X
16.Front/Back kick Combo              
                                                    X
See: Myung, Kwang Sik; HAPKIDO- Art of Masters pps 74-92

3.) Inside (crescent)                                              
 Myung Kim And Suh Only                                                              
4.) Outside (cresent)                                              
 Myung Kim And Suh Only                                                              
9.) Knifeedge Down Kick (Myung Only)                                          
10.) Knifeedge Push Kick  (Myung Only)                      
11.) Knife edge Front Kick  (Myung and Suh Only)                           
13.) Cover Kick                (Myung Only)                           
15.) Heel Inside Hook Kick   (Myung Only)
16.)Roundhouse Kick           (Myung, Lee and Suh)                  
17.) Heel High Hook Kick   (Myung, Lee and Suh)                           

See: Lee, Joo Bang; The Ancient Martial Art of Hwa Rang Do pps 98-124

13.) Spinning Heel Kick Dora Cha Gi                         Lee & Suh
15.) Low Spinning Heel Kick Ha Dan Dora Cha Gi         Lee & Suh 

See: Suh, In Hyuk; KUK SOOL WON: Traditional Korean Martial Art 

1.) Straight Leg Kick Ahp Cha Ohl Li Ki      (Suh Only) 
11.) Reverse Roundhouse Kick Yuhk Bahl Deung Cha Gi     (Suh Only) 
13.) Side Front Kick Yuhp Jik Ki                               (Suh Only) 
14.) Turn-back Side Kick Dee Doh Rah Yuhp Cha Ki       (Suh Only)


NOW--- before you all start tuning up on me please remember that I am comparing only introductory material. Just cause I don't have someone down for a particular technique does not mean they don't have it. It just means I didn't find it included in their published curriculum of introductory material.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

Actually Bruce, you are right,, ALL these kicks from the different groups are very similar in style and order of flow.... if I add the Sin Moo Kicks you would see they are almost exactly what you have put down... especially the first group of the kicks from your Korea trip... coincidence??? I think not....
                                                                Michael Tomlinson
                                                              5th Dan Sin Moo Hapkido


----------



## glad2bhere

I like that point but it also raises another controversial point in view of what is NOT emphasized. Its easy to see in the comparison of introductory techniques that the emphasis is on predominantly low, "ugly" kicks. What does this say about that portion of the yusool material, then, which has put much time and effort into the more acrobatic kicks. I think I can even make some room for spin-kicks and the odd jump-side kick. But can we continue to push the idea of 570 degree kicks and split-kicks done out of a back-flip? As I share this I consider that the Chinese have been rapidly back-pedaling from their investment in WuShu and have been making nice with the Taiwanese in the hopes of coaxing old masters back to the mainland for seminars in the old Boxing material. I wonder if we are better served pressing for better execution of more reasonable techniques and less consideration of the exotic. 

Also along these line I have been giving some very serious thought to the TKD-like nature of the five hyungs we use in Yon Mu Kwan. There is considerable repetition and while the more basic techniques like side-kicks and Front Snap kicks are much used, the more obscure kicks don't get much attention. Maybe its time to consider substituting the lesser seen technique for some of those bread&butter kicks and strikes. Thoughts?  Anyone? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

'


----------



## American HKD

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I like that point but it also raises another controversial point in view of what is NOT emphasized. Its easy to see in the comparison of introductory techniques that the emphasis is on predominantly low, "ugly" kicks. What does this say about that portion of the yusool material, then, which has put much time and effort into the more acrobatic kicks. I think I can even make some room for spin-kicks and the odd jump-side kick. But can we continue to push the idea of 570 degree kicks and split-kicks done out of a back-flip? As I share this I consider that the Chinese have been rapidly back-pedaling from their investment in WuShu and have been making nice with the Taiwanese in the hopes of coaxing old masters back to the mainland for seminars in the old Boxing material. I wonder if we are better served pressing for better execution of more reasonable techniques and less consideration of the exotic.
> 
> Also along these line I have been giving some very serious thought to the TKD-like nature of the five hyungs we use in Yon Mu Kwan. There is considerable repetition and while the more basic techniques like side-kicks and Front Snap kicks are much used, the more obscure kicks don't get much attention. Maybe its time to consider substituting the lesser seen technique for some of those bread&butter kicks and strikes. Thoughts? Anyone?
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


Dear Bruce,

I agree with you in this case.

As I mature I really believe in my heart most of the high kicks and jumping/flying kicks are purely for athleticism and show ONLY, like gymnastics if you will great moves can't fight!

I'm seriously thinking about not teaching most of them any more.
Look at any Master for example as they age it takes more and more time and engergy to maintain those type of kicks. I haven't seen any Master in thier 40's kick like they did in thier 20 & 30's my Master icluded.

To me self-defense skills should become better with age, if you only can do them as a young person what good are they when you reach 40, 50, 60?

I resently spoke to a progressive Korean Master of very high staus from a reputable Association who told me that high kick jumping kick are all for show and they dont require them for black belt or above.


----------



## glad2bhere

......and as long as we have gone this far there is yet another piece that would nice to investigate. That piece is the role of kicking (such as it might be) in the ju jutsu and DRAJJ traditions. It would be nice if one of those folks who is fairly familiar with Japanese traditions might favor us with an opinion about the nature of this kicking versus what is presented in the Japanese arts. Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

I'm with you guys on the acrobatic kicking.  I am 46 now and those jump back spinning kicks just don't work like they use to.. I focus much more on the  self defense aspects of Hapkido... low to medium range kicks, I also specify the kicks in which you don't turn your shoulders and body sideways more also... being from a wrestling, choking background I see a real gamble in execution when a person does a side kick for example and give the hint of their back up... we focus on passing and flanking so much that if you give one of my guys your edge he is behind you,, I like the scoop and outside heel type kicks in which I can enter kicking and still be balanced and centered for my pressing techniques....
                                          Michael Tomlinson


----------



## glad2bhere

For us, not so much the Side kick, but the RH kick is taught as a sacrifice kick much like the Stomach Throw in Judo is a sacrifice throw. The sport people love that skip-in RH kick but without proper set-up its an accident waiting to happen. I first got a clue when I started hearing Bill Wallaces' comments on using the RH Kick as much as he does. Apparently the part that most people don't attend to is the way he preps the situation BEFORE cutting loose. 


Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

Bill Wallace is a good guy, I did an all day training session with him a couple years ago.. he knows his stuff.. his stretching routine is really top notch also, he has a degree in Kinesiology and is a real character... a lot of his kicking concepts make good sense when it comes to timing and baiting...  we practice slipping and also sliding in on the rh and sidekick as well as the spinning hook kicks, with the proper x step and arm position you can get the flank and or back pretty consistenly on many different people.. it's funny because once you do this you get a new respect for certain kicks and disregard others... Les Connard is the best I've ever seen at this,, his guys grab the legs and evade the kicks so well that his high up black belts ONLY throw front leg kicks at each other because they have their stepping and timing down so well that a rear leg kick on them is suicide.. they can bait you like a trout and when you even hint of moving a kick from the rear leg they own you. 
     Less has shown me this stepping and evading a couple of times personally and it is quite awesome.. he is a big guy,, about six four and he moves like a cat.....Jang Mu is a cool style of Hapkido and Less is a class act and VERY formidable Hapkido Player.
                                            Michael Tomlinson


----------



## glad2bhere

Is anyone going to share the introductory kicking material from Dojunim Lims' tradition?  Does anyone want to post the introductory kicks for Dojunim Ji's Sin Moo tradition? Anyone? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

Here is the Sin Moo Basic kicks in our terminology...
                                                     Michael Tomlinson


SIN MOO 25 BASIC KICKS

1] SCOOP KICK TO SHIN
2] SCORPION KICK
3] OUTSIDE HEEL KICK
4] SIDE KICK
5] INSIDE CRESCENT KICK
6] OUTSIDE CRESCENT KICK
7] ROUNDHOUSE KICK
8] FRONT THRUST KICKUNDER CHIN
9] AXE KICK
10] FRONT PUSHING HEEL KICK
11] LOW ROUNDHOUSE
12] DOWNWARD OUTSIDE CRESCENTX STEP, HITS LEG 
13] FRONT UPWARD SLICING KICK
14] FRONT PUSHING KICKTO HEAD
15] HORIZONTAL SLICING OUTSIDE CRESCENT
16] SIDE KICKTOUCHING GROUND
17] BACK SIDE KICKTOUCHING GROUND
18] BACK LOWER SPINNING SLICING KICK
19] UPWARD KNEE
20] DIAGONAL KNEE TO THIGHX STEP, GRAB SHOULDER
21] THRUSTING KNEE KICK
22] CIRCULAR SCOOP KICKAGAINST WALL
23] INVERTED ROUNDHOUSE KICKPOPCORN KICK
24] UPWARD SLAP KICKX STEP, TO EXTENDED LEG
25] SLAP KICK TO BACK OF HEADCROSS X STEP


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all, 

What I saw in Korea in Daegu was hard, fast and below the waist (get your mind out of the gutter...).  Kicks that is.  The list I have from the Jung Ki Kwan is not as nicely organized yet as these others, so maybe the longer standing members of the Jung Ki Kwan can fill in here, I will try to organize the list in similar fashion as those above.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Bruce, was one of your list from GM Kim, Yun Sang?  Was it the first, you list both as Myung lists...

For what its worth, I have seen lots of kicking to the lower body in many different forms of Jujitsu.  Mostly for unbalancing, but also knee destruction - can't speak for DRAJJ, but seen it in other styles...should say been on the receiving end of such kicks...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Kevin: 

Post #185--- the first post was the kicking curriculum from Kim Yun Sang. 

Post #186--- the second kicking curriculum is from Myung Kwang Sik 

The Kim-Myung Comparison, I think,  is so-so.  I'm betting the Ji-Myung comparison will, of course, be much closer. 

My curiousity is piqued a bit about how people see the Lee and Suh kicking material fitting in especially since those are suppose to be related much closer to Ji's confederate, Kim, Moo Woong. Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

I'll look at those again...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## greendragon

Is it just me or do ALL of these orgs kicks look eerily close to the same?
                                                             Michael Tomlinson


----------



## glad2bhere

If you look at the comparitive post I made among the various practitioners and dropping out the more flamboyant kicks such as the spin-kicks of the WHRDA and KSW, I think the similarities are pretty close. Everybody seems to have a knee strike, elbow strikes (fwd, rwd, lateral and descending), front kick and back kick, side kick and RH Kick (or maybe just a shin kick). The greatest variance seems to come with the lesser known kicks. For instance the Outside-Inside Swivel Kick (AKA: Curve kick) and the Inside-Outside Swivel Kick as well as the inside and Outside Crescent Kicks are not as consistent. Same with the "point kick" or "toe kick" which has probably the widest variety of executions from straight forward like a Front Snap Kick to an odd curvature after the fashion of the Slap Kick. The Heel hook kick that Kim uses is low and snapped down behind the knee or to the outside of the thigh. But by the time it gets to Myung its morphed into the Heel High Hook kick and from there into the spinning heel kick of Lee and Suh. 

The single technique outstanding across the board seems to be the Descending Knee Strike which is executed from a standing position. In the Yon Mu Kwan we have a knee technique ("knee drop") which approximates this but is more of a drop of the body on to a single target on the floor with the focus through the knee rather than an actual striking with the knee. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Greeting,

Master Ji has a few more kicks than most, a couple them I haven't seen in the KHF or with Myung, however He Young Kim has them all in HKD1. Myung maybe dropped a few along the way. 

A few of Ji kicks are pretty cool some low, some higher, but all in all everybody seems to have the same kicks except as Bruce said take away some jumping and spinning and what's the real difference not much?

Which may lead one to speculate that our Ho Shin Sool isn't much different either just a little here or there?

My guess all along is there not much difference between Jung Ki, Lim, Kim, or Ji, Myung, KHF types etc.

People may make a bigger deal of things than there really is!


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Most of it comng from the same root, it should be basically the same I would also assume...

If I had to hazard a guess - and it is a guess - I think that a lot of the higher, fancier kicks came from (at the time) an athletic group of younger, enthusiastic men that wanted to demonstrate their skill...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

Absolutely.  Thats exactly why I take the position that I do over and over again. I think it is a mistake to view Hapkiyusool as a separate art rather than a refinement of the yusool. Not that it can't be taught as a separate art if a person had a mind to do just that piece. As I said before my own teacher, Myung, and your teacher, Ji, have made a life's work out of essentially the yu sool level of Hapkido and I don't see where they or their students are any worse the wear for it, right? 

By way of extension this is also why I take the position I do on Hapkido organizations. I know that Westerners are much more familiar with corporations and sole proprietorships but for my part I really can't see where the art has been better-served by this approach. I think that it would be well if folks learned to adopt the Kwan approach which is more fraternal (for want of any better word to describe it) than corporate. Another benefit I see is that when people start doing things with money, having folks pitch-in on an as-needed basis ( as opposed to establishing a set flow of funds on a regular basis) takes some of the temptation to cut corners or do things specifically to influence the flow of cash in a particular direction. In my own case, I use my position to get uniforms at wholesale, and cut corners for my students whereever I can. The important piece is making sure that the art gets taught with some sort of cohesion and coherence to the curriculum, right?  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Stuart:
> 
> Absolutely. Thats exactly why I take the position that I do over and over again. I think it is a mistake to view Hapkiyusool as a separate art rather than a refinement of the yusool. Not that it can't be taught as a separate art if a person had a mind to do just that piece. As I said before my own teacher, Myung, and your teacher, Ji, have made a life's work out of essentially the yu sool level of Hapkido and I don't see where they or their students are any worse the wear for it, right?
> 
> By way of extension this is also why I take the position I do on Hapkido organizations. I know that Westerners are much more familiar with corporations and sole proprietorships but for my part I really can't see where the art has been better-served by this approach. I think that it would be well if folks learned to adopt the Kwan approach which is more fraternal (for want of any better word to describe it) than corporate. Another benefit I see is that when people start doing things with money, having folks pitch-in on an as-needed basis ( as opposed to establishing a set flow of funds on a regular basis) takes some of the temptation to cut corners or do things specifically to influence the flow of cash in a particular direction. In my own case, I use my position to get uniforms at wholesale, and cut corners for my students whereever I can. The important piece is making sure that the art gets taught with some sort of cohesion and coherence to the curriculum, right? FWIW.
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


Agreed 

Except I still believe we learn Hapkido Yu Sool just as Aiki Jutsu, I see no differance at all. I feel I've been taught Hapki Yu Sool it just take longer time to refine than just the Yu Sul that's why many lower ranking Dans still don't get it yet or have'nt learned from a qualified teacher.


----------



## Barrie

Hey Todd,

You have been visiting GM Lim for some years so I presume you know his kicking curriculum very well. Please share your knowledge as you have asked Bruce to do.

Barrie Restall


----------



## howard

hi barrie, in todd's absence, i'll try to provide a bit of info on jungkikwan kicking techniques...

the kicks we train are pretty basic.  front, side, back, roundhouse; we train the crescent kicks but rarely use them.

2 of the most frequently used kicks are the scorpion sting kick and the spring kick.  the former is a weird type of reverse roundhouse kick, for lack of a better term.  to do the kick with the R foot, you chamber the ball of the R foot near the L knee, then strike outward (from your L to your R) with the foot, striking with the instep.  is typically used to strike anywhere from the outer calf to the floating ribs.  often done to set up a joint lock or follow-up strike.

the spring kick is a low kick, the striking surface is the heel.  the chamber involves simply raising the knee of the kicking foot into yourself, almost as if you were going to do a knee drive.  then, strike downward into the target with the heel.  can be very damaging if aimed at the kneecap or the shin, or even the outer quadriceps.

our formal techniques make very little use of kicks, and they are usually kept low.  there are a couple of kicks here and there, including in the 2nd dan knife defenses.  however, you will see kicks used to finish locking and throwing techniques as determined by the situation (how does your opponent end up after you apply the technique).

hope this helps...  todd can surely add more detail.

regards, howard


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Howard: 

".......2 of the most frequently used kicks are the scorpion sting kick and the spring kick. the former is a weird type of reverse roundhouse kick, for lack of a better term. to do the kick with the R foot, you chamber the ball of the R foot near the L knee, then strike outward (from your L to your R) with the foot, striking with the instep. is typically used to strike anywhere from the outer calf to the floating ribs. often done to set up a joint lock or follow-up strike.

the spring kick is a low kick, the striking surface is the heel. the chamber involves simply raising the knee of the kicking foot into yourself, almost as if you were going to do a knee drive. then, strike downward into the target with the heel. can be very damaging if aimed at the kneecap or the shin, or even the outer quadriceps......" 

We will probably never get everyone to use the same name for things but let me see if I can compare the kicks you are speaking of to the ones I know. 

The "Scorpian Kick" sounds roughly like the Inside-Outside Swivel Kick in that the rear leg is brought forward to chamber near the supporting knee, then cast forward and outward in an arc with the toes points directly to the side away from the centerline. Point of contact is the leading edge of the heel, though Dojunim Kim speaks of this same kick as a sort of "toe kick" which is low and fast and targets the inside of the thigh. 

The Other kick sounds very much like a Scoop Kick which most people recognize as a low Side Kick done with the arch of the foot faced up (rather than down as with a low Side Kick). This is a great little technique for checking the partners forward motion by checking his step just as he is about to complete it. First couple are a bit awkward but its a skill one can pick-up easily. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

hi bruce,



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> The "Scorpian Kick" sounds roughly like the Inside-Outside Swivel Kick in that the rear leg is brought forward to chamber near the supporting knee, then cast forward and outward in an arc with the toes points directly to the side away from the centerline. Point of contact is the leading edge of the heel, though Dojunim Kim speaks of this same kick as a sort of "toe kick" which is low and fast and targets the inside of the thigh.


we usually strike with the instep (top of the foot) or the toes with this kick.  it's a quick snapping kick, not a bone-breaker by any means, used as a setup technique.



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> The Other kick sounds very much like a Scoop Kick which most people recognize as a low Side Kick done with the arch of the foot faced up (rather than down as with a low Side Kick). This is a great little technique for checking the partners forward motion by checking his step just as he is about to complete it. First couple are a bit awkward but its a skill one can pick-up easily. FWIW.


actually, in the second kick, the foot position is quite different from the classic side kick.  for example, if you throw the kick with your R foot, rather than turning your foot toes inward (to your L) and extending the heel, you would turn your foot in the opposite direction (your toes would point outward, to your R).  it's awkward at first, but with some practice it becomes a very powerful low kick.  it can be especially useful if you simutaneously feint hand strikes, so that you keep your opponent's attention up around his head.  untrained people will hardly ever detect the low kick in that situation.

hope this helps...


----------



## greendragon

I personally like the scorpion, scoop, and outside heel kicks for in close work..they work well and lead right in to the grappling, joint locking range...
                                                                    Michael Tomlinson


----------



## Disco

Found this on another site and thought it may be of some additional interest.

"I have recently read however that another Korean (Jang In Mok who now lives in Taegue City) trained in Daito Ryu at the same time that Choi supposedly did. I understand that Jang In Mok has official documentation of his training and rank and that he is acknowledged by the Daito Ryu orgs. So, my question is, If Jang In Mok is legit why can't we just ask him if Choi was present while he was training in Daito Ryu in Japan? It seems to me that he would remember if Choi was training in the same dojo".


----------



## ajs1976

Disco,

you beat me to it. I did a search and I found a couple of pages with the same information.

From http://www.wdob.net/mai/people/yongsulchoi/yongsulchoi.php



> Jang In Mok
> 
> We now come to a most interesting development that does not appear in much of the Hapkido literature. Still living today in Taegue city is Grandmaster Jang In Mok who also trained under Takeda Sokaku. Grandmaster Jang is eighty three years old which makes his birth year 1912. He has a scroll that lists his training record in the Daito Ryu. Even though Jang In Mok was born later than Choi Young Sool they were contemporaries in Japan studying under Takeda and they both returned to Taegue city in Korea in 1945. Jang is a doctor of oriental medicine and massage but also used to teach hapkido. As his career was mainly as a doctor he did not produce large numbers of students. Further research on Grandmaster Jang's early years in Japan is presently continuing and should he provide us with any further information it is certain to improve our resolution into this window of the past.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Mike: 

"......We now come to a most interesting development that does not appear in much of the Hapkido literature. Still living today in Taegue city is Grandmaster Jang In Mok who also trained under Takeda Sokaku. Grandmaster Jang is eighty three years old which makes his birth year 1912. He has a scroll that lists his training record in the Daito Ryu. Even though Jang In Mok was born later than Choi Young Sool they were contemporaries in Japan studying under Takeda and they both returned to Taegue city in Korea in 1945. Jang is a doctor of oriental medicine and massage but also used to teach hapkido. ....." 

Most people who are well read on Hapkido history are pretty aware of this individual. For my part I would love to see a quick comparison between his introductory kicking material and those that we have listed here so far. 

BTW: Just for the record I don't think it has actually been documented that this person trained under Takeda Sokaku himself. His licensure was awarded by a student of Takedas' (August 1943) after the teacher died in Spring of that same year. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Jang Im Mok does not appear in Hapkido literature because he did teach Hapkido.  He taught DRAJJ - pure and simple.  In addition, his credentials were not from Takeda Sokaku directly, but from one of his students.  Jang does say he spent seminar time with Takeda, but was not a direct student.  In at least one interview, he indicates that Choi was well known in Japan in DRAJJ circles as a fighter.  Jang was 84 in 1995, making him 93 now (I am not sure if he is still alive).

Jang's most senior student (or rather the man he promoted the highest) is Huh, Il Woong.  Huh was a student of Kim, Moo woong (co-creater of much of the kicking curriculum seen today in Hapkido with Ji Han Jae) and Ji.  Kim left the instruction of Choi, Yong Sul in 1959 to move to Soeul, where he trained in the dojang of Ji for about 10 months then left to open the Shin Moo Kwan, taking the then brown belt Huh with him.

As a side note, Hwa rang do's Lee brothers were noted students of Kim, Moo-woong until 1962 (maybe as late as 1964) when they left to study with Suh, In Hyuk - founding Hwa rang do in 1969.

Huh, Il Woong was the president of one of the Korea Hapkido Association groups (three are known to have existed around this time) during the mid 1970's and is remembered by several members of the Great Britain Hapkido Association for a trip he made to the UK in 1982.  This group was called the Kuk Sool Won, Korea Hapkido Association (no affiliation to Suh, In Hyuk's group).  Huh is a well known university professor, and Master of Hapkido and Ki Hap Do (a form of Korean Chi-gung) as well as Jang, Im Mok's senior student.  Huh is a professor at Myongji University in the department of Sports and Leisure Studies, Teaching the majors of Prescription of Exersize and Martial Arts.  He was also awarded a 7th Dan, "Black Dragon" award from the China Wushu Association on July 30, 1999. 

Jang only taught on a small scale, never to the extent of Choi; preferring his practice as a physician.

There are several noted interviews with Jang, including one done by GM Mike Wollmershauser which may be available soon in print, it is currently on video tape and being fully transcribed.

Before anyone jumps the gun...DRAJJ and Hapkido are similar, but not the same, the techniques of Choi, Yong Sul reflect a distinct fighting nature and directness of application that I believe is not the same as those of TODAY's  DRAJJ.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

Many thanks. For my money this is probably the most unaddressed piece of the Hapkido Development Puzzle. I still think it would be great to get a practitioner of the Jand Im Mok tradition to share what they learn as introductory kicking techniques to see how it compares with what we have been talking about. Even if Jang Im Mok is no longer with us, what do you suppose would be the chances of getting one of his direct students to communicate with us? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

I am currently trying to get a connection to Huh, Il Woong through another source in Korea who knows him well.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Huh's organization had the same types of kicks found in many other Ji type groups.  I can piece together a short list from what I have around...

Sincerely,
Kevin Sogor


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin:

I think it would be great to see the list of kicks both to compare Huh's Kim-derived tradition to Ji's and to compate Lim's kicking material to Kim Yun Sang's. 

One thing I thought I would share for whatever its worth. 

I had an opportunity to train with a group of DRAJJ folks at a weekend seminar presented by Okamoto Sensei. The entire weekend was spent doing "Ki" motions which were not intended as actual combat material but rather to instill much of the biomechanics for off-balancing and mis-aligning ones' partner. Actual practitioners of the Okamoto tradition were then, apparently, instructed in the "hoshinsul" or self-defense material (if you will) after the rest of us visitors left on Sunday. I sahre this because of your comment about Choi being more combat oriented with his material. I can easily imagine him focusing on the more pragmatic and choosing to let a lot of the abstract material fall by the side. Not a dig, mind you. I'm thinking of the folks who have begun to find it popular to mix Chi-kung-like training in with everything else, for instance. I could imagine Choi casting a critical eye on such things for any clear benefit to sound training, and finding nothing apparent drop those bits.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Greeting

Why have these 2 guys who could validate Choi Young Sool as a true Sensei of DDAJJ been left out of all historical accounts?

It seems very strange?


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

Your question is exactly that point that keeps this stuff from ever being settled. Its not that some oral traditions aren't true or that most of the oral traditions are called into question. What I have a problem with is how very very selective any one single story tends to be. Take any given recitation, and begin to track it for validation and sooner or later it comes back to somebody essentially saying, "'cuz I said so." Now if we are going to go with the usual Korean approach to such traditions I would think that such a statement would be enough. However, when people start professing a particular person or tradition as THE authentic lineage and questions everybody else than I say its time to ask for something more than just anecdotal evidence. In such a case "no evidence" would seem to equal "no arguement". I don't see us having it both ways. Either there is evidence and we have a single authentic tradition with some ONE person at the top of the heap, or we agree that there are many traditions becuase there simple isn't enough evidence to validate one group above another.  Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

iron_ox said:
			
		

> ...Jang Im Mok...  does say he spent seminar time with Takeda, but was not a direct student. In at least one interview, he indicates that Choi was well known in Japan in DRAJJ circles as a fighter...
> 
> ...There are several noted interviews with Jang, including one done by GM Mike Wollmershauser which may be available soon in print, it is currently on video tape and being fully transcribed...


hi kevin, the interview that you mention in the first part of your post that i've quoted above... would that be the wollmerhauser interview by chance?  if not, would you be able to give us the source of the interview?

this is very interesting stuff.  thanks, howard


----------



## greendragon

Bruce writes::::
  However, when people start professing a particular person or tradition as THE authentic lineage and questions everybody else than I say its time to ask for something more than just anecdotal evidence. In such a case "no evidence" would seem to equal "no arguement". I don't see us having it both ways. Either there is evidence and we have a single authentic tradition with some ONE person at the top of the heap, or we agree that there are many traditions becuase there simple isn't enough evidence to validate one group above another. Thoughts? :::::

That is a very observant statement.  I have noticed this several times myself and I TOTALLY agree with you here.. too many different spins on the same history,,,too many claims of they did this or that with NO further documentation other than "well because that's what I heard from the great pubah"...
                                    Michael Tomlinson


----------



## American HKD

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Stuart:
> 
> Your question is exactly that point that keeps this stuff from ever being settled. Its not that some oral traditions aren't true or that most of the oral traditions are called into question. What I have a problem with is how very very selective any one single story tends to be. Take any given recitation, and begin to track it for validation and sooner or later it comes back to somebody essentially saying, "'cuz I said so." Now if we are going to go with the usual Korean approach to such traditions I would think that such a statement would be enough. However, when people start professing a particular person or tradition as THE authentic lineage and questions everybody else than I say its time to ask for something more than just anecdotal evidence. In such a case "no evidence" would seem to equal "no arguement". I don't see us having it both ways. Either there is evidence and we have a single authentic tradition with some ONE person at the top of the heap, or we agree that there are many traditions becuase there simple isn't enough evidence to validate one group above another. Thoughts?
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


Dear Bruce,

I see your point, but it's this guy seems like a good starting point none the less.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Stuart: 

".....I see your point, but it's this guy seems like a good starting point none the less......." 

Yes, and at this point I would invite you to look at the difference in the wording in your response. I think when people can characterize a particular individual as "a good starting point" or perhaps as "making a valuable contribution" or perhaps as an "authoritative source" I see this demonstrating a level of cooperation (as well as a discriminating eye to what is being taught). By comparison, when a person uses labels such as "the recognized leader" or "the only real successor" and so forth then I hear a strong political influence. 

Now, let me also say that I thoroughly understand people's personal loyalty to one individual or another and I can respect that. For myself I know how beholding I am to Dojunim Kim and his many kindnesses, and I am sure that you have the same background with Dojunim Ji as Todd and Kevin have with Dojunim Lim. If it is possible to conference about our respective material such as what we have been doing with the kicking, perhaps there is a lot of promise there, yes? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

greendragon said:
			
		

> Bruce writes...I don't see us having it both ways. Either there is evidence and we have a single authentic tradition with some ONE person at the top of the heap, or we agree that there are many traditions becuase there simple isn't enough evidence to validate one group above another.


well, not exactly, i'd say... another possibility is that there is no firm, generally accepted evidence of a single source, but that that single source did exist.  in that case, we'd have pretty much what we have today: groups who believe that all hapkido comes from choi's original art, and groups who believe that his first-generation students who struck off on their own are more appropriately considsered the source(s) of hapkido, because hapkido consists of choi's original art in addition to things like the kicking techniques that come from some of those first-generation people.

bruce, do you see my point?  i'm merely saying that the current absence of firm evidence about a theory that either confirms or refutes that theory does not mean that the theory is inherently incorrect.


----------



## glad2bhere

Hhhmmmmm....  OK. Lets go with that. For my money I see that as a kind of "slippery slope" but I still think we can make some good out of it. Lets go with the idea of a "single source" and JUST THAT. (I stress this because for the purposes of my question I don't want to go around the tree one more time about WHO constitutes the "single source, 'kay?) 

So, OK, we have a single source of XYZ art. Now what, exactly, is our relationship to be with that source? I am trying to be very specific about my question so please don't think there is some sort of trick bag hidden here. All I am saying is that we for the moment agree that we train in Art XYZ and that art has a single source. My question is what is to be our relationship with that source?  Here are some options that come to mind from past discussions and other events I have been a part of. 

1.) The single source (SS) is sacred and inviolate. What he taught is what is taught. Nothing is added and nothing is taken away. (Now I know this is not a real experience in the real world, I'm just stating that this is a kind view that could be held.) 

2.) SS is subject to interpretation under the authority of his designated successor who may introduce change while maintaining the spirit if not the letter of the original teachings. 

3.) SS is a starting point from which various people having experienced SS at one time or another got as much as they could get and passed that on as their interpretation of SS to become a sort of Single Source in their own rights. 

4.) SS is a starting point representing but one of a number of starting points in a larger constellation of traditions some of which came before and some of which that came after the particular SS identified. 

5.) SS is a  discrete amount of information or an approach which other people may add to and subtract from to produce their own truth as they will. 

I pose this question because this may have more to do with differences among people who are discussing things here than many other points.  Thoughts? Comments?


----------



## howard

bruce, assuming, as you suggest for the sake of argument, that a single source exists for an art, i think all 5 of your situations are not only possible, but probable, especially as we move farther away in time from the lifetime of SS.

not trying to sound like a politician, but i really think this is true.  in fact, we could probably find at least one prominent person from each of these categories in today's hapkido world...


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Howard,  yes one of the interviews I was speaking of was from GM Wollmershauser, the others are on the net, just take some digging...

Bruce,  I will accept all except #4, which I think you slip in to try and explain something that you cannot either identify or prove...Dojunim Choi was the first - simply point out anyone before him...a human teaching this stuff not a fantasy "tradition".

Also, for the sake of argument, since everyone wants to question Choi, Yong Sul's life story, then where is the questioning for EVERYONE else?  Choi's teacher died at the height of WW II - not having lots of documents then could be understood - OK, so lets say this is a fantasy, and Choi pulled the stuff he taught out of thin air - then where did the rest of his students get their stuff to build Sin Moo, Hwa rang do, Kuk Sool Kon, etc.  Why are there no pictures of Toaist Lee or Granny?  How about Monk Saum Dosa? Why - did they ever really exist(I don't know), if you want to question Choi's verasity, at least he picked a real human being...

There is a single source, Dojumin Choi, Yong Sul.  He had LOTS of talented students that took what they learned and expanded upon it, gave it some "Korean" tradition and flavors and gave it lots of names - but try as you like...the single source stops (or starts) at the Suh Brewery, Sunday, February 22, 1948.
Martial traditions are kept alive by "personalities" not books, they thrive on the training of adherants that follow the teaching of individuals that through experience or inheritance hold collections of techniques unique to that train of belief.  Without the personalities, there is no art left to teach to anyone - because no one is teaching.  We are all "personalities" to our students, as our teachers are personalities to us - as we all train in a system with a hierarchy, these personalities, like any pyramid get fewer and fewer as we reach the top levels of training.

Sincerely,

Kevin "Hope I become a personality" Sogor


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

As I reflect why it is so hard for some to accept a single source for Hapkido (and here, I will say that this includes the Ji tradition because the only person we KNOW he trained with is Choi), maybe the answer is simple - becasue if there is a single source that passed away as late as 1986, and your tradition has NOTHING to do with CHOI (again, not Ji folks here) - and you call what you do Hapkido, I would think you would feel lied to and betrayed by whoever told you what you were learning was Hapkido...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## howard

hi kevin, it's always seemed to me, from a plain old common sense point of view, that if choi had not trained under takeda, how did he know so much about him?  after all, there was no internet back then, not even television.  also, from a common sense point of view, why would a korean claim to have trained under a japanese, given the history between the 2 countries?  looks like if choi was going to make up a master, that master would have been korean.

just a final thought for now... i don't think any reasonable person disputes that choi was a very skilled martial artists when he showed up back in korea, and from reading accounts of what he did and taught, his art certainly seems to have a strong aiki component.  so, if what he learned was not daito ryu, what was it?  it would be interesting to see somebody (who has lots of time on their hands) talk to choi's first-generation students, watch them train, and try to see if what he taught might come from some other japanese style.

personally, i believe intuitively that he did train under takeda.  but as long as there is no ironclad evidence to prove that, i have to admit the possibility that he did not.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Howard,

I would agree to a degree, except, Dojunim Choi is now dead, and I am an adherant to his teachings, I would love to find some really hard documentary evidence for his claims, but even without these, I feel compelled to believe his story out of respect of his memory.  May be irrational, but look at us, swinging swords in an era of machine-guns...irrational is our stock in trade.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor


----------



## howard

iron_ox said:
			
		

> ...look at us, swinging swords in an era of machine-guns...irrational is our stock in trade.


absolutely!

hey, we all need our escapes, right?  the real world is too ugly to face all day long, every day.

off topic i know, but here's another of my favorite irrational escape areas - watching taped old episodes of beavis and butthead.

now i bet you're REALLY wondering about me (lol)...


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

".....Also, for the sake of argument, since everyone wants to question Choi, Yong Sul's life story, then where is the questioning for EVERYONE else? Choi's teacher died at the height of WW II - not having lots of documents then could be understood - OK, so lets say this is a fantasy, and Choi pulled the stuff he taught out of thin air - then where did the rest of his students get their stuff to build Sin Moo, Hwa rang do, Kuk Sool Kon, etc. Why are there no pictures of Toaist Lee or Granny? How about Monk Saum Dosa? Why - did they ever really exist(I don't know), if you want to question Choi's verasity, at least he picked a real human being...

There is a single source, Dojumin Choi, Yong Sul. He had LOTS of talented students that took what they learned and expanded upon it, gave it some "Korean" tradition and flavors and gave it lots of names - but try as you like...the single source stops (or starts) at the Suh Brewery, Sunday, February 22, 1948....." 

I did not provide those options to either prove or not prove anything. You have a strong affinity for one of those options and I think that plain and I find nothing wrong with that. Can you allow that another person may have as strong a belief system about HIS particular view? Maybe another person doesn't need a picture of a person, just like some people don't need a certificate or license for Choi. My question has less to do with WHAT people believe as the intolerance that seems to proceed from the fact that not everybody believes the same or that some peoples beliefs are some how more valued than others. Thoughts? Comments? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## greendragon

Hey I like machine guns!!!
                                      Michael Tomlinson :asian:


----------



## greendragon

Kevin writes::
There is a single source, Dojumin Choi, Yong Sul. He had LOTS of talented students that took what they learned and expanded upon it, gave it some "Korean" tradition and flavors and gave it lots of names - but try as you like... >>>>

I agree with this comment...

Bruce writes....

 Can you allow that another person may have as strong a belief system about HIS particular view? Maybe another person doesn't need a picture of a person, just like some people don't need a certificate or license for Choi. My question has less to do with WHAT people believe as the intolerance that seems to proceed from the fact that not everybody believes the same or that some peoples beliefs are some how more valued than others. Thoughts? Comments? 

I agree with this comment also.. 

as Todd said before, the important thing is that we all practice Hapkido... personally I don't care what or who anyone believes in as long as you are a respectfull person.  I don't believe in calling this or that group wrong or questioning some of the old GM's such as Ji Han Jae or Joo Bang Lee, or Kwang Sik Myung, etc.. without meeting them and talking to them face to face...this is what I meant before..  I have nothing but respect for all of the Korean Hapkidoists from that era.. Men such as Ji, Myung, Kim, Han etc...were in Vietnam practicing and using Hapkido for life and death while most of us on here were in diapers or young teens.. they have lived the battle and deserve nothing but our respect....and I will never say anything disparaging about them on the internet.. if I have a gripe with anyone I will tell them to their face..that is also Hapkido training, plain and simple. I think this is the important thing to remember..if they say something in history is this way or that it doesn't affect MY training one bit....I know what works and what doesn't from working out with them personally over and over and I know most of these men were in Vietnam and North Korea at times Killing people for real and not in fantasy land and that is a pretty good test of their Hapkido..whether it is "authentic" or not,, when I train with some of the old Korean GM's and look into their eyes face to face as men I KNOW what is real and can see it on them...I don't think you can get this from a book or internet debate or history lesson and that is why training with some of them is more important than speculating about their technique or someone else's technique.. or which came first or who is the most real etc.etc.etc.. remember there is a big difference in someone who "theorizes about techniques and someone who has had to kill people with their techniques".... my two cents anywho...
                                          Michael Tomlinson


----------



## American HKD

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Hello all,
> 
> As I reflect why it is so hard for some to accept a single source for Hapkido (and here, I will say that this includes the Ji tradition because the only person we KNOW he trained with is Choi), maybe the answer is simple - becasue if there is a single source that passed away as late as 1986, and your tradition has NOTHING to do with CHOI (again, not Ji folks here) - and you call what you do Hapkido, I would think you would feel lied to and betrayed by whoever told you what you were learning was Hapkido...
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Kevin Sogor


Dear Kevin,

I'm not sure what you mean here, Ji followers and the vast majority of the Hapkido community beleive Ji coined the name Hapkido end of story. 

( Now I'm only talking about the* name* HKD at this point ).

Choi called it Yawara or maybe Hapki Yu Sool, Hapki Kwan Yu Sool etc. I beleive it had a few names until Ji founded the name HKD and the name stuck universally.

That's the basis for Ji's traditions and that's why many would hold that Ji himself is the real Founder of HAPKIDO in name and in curriculum. 
Choi's Art being a major source of the of the system as you put it.

The same thing happened in the same time period with Joo Bang Lee founder Hwarang Do and In Sun Hyuk founder Kook Sool Won. Re-organize the same material with a different flavor.

Check out He Young Kim and his Han Mu Do system, he did the same thing as Ji, Joo Bang Lee etc. right here in the USA. same material different name.

My point being is Hapkido is somewhat different from Hapki Yu Sool and although very close in thier roots "NOT THE SAME ART" so from this point of veiw Hapkido is Ji's Art alone and not a clone technique for technique of Choi's teachings as some claim.

With that being said that's all I'm doing is sharing my take on the subject, but I really don't one way or another care as Mike T said. We should all share what we can!


----------



## glad2bhere

My original post was to outline the possible options descending from a single source----- the very options you folks are beginning to debate. THIS is why such suggestions as Mike Dunn made some time back are not going to work. 

a.) Its not that people cannot work together, its that their investment in a particular belief system eclipses their ability to tolerate another point of view. 

b.) Its not that other points of view are not valid but that investment in a particular point of view takes precedence over trust and caring which would allow for sharing and exchange. 

c.) Its not that people CAN'T share or exchange, but that folks seem to want the position of control over what they view as proprietary information so that THEY and THEY ALONE are identified as the source of that proprietary information. 

d.) Flipping the coin over there are people who are not dedicated to the Hapkido arts who simply want to collect information on the cheap with as little expense to themselves as possible. That information is then compromised by being mixed with material from other arts or not taught in its original form. 

I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone. All I am saying is that every so often folks ask why we can't all just get along. Here are the reasons its not happening and its going to take character and commitment to overcome this. To my way of thinking people are either willin g to address these issues or I think we need to quit kidding ourselves that we can work together in any meaningful way.  Thoughts? Comments? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Stuart,

Again, completely agree about sharing.  The only points I make are based on documented comments from Ji and others - what they do in a dojang is quite seperate from that - but I do believe that what you say is at least as important as what you do.

From saying that, if we believe that Ji coined the term Hapkido, HE claims that he gave it to Choi to use out of respect.  It is well documented that Choi used the term for YEARS.  My point was more that the only documented source of training that we can find for Ji is Choi - therefore, Choi is the root.

Moreover, this is how I look at it, when I was looking for a source of protein in Korea, it was suggested to me I try SPAM (thanks, Todd...) so I did and liked it, now, was it SPAM because of the name? No, the name was irrelevant really.  It was SPAM because of what was in the can - now, if you dump it out and dress it up with garnish, it is STILL SPAM - so, I'm less concerned with what it is called, (it is convenient for conversation to have a single name) and I don't really care how much garnish YOU use, it is still the same basic thing.  E.G. I don't really care how you dress it up, lots of kicks, blah, blah, the root of Hapkido is Choi.

Now the other issue in that post that I raised is that (here is the SPAM analogy again) if I bought a can of SPAM and opened it to find horse droppings, I would be upset.  SO, if I were involved in an art that Claimed to be Hapkido, but had no connection to Choi at all, not through a Ji root, etc.  I would be very upset.  My point is that there are lots of those types of "Hapkido" schools floating around in this country, with claims to so and so, but no real link - those are the students we should be protecting and identifying the fakes for who they are...

Once again, if the Ji curriculum works for you, fine.  I am STILL constantly surprised at the comments made by Ji over the years.  Now we are being told that he will leave no one in charge and everyone should take his material and make it their own.  Despite this being contrary to his last interview, if this is the case then Sin Moo dies with him, and hail the raise of the garage version of Hapkido - more like Jeet Kune Hapkido...from Jeet Kune Do the style that never was and was never supposed to be - everyone will claim domain over their own bit of knowledge, with no real well spring. I have always believed that orgaization like a pyramid produced the best martial artists, and arts, with the death of Ji, if he indeed leaves no single head, there will be an unprecedented collapse in his branch of the Hapkido tree...


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

".......Moreover, this is how I look at it, when I was looking for a source of protein in Korea, it was suggested to me I try SPAM (thanks, Todd...) so I did and liked it, now, was it SPAM because of the name? No, the name was irrelevant really. It was SPAM because of what was in the can - now, if you dump it out and dress it up with garnish, it is STILL SPAM - so, I'm less concerned with what it is called, (it is convenient for conversation to have a single name) and I don't really care how much garnish YOU use, it is still the same basic thing. E.G. I don't really care how you dress it up, lots of kicks, blah, blah, the root of Hapkido is Choi......" 

This might be a fine analogy to use. 

1.) So a quick thanks to Todd for introducing you to Spam. Fair enough. And apparently you have a keen taste for the brand of spam he introduced you to. Thats OK. I would point out that there are a number of brands of Spam on the market. Personally I enjoy the brand that I was introduced to. 

2.) The making of Spam did not start with the particular brand that you were introduced to. In fact, processed meat has been around for a couple hundred years and preserved meat has been around for many thousands of years. I have no qualms with you teasing out a particular brand of a particular processed meat but I would reserve the right to view the brand I like as most satisfying for MY palate. 

3.) Furthermore, I wonder if the overall quality of Spam and its enjoyment might increase if we got together and considered as a group of "spam afficianados" the relative merits of one brand against another, the inclusion or exclusions of spices, debate the relative merits of various cooking procedures and so forth. 

4.) Now I also admit that there will be marketing thieves who will attend a few get-togethers and then rip-off some ideas and then market them as their own. However, I think the overall quality of Spam will benefit in the long run. 

Back in a bit. Gotta go make a sandwich. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

"........Once again, if the Ji curriculum works for you, fine. I am STILL constantly surprised at the comments made by Ji over the years. Now we are being told that he will leave no one in charge and everyone should take his material and make it their own. Despite this being contrary to his last interview, if this is the case then Sin Moo dies with him, and hail the raise of the garage version of Hapkido - more like Jeet Kune Hapkido...from Jeet Kune Do the style that never was and was never supposed to be - everyone will claim domain over their own bit of knowledge, with no real well spring. I have always believed that orgaization like a pyramid produced the best martial artists, and arts, with the death of Ji, if he indeed leaves no single head, there will be an unprecedented collapse in his branch of the Hapkido tree..." 

The only way this is going to happen is if we continue to pursue the Hapkido arts as some sort of proprietary information to be exclusively provided by only select or authorized sources. People seem to be fighting very strong for this and it has not been proven that this approach does the martial arts any good. TKD may still be around but look at the nature of its quality and practice. Commerce and marketing require that the original be modified in deference to what the public will tolerate. Passing the art along through less tightly controlled access maynot guarentee that the money will all go one way or another but at least the people who practice will care about the art. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## American HKD

Dear Kevin,

Ji told me himself that what he teaches to us is the ROOT system. What we do with it is up to us and we'll be branches of the tree with Ji as the trunk. I think he feels that's his legacy or something to teach and inspire not control every move. 

If he's fine with that so why should'nt we as his students? 

That's one reason I like him so much because he's non-judgemental and open to ideas, growth, and personal differances in people, abilities, body types just to name a few.

Ji's Sin Moo will won't collapse completely but the unskilled practioners will be weeded out quickly enough if they cant demonstrate the standard skills and requirements. Or some people will sart thier own Sin Moo Assocations.
The rest will find thier way into other Associations if thier good players.

All I can say is I'm learning alot from him so far.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

Continuing with the processed meat anaology (why did I start this...) I would have to disagree a bit.  SPAM is SPAM, other processed meat is whatever it is.  When I open SPAM, I know exactly what I am getting.  Now, You or I could take that stuff and dress it up, or eat it plain (my preference), but it is STILL SPAM.  SPAM is not pepperoni, or cotto salami, nor is it a jennie-o turkey breast, it is SPAM.  My point was, it could be called PUKE for all I care, it would still be SPAM - and there is none like it...further, there was processed meat that came before and after, but SPAM is the same as it was when it was first introduced - it hasn't changed.  It is a benchmark of canned meat...all that came before it was just processed meat, then there was SPAM...

Back to the real world, Ji claims the anem Hapkido was his and he gave it to Choi, cool.  Other Choi students went on to dress their SPAM differently, and give it other names - here is where it gets complicated - the root is still SPAM, BUT when the flavor and the texture has been modified to such a degree that there is no similarity to the original product, then SPAM is only the main ingredient - but call it what you will, it ain't pork roast, only changed SPAM.

Lunch does sound good...


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Stuart,

Again, I'm not at all disagreeing with what he wants to do, that is totally his perogotive.  I am again simply making an observation about what has been printed vs. this newer material. 

Now, for my part, I will say that when the charasmatic leader of any system dies without leaving a single equally charismatic head, things in other styles have headed south very fast, with everyone claiming control of the mantle.  Look at Wing Chun (or however you would like to romanize it) after the death of GM Yip Man.

Please don't misunderstand, I am not commenting on content of style, but the context of the statements that are made.  Again, from the last published article, Chris Garland was supposed to assume some sort of figure head role, now that appears not to be true.  Again, it is interesting, but very conflicting.  My interest here is that the general population that may read our stuff is as completely informed as possible...that's all.  It is important to note that I am not making distinctions about what Ji says to you during training or in private, but it is the public persona that we can all identify with - which is often at odds with the Ji you say you know.


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

OK, if we as students of Hapkido do not have proprietary sources such as the small number of GM listed here then what do we have? A buddy collection that meets to pat each other on the back and say good job?  I believe we must have proprietary sources that guide us with correct technique - but if not what do you suggest?


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Kevin and Bruce-

You guys are freaking nuts. :uhyeah: 

This conversation isn't going anywhere. You have one side that sees the world in shades of gray. You have the other side that sees the world in black and white. You can't force someone who sees in black and white to accept the grays, just like you can't force someone who sees the grays to ignore the different shades and only accept black and white.

Interesting quote from Patrick McCarthy in the book Martial Arts Talk by Mark Wiley.

"Q: WHy do you believe contemporary practitioners of the arts feel a need to develop their own, "new" styles?

Aeople always find a need to reinterpret things in their own way, for varying reasons. However, I can assure everyone reading this that nothing new is ever created (relating to martial arts) that hasn't existed before with regard to applications of principles-there are just more improved ways to impart the same thing!

Q: You have been known to illustrate this point in a very real way during your seminars. WOuld you care to share with us your method for doing so?

A: In modern times we suffer from the proverbial "best style, best school, best teacher" phenomenon.

If I have eight or ten different styles there, I'l take a volunterr from each group and a guinea pig-usually the guy most clouded by narrow visioin. I blindfold him and tell him to prepare himself to withstand controlled impacts to the chest, the stomach, and a joint lock. I call one of the volunteers to strike, kick, and joint lock him. I then removed the blindfold from teh recipient and I ask him "what style punched you first? What style kicked you second? What style bent your joint third?"

Invariably, the answers are always the same: "I can't answer the question because I wasn't visually stimulated.""

Great quote, I believe. 

I don't care if Choi "invented" hapkido or someone else "invented" hapkido. I just care that hapkido, as taught by master, makes SENSE to me. I believe and agree with its theories and "mission statement". That is all that matters to me. 

Jeremy


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

"....OK, if we as students of Hapkido do not have proprietary sources such as the small number of GM listed here then what do we have? A buddy collection that meets to pat each other on the back and say good job? I believe we must have proprietary sources that guide us with correct technique - but if not what do you suggest?...." 

I will suggest and continue to suggest what I have always suggested--- the use of the traditional Kwan approach to passing these traditions along. The only value to proprietary information is to make sure that people get their rewards for managing it. Thats what it is. Proprietary information = Rewards. 

1.) Proprietary information does not allow for development. 

2.) Proprietary information does not allow for change.And in case people have lost sight of this the very strength of Korean Martial tradition has been adaptability and change. 

3.) What proprietary information does is assures the person who has authority over that information that they get their fair compensation. 

4.) It sounds like to me that what you are actually making an arguement for is to have bragging rights to the most authentic lineage so that you have a reasonable claim to having the most reasonable flow of money in your direction. 

Now I don't have a problem with this last point except that you must admit that such motives are more than enough to keep you from examioning what we are talking about in an objective way, yes? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy: 

Perhaps you have not been keeping up with current events, so you may not realize what you are looking at in this string. Please allow me to enlighten you. 

For the last two decades people have been arguing about Hapkido. Most of what they have focused on has been oral traditions and personalities. The reason that they debate these points is that its easier to do and no one can actually hold another accountable for simply having an opinion. 

If however, you begin at the start of this string you will notice some very telling patterns both in what is said and what has not been said. With the advent of the Internet we can almost discuss these things in real time. Furthermore the responses can be bumped up against each other in black&white. 

Now, there is an attitude that comes along with frustration at these sorts of strings, and the rejoinder to that frustration is "I don't care"  or "who cares". 
Fact of the matter is that people who stop caring about this side of the MA wind up being defrauded by people who come along and misrepresent things. 
When this happens you will read things like "Korean martial traditions died out a long time ago" or "Kumdo is just the Korean name for Kendo" or "if it weren't for Japan Korea would have no martial traditions". Part of the responsibility of training in KMA is taking responsibility to maintaining the integrity of the arts. Kevin has this take on the subject and I have mine and Todd has his and Michael has.... well, you get the picture. Where we get into trouble is when people STOP talking and into the vacuum comes a guy talking S*** and there is nobody to care that he is doing that. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Now, there is an attitude that comes along with frustration at these sorts of strings, and the rejoinder to that frustration is "I don't care"  or "who cares".
> Fact of the matter is that people who stop caring about this side of the MA wind up being defrauded by people who come along and misrepresent things. ...
> Part of the responsibility of training in KMA is taking responsibility to maintaining the integrity of the arts. Kevin has this take on the subject and I have mine and Todd has his and Michael has.... well, you get the picture. Where we get into trouble is when people STOP talking and into the vacuum comes a guy talking S*** and there is nobody to care that he is doing that. FWIW.



Hello Bruce,

Bravo!  Here, I will agree 100%!  It is when people stop talking when the BS starts to rise...I make no claims to greatness, but I will add my perspective based on the evidence others produce - we all should.

Jeremy, (don't take this personally - it is more a global statement) to not care about the martial art you study in all its facets, I would just say quit now while you are ahead.  A martial art (any of them) is more than ways of knocking out an opponent - it is a philosophy, mental discipline, physical discipline and a root to guide life.  To simply throw your hands up and say "I don't care" means you are either learning wrong or being taught wrong.  The best anaolgy I can come up with is when someone is asked if they have ever done a martial art and the answer is "yeah, Karate" - then asked "what kind" they say "the punching and kicking kind..." - they missed the whole point here I think.

Bruce, about the commercial aspect of proprietary information, I have never mentioned money, it is only a real issue to you.  I believe that strong lineage does mean that I can advertise better and grow a stronger school, but the frauds seem to raking it in a whole lot faster than me...

Funny thing is that the guys with strong lineage never seem to question about money...

I would also add from my perspective that the thought that proprietary information does not allow for growth and change is a stilted view - technique RARELY changes - application can always be adapted - but only if the correct technique is learned...so I see proprietary knowledge of technique as very important.


----------



## American HKD

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Hello Stuart,
> 
> Again, I'm not at all disagreeing with what he wants to do, that is totally his perogotive. I am again simply making an observation about what has been printed vs. this newer material.
> 
> Now, for my part, I will say that when the charasmatic leader of any system dies without leaving a single equally charismatic head, things in other styles have headed south very fast, with everyone claiming control of the mantle. Look at Wing Chun (or however you would like to romanize it) after the death of GM Yip Man.
> 
> Please don't misunderstand, I am not commenting on content of style, but the context of the statements that are made. Again, from the last published article, Chris Garland was supposed to assume some sort of figure head role, now that appears not to be true. Again, it is interesting, but very conflicting. My interest here is that the general population that may read our stuff is as completely informed as possible...that's all. It is important to note that I am not making distinctions about what Ji says to you during training or in private, but it is the public persona that we can all identify with - which is often at odds with the Ji you say you know.


Dear Kevin,

I understand what you mean and I don't know whats in Ji head in fact I dont talk about politics at all with him very much I don't feel it's my place but sometimes he will just make comments.

Most likely one well respected person or several people will try to start thier own Sin Moo Associations, like what happened when Ed Parker died or Yip Man and others.

Hopefully someone or maybe more than one person will emerge with the people skills and the technical skills to make it happen, if not it will be a mess.


----------



## greendragon

Sin Moo will be just fine... there are plenty of good guys that train very hard.. guys like Sean Bradley, Rick Nabors, Javier Agosto, Mike McCarty, Todd Deninger, Tony Pak, etc. etc... and when we get together we train hard and have fun... there is a brotherhood that is based on hardcore Hapkido with lots of sweat and respect. the best thing Doju Nim Ji could do is teach us Sin Moo and then push us out of the nest so to speak..he wants you to fly on your own... we have a good solid curriculum and plenty of knowledgable points of view.. and lots of guys who want to train hard without being the chief... what could be better than that.  I will say that over the years there has been some controversy between what is real and what is not..just know that from our end that is in contact with Ji there is NO successor and like I say that was told to us in May along with about 15 other people there.  The successor thing is really comical because everyone who has claimed to be a inheritor or sucessor so far are people who have only trained with Ji once and then wrote huge articles about the experience... hillarious. you guys have to understand that Doju Nim Ji never even looks at those magazines and has someone tell him who wrote what later,, he is totally unaware of all the junk out there flying around....the one person who has actually trained with Ji Han Jae the longest is GM Yung T Freda and he NEVER claims or acts like that in any way...as a matter of fact I just got word he moved to Latvia with his wife, he is a class act and VERY good in Hapkido.

                                                            Michael Tomlinson


----------



## glad2bhere

Well, then Kevin, if money or recognition or reward are niot a factor then I would start to call your reasoning strongly into question. 

If Choi taught a Japanese tradition, 

and 

Dojunim Lim states that he teaches a Japanese tradition

and you have strong feelings about having the source being as pure as can reasonably be expected,

then I am not sure why you are bothering with Hapkido as you are framing it.
Why not simply study DRAJJ and be done with it?  

The source of the material is non-specific in that Chois' background cannot be documented.
The current host of resources and personalities have all put their own spin on things so that Chois' tradition is no longer available. What exactly is it that you are championing? It can't be Chois' tradition because nobody is sure what that is. It was never documented in its entirety and nobody can prove what it was that he learned.His material bumped up against Jangs or Takedas' is not the same, and neither does it resemble Kondos'.  
Its can't be Korean martial arts because you and Todd and even Dojunim Lim agree that the material being taught is Japanese. 
If You are saying that you are not representing Chois' material as proprietary and doing that for some sort of recognition or gain what is it you are wanting to declare? So we have a person, now deceased, who learned "something", taught "something" and then died. His heirs are all teaching their own take on whatever it was that THEY think was what they learned and what they want to teach. What exactly are you positing?  

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

Well let's see, I run a commercial school, so yes, I need to get paid for that.  I need to eat, and since I teach Hapkido for a living, I need money for that purpose...so yes, i guess I need money, but you make all this sound like a demonic enterprise - sorry if past experiences have jaded you, but getting paid a reasonable sum for training someone I think is quite normal.

Grandmaster Lim does not refer to himself as Dojunim, never has.

The recognition I seek is personal, when I tell someone that I teach Hapkido, I want to know in my heart that what I am teaching is as authentic as I can make it.  Now, I am certainly of the belief that Choi spent 30+ years in Japan and came back with a huge martial repetoire, this is without question.  He never studied in Korea, SO what he taught was Japanese in its origin.  Maybe you ought to except the fact that what you have been taught is Japanese, not ancient Korean, not mystical Chinese.  Now is it DRAJJ, no, not the version you see today.  I accept Choi's story, which means he was with Takeda longer than anyone - hence it is going to be different given the teaching style and lifestyle of Takeda.

Who says Choi's tradition is no longer available?  Sorry, wrong again.  Grandmaster Lim carries on the Choi tradition.  I mean, you just spent 12 days with Kim, Yun Sang who also claims to teach the Choi tradition - is he also not telling the truth?  How do you figure that Choi's tradition is not documented - maybe in your training experience, not mine.

How do you invoke Jang, Im Mok or Takeda's material - have you seen either? Doubt it seriously. Even the modern DRAJJ admit they do not know all of Takeda's material - I suspect Choi learned more than current DRAJJ know today.

You are the ONLY person that is concerned with making Hapkido more Korean than it is - more than the Koreans do I feel.  You seek to link martial traditions from China and Korea but can document no persons or arts that create a link.  You want to link Chin Na somehow, well its only a little older than Hapkido, never spread to Korea in any meaningful way, and what I have seen of it is only a crude version of what I have been taught in Hapkido.

Bruce, how did Choi know who Takeda was?  Because he was there.  You struggle so hard to reconsile your own training experiences where you were not told the truth, I'm sorry for that, but the reach to create Chin Na, Mantis, and Kwon Bup links from 500 year old books to the art that was taught by Choi is futile.

Everyone you have EVER trained with traces back to Choi - no one else.  Now if I try to get as close to the source as possible through the longest training students of Choi to ensure that I am teaching the tradition I claim where is the harm there - just giving folks value for money.  You might be able to bluster your way past many with long posts and emotional calls for "train in DRAJJ", but I've seen this response for years - it comes from the people who unfortunately are really insecure with their training and ability, have been taken advantage of financially and lied to about the lineage of their art and their instructors.  To this, I can only be sad and hope they find a way that satisfies them.

Bruce, all I have ever said is simple: Dojunim Choi taught an art that became known BY HIM as Hapkido (with all deference to Ji's involvement with the name).  He learned this art in Japan, he did no training in Korea. He taught what he learned to his students, some stayed longer (and learned more than others).  Lots of offshoots started, with many names and a variety of additions.  Good for them.  I have always been interested in the original teachings - which the founders of the offshoots got.  That is what I know I am teaching now.  I don't care what "country of origin" or "country of benefit" Hapkido comes from.  Choi was Korean, taught in Korea, mostly to Koreans, hence, Hapkido, Korean art of Self-defense.

Get my reasoning? Quite simple really.


----------



## SmellyMonkey

iron_ox said:
			
		

> Jeremy, (don't take this personally - it is more a global statement) to not care about the martial art you study in all its facets, I would just say quit now while you are ahead. A martial art (any of them) is more than ways of knocking out an opponent - it is a philosophy, mental discipline, physical discipline and a root to guide life. To simply throw your hands up and say "I don't care" means you are either learning wrong or being taught wrong. The best anaolgy I can come up with is when someone is asked if they have ever done a martial art and the answer is "yeah, Karate" - then asked "what kind" they say "the punching and kicking kind..." - they missed the whole point here I think.


What "I don't care" about is who exactly founded the art.  Which governing body has the write to say what is and what is not hapkido.  What happens if Joe Schmo down the street opens a "hapkido" school as a 1st dan and doesn't have a clue how to do basic techniques. And the other politics that go with the art.

These things are not hapkido to me.  I find them interesting, but I don't CARE about them.

What is hapkido to me?

It is a "do" or "way" art.  I believe that if I continue to train and learn and work hard, I will fulfill my potential.  Not just with the martial art, but with life.

It is an art, not a sport.  I can learn very effective fighting techniques that will be useful in a street fight.  I can use hapkido to control an drunk friend, to restrain a mentally unstable (but mostly harmless) person on the train who is hitting someone with an umbrella, or to break the neck of someone who intends to kill or maim me.

It is spiritual.  Behind all the "motions" is a philosophy of ki and how to use your ki.  This isn't something I as a westerner am used to, but something that amazes me every day.

And hapkido is huge.  I can learn about punchs, ridge hands, kicks, throws, ground techniques, wrist locks, arm bars, weapons...  I can spend my life learning and never learn everything there is to learn.

Hapkido is my art.  I think about it all day at work.  I train as often as I can with work and family.  I read books that are related in some way to hapkido or other martial arts.  I lift weights specifically to gain a higher or stronger kick.  I wake up in the mornings to stretch.

And in another ten years or so I hope to open a school of my own.  I am saving enough money so I don't have to worry about the school being anymore than a break-even operation.  

You say that you weren't directing the comment specifically at me.  Yet, in some way, you have judged me.

I may not care about the same things you do.  I may not have trained as long as you have.  I may not agree with all of your ideas.  But I deserve to call hapkido my art.  And I don't care what other people say about that.

Respectfully,

Jeremy


----------



## SmellyMonkey

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Jeremy:
> 
> 
> For the last two decades people have been arguing about Hapkido. Most of what they have focused on has been oral traditions and personalities. The reason that they debate these points is that its easier to do and no one can actually hold another accountable for simply having an opinion.
> 
> If however, you begin at the start of this string you will notice some very telling patterns both in what is said and what has not been said. With the advent of the Internet we can almost discuss these things in real time. Furthermore the responses can be bumped up against each other in black&white. ".


I've tried point to a born-again Christian the logical flaws of his belief that the bible is the word of God. You know what? I didn't get anywhere. He got pissed off and I got pissed off. 

I've said this before. People build a belief system with martial arts like others build a belief system with religion. You can't fight a belief system like this. So why try?



> Now, there is an attitude that comes along with frustration at these sorts of strings, and the rejoinder to that frustration is "I don't care" or "who cares".
> Fact of the matter is that people who stop caring about this side of the MA wind up being defrauded by people who come along and misrepresent things.
> When this happens you will read things like "Korean martial traditions died out a long time ago" or "Kumdo is just the Korean name for Kendo" or "if it weren't for Japan Korea would have no martial traditions".


Until martial arts governing bodies are given "trademark" protection (God help us!) over the use of an art's name, this can't be stopped. Besides, people have been defrauded (relating to martial arts) for thousands of years.

I've heard Koreans say that martial arts first past on to Japan through Korea. So, therefore DARJJ is actually a KOREAN martial art. Probably someone in China would argue that arts first past to Korea through China, so DARJJ is actually a Chinese martial art. And so on. 

Off to class I go to learn whatever the hell is I am learning. I just know that it ROCKS 

Jeremy


----------



## greendragon

Very well said Jeremy.....knowing is in the practice...
                                  Michael Tomlinson


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Jeremy,

Sorry if you felt judged, but many of the issues you don't care about in my opinion are central to the study of any martial art.  Bruce and I may have conflicting opinions about who founded the art of Hapkido - but it keeps discussion and awareness at the forefront (a discussion you "judged" to be going nowhere...) of the public.  I do care if some schmuck opens a "Hapkido" school and doesn't have a clue what they are doing - I've been lucky enough to shut a few down in the last 25 years.  I do care about bogus organizations that hand out phony rank and try to dictate policy - you missed the last year of turmoil for many here...

Of course Hapkido is in the training, training is the constant, but we can't fully discuss training in writing - so we often discuss "political" issues.  How do we bear witness to a BS artist trying to rip off the public? Politics.  Have we seen some in the last year, yep, and some of the folks on this board helped to bring some of these issues to light.

I think that these types of discussion safeguard the group that "just wants to train" and thinks they do so in a vacuum.  The other thngs you mention are very positive, philosophy etc, but if you "don't care" about something so much around people that do, best to sit listen and see if they are saying anything you might care about oneday.  It is great you want to open a dojang, but what if the guy in the space next door does the same thing, and you know he is just a "Joe Schmo" with a first Dan and no talent - you will have to have better credentials, as well as better technique - because if he is flashier than you, you might be training alone...

I can say without a doubt that most of the guys here, even in heated exchanges (like between Bruce and myself) are done with the greatest respect - we have a single goal in mind, to grow.  Maybe I do have my mind set on certain issues, so what, as long as I am willing to talk them out, I may learn as well.  I have learned from both Stuart and Bruce, as examples, in areas that I might not have explored except to listen to what they had to say - even if they had to pin me against the cyberspace wall...

Again, Jeremy, sorry if you felt judged, didn't set out to hurt feelings...


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Wow!  Much has been going on since I have been away!  

Sorry it has taken so long but here are the 10 original Hapkido kicks as taught by Founder Choi, Yong Sool:

* *Kicking the lower ankle*. - Ha dan pal chagi
** Kicking the groin 1*. - Nang shim chagi
** Kicking the groin 2*.  - Nang shim chagi
** Kicking the knee joint with the side foot knife* - Yop chagi
** Kicking the knee joint with the front foot knife*. - Cutting kick
** Kicking the femoral part downward*. - Inside to outside heel kick
** Winding the spine and kicking*. - Heel to back of leg or spine
** Spinning and kicking the leg joint*. - Spin back or side kick to knee
** Kicking the chin*. - Up chagi
** Kicking backward with the rear foot*. - Middle knuckle, back side kick

The interesting thing about these kicks is that they are no nonsense fighting kicks unlike many of the flashy kicks seen in some styles of Hapkido.

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

" Now, I am certainly of the belief that Choi spent 30+ years in Japan and came back with a huge martial repetoire, this is without question. He never studied in Korea, SO what he taught was Japanese in its origin. Maybe you ought to except the fact that what you have been taught is Japanese, not ancient Korean, not mystical Chinese. Now is it DRAJJ, no, not the version you see today. I accept Choi's story, which means he was with Takeda longer than anyone - hence it is going to be different given the teaching style and lifestyle of Takeda....." 

First off, I don't have a problem with Choi having learned a Japanese tradition because I view it only as one more influence ON Korean MA and not necessarily a KMA in and of itself. Where I get confused is when people want to take Chois' material and make it into a Korean tradition, or at least not a Japanese tradition or somehow separate from both. 

"Who says Choi's tradition is no longer available? Sorry, wrong again. Grandmaster Lim carries on the Choi tradition. I mean, you just spent 12 days with Kim, Yun Sang who also claims to teach the Choi tradition - is he also not telling the truth? How do you figure that Choi's tradition is not documented - maybe in your training experience, not mine." 

Thats not accurate. The single consistent point every single student of Choi has put forward is that THEY TEACH WHAT CHOI TAUGHT THEM and EVERY SINGLE TRADITION IS DIFFERENT. We simply do not know what Choi taught except that he seems to have taught different things to different people at different times. Your report is that Lim told you that he learned higher techniques which is where his curriculum begins. Myung and Ji apparently learned more fundamental material and thats where THEIR teaching begins. They did not continue into the higher material and Lim does not go into the lower material. So unless someone learns BOTH levels they cannot say that they are learning all of Chois tradition and even THEN we do not know if one has the entire corpus of Chois tradition. Even you said, "Even the modern DRAJJ admit they do not know all of Takeda's material - I suspect Choi learned more than current DRAJJ know today." You "suspect" but you don't really know and no one evwer will now that he is dead. 

"You are the ONLY person that is concerned with making Hapkido more Korean than it is - more than the Koreans do I feel. You seek to link martial traditions from China and Korea but can document no persons or arts that create a link. You want to link Chin Na somehow, well its only a little older than Hapkido, never spread to Korea in any meaningful way, and what I have seen of it is only a crude version of what I have been taught in Hapkido....." 

Wrong again. All I want to do is make sure that Hapkido is kept appropriately framed in the larger context of Korean martial traditions. Hapkido is not the sum of all traditions and is, in and of itself not a Korean tradition. It is a strong influence ON Korean traditions and needs to be recognized, but so do all of the other influences and historical pieces. You don't want to look at other pieces of Korean martial tradition because there is no hard-and-fast place for you to identify for yourself. Like it or not this is as it should be as Korean martial tradition is not about you or Todd or Me or Choi. Its about traditions that need to be studied and polished and reflected on. Some of that involves mat work and some of it involves 500 y/o books. 

"Everyone you have EVER trained with traces back to Choi - no one else. Now if I try to get as close to the source as possible through the longest training students of Choi to ensure that I am teaching the tradition I claim where is the harm there - just giving folks value for money. You might be able to bluster your way past many with long posts and emotional calls for "train in DRAJJ", but I've seen this response for years - it comes from the people who unfortunately are really insecure with their training and ability, have been taken advantage of financially and lied to about the lineage of their art and their instructors. To this, I can only be sad and hope they find a way that satisfies them....." 

I think you are reaching now.  You can't know everyone I have trained with nor can you know the amount of study I have done regarding Korean martial science or Korean culture. The harm in trumpeting Choi with such emotion is that all it does is make such people large fish in small ponds. The Korean traditions are a huge pond in which any of us are small fish. In addition I don't think that you see that taking the position that you have makes you very similar to Michael who champions Ji, or Carsten who champions Lee, or Mike who supports Pelligrini. Lim just happens to be YOUR favorite, but the larger question of Korean traditions is being ignored.

".....Bruce, all I have ever said is simple: Dojunim Choi taught an art that became known BY HIM as Hapkido (with all deference to Ji's involvement with the name). He learned this art in Japan, he did no training in Korea. He taught what he learned to his students, some stayed longer (and learned more than others). Lots of offshoots started, with many names and a variety of additions. Good for them. I have always been interested in the original teachings - which the founders of the offshoots got. That is what I know I am teaching now. I don't care what "country of origin" or "country of benefit" Hapkido comes from. Choi was Korean, taught in Korea, mostly to Koreans, hence, Hapkido, Korean art of Self-defense......" 

Thats fine, as long as you are aware that you are teaching a non-Korean tradition within the context of Korean culture and thats what you choose to do. For my part, the Hapkido arts have become much larger than Chois' original material including a spectrum of kicking and weapons that Choi may not have envisioned originally. I respect his memory for his many kindnesses to my teachers, and in turn I respect my teachers for their many kindnesses to me. The study of Hapkido, however, is much broader than the discrete piece you have carved out for yourself. Scarey, but true. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Michael: 

".....Very well said Jeremy.....knowing is in the practice..." 

I have heard this position presented by you a few times and I think that you may be misrepresenting an important piece here. 

Yes, its true that a large part of Hapkido arts is experiential. An even LARGER part is research and investigation. You may have overlooked that when someone gives you information the stated part may well be "practice this and practice often."  The un-stated part is "use this as a springboard for finding a deeper understanding". Kwang Sik Myung pressed this point for me and the kwan to which I belong has it as one of the Four Pillars of its mission. For me that means taking 12,000 mile trips to Korea or spending hours in the library or many posts on nets like this. 

Now if you are not interested in doing the sort of work I do, thats fine. Nobody says you have to. All I am saying is that I think you present a needlessly superficial approach as the single best manner of Hapkido practice and I don't think that is accurate, I also don't think that the Hapkido community is well-served by it.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

I think this thread has delved into the human "who's who" history of hapkido pretty well, with many individual viewpoints expressed.

Is there a way we can move on to the philisophy of the art?  The core tenants and theories of combat and personal growth that make hapkido different from other arts?

I am thinking specifically of the following subjects:

1.  The water theory

2.  The ki theory-how to develop and use ki in your techniques

3.  The circle theory

4.  Warrior honor and how it relates to hapkido specifically.


I'd love to hear other's thoughts on these topics.  

Thanks,
Jeremy


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Bruce, again, simply, where is the connection between what was taught by Choi (or Ji) and ANY previous "Korean" martial tradition.  I don't understand how you can equate any type of validity to traditions that are only written in books - if their are no living adherants to a tradition, then that tradition died - and probably for a good cause...

On the subject of propriety, although I have never said I wanted that propriety, I will reflect on that need.  Searching the web yesterday, I stumbled quite by accident on a "hapkido" site.  The "dojoonim" wears a belt with four dan stripes, and by his own bio has little or no discernable Hapkido (Choi, Ji, or otherwise) in his background.  He calims "dojoo" rank in his own "hapkido" style.  Yet, this year, he hosted a seminar with a Hapkido practioner from South-East Asia (KHF related), who promply gave him rank after said seminar.  I am willing to bet that the KHF or the World Kido will be the next stop for this guy and watch as he becomes a "recognized" founder of style. 

When Hapkido is turned into a "generic" term for any KMA with a throw in it(or even not a KMA), we invite the frauds and the public is duped.  So, discussions like this may not solve the issue of propriety, or who is more correct in history, but they might serve as a wake up call for an average guy looking to examine what Hapkido is and is not.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

You are not going to see the connection because quite simply you don't WANT to see the connection. Here are some connections you don't want to see. 

As a Korean art, Hapkido is bound by the O-Gae which was reported originated in the 6th century. 

As a Korean art, Hapkido is subsumed under Korean martial tradition which includes the Chinese influences of the Ming dynasty as reflected through General Qi Ji-huangs manual and later through the Mu Yei To Bo Tong Ji. And by the way these traditions are only found in books for people who only want them to stay in books. There are plenty of people who train in these traditions both in Korea and in China. It only serves your particular argument to consider these things dead. That way you are not required to know anything about them or how they relate to what you do. 

As a Korean art, Hapkido is as valid in the use of weapons as well as without the use of weapons. 

As a Korean art Hapkido is on a par with Chin Na, Ssierum, archery and a host of other practices. You can't demonstrate a clear clean intersect between Choi and Japan but you want me to demonstrate a clear clean intersect between China and Korea. I have, and mine is documented. All you have are oral traditions and the suggestion of similarity. Why the double standard?  

The way you would have it, Hapkido would be "just Korean enough" to absolve you from being beholden to Japanese authority descending from Takeda, but not so Korean that you would be responsible for its place in the hierarchy of Korean material. You don't get it both ways. Either accept that you are a Korean art and the responsibilities that go with it, or accept that you are a Japanese art and go study in Japan as Lim did. I suggest you quit deluding yourself that there is some sort of authentic "middle-ground" that exists without benefit of documents and solely on the basis of the intentions of somebodys' marketing scheme.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy: 

".......I am thinking specifically of the following subjects:

1. The water theory

2. The ki theory-how to develop and use ki in your techniques

3. The circle theory

4. Warrior honor and how it relates to hapkido specifically......" 

Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido identifies that everything we do whether with a weapon or without a weapon is bound by the Three Principles. 

1.) The Water Principle: A practitioner learns to deal with what is presented to him rather than trying to make a particular thing happen. 

2.) Point and Circle Principle: A practitioner learns the everything is a cycle and that the ability to "re-cycle" from one thing to another is a key part of dealing with life on lifes' terms. 

3.) Economy of Energy: A practitioner learns to never work harder than his partner in an encounter. 

As far as "ki" goes I am afraid we just don't get that "cosmic".  I don't know what "Ki" is and nobody is able to explain it to me so I can't explain it to others. One thing I will say is that the more consistently I train the more skilled I become. If thats "ki" so be it. 

I could go on and on  and on about codes and traditions and ethics in Hapkido but I think THAT would be where your comments about religion might come into play. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> As a Korean art, Hapkido is bound by the O-Gae which was reported originated in the 6th century.
> 
> As a Korean art, Hapkido is subsumed under Korean martial tradition which includes the Chinese influences of the Ming dynasty as reflected through General Qi Ji-huangs manual and later through the Mu Yei To Bo Tong Ji.
> 
> As a Korean art, Hapkido is as valid in the use of weapons as well as without the use of weapons.
> 
> As a Korean art Hapkido is on a par with Chin Na, Ssierum, archery and a host of other practices.
> 
> The way you would have it, Hapkido would be "just Korean enough" to absolve you from being beholden to Japanese authority descending from Takeda, but not so Korean that you would be responsible for its place in the hierarchy of Korean material. You don't get it both ways. Either accept that you are a Korean art and the responsibilities that go with it, or accept that you are a Japanese art and go study in Japan. I suggest you quit deluding yourself that there is some sort of authentic "middle-ground" that exists without benefit of documents and solely on the basis of the intentions of somebodys' marketing scheme.  FWIW.




So, in other words you cannot show a connection to a living art...


----------



## iron_ox

SmellyMonkey said:
			
		

> 4.  Warrior honor and how it relates to hapkido specifically.



Hello all, 

This is an interesting issue.  A bit general, but this is sometimes how I approach this.  In this day and age, we are not "warriors" - we don't need to be, so often this type of warrior code is replaced by a "code of ethics" or "code of moral living" if you will.  I see Hapkido as a combat art, and a "code of ethics" is something I expect that most people get at home - I can try to lead by example, but know I'm flawed, but basically I have always felt that if someone did not get a strong ethical code at home, I'm certainly not going to be able to cram one down their throat during a wrist lock.  These people generally expose their lack of ethical character and are dismissed as students.  My experience.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

".....So, in other words you cannot show a connection to a living art..." 

I just did. You simply choose not to recognize it as a connection. You want to be a Korean art but outside of the auspices of Korean culture. Ergo: Looks like you will be doing your follow-up learning in Japan. 

"......The way you would have it, Hapkido would be "just Korean enough" to absolve you from being beholden to Japanese authority descending from Takeda, but not so Korean that you would be responsible for its place in the hierarchy of Korean material. You don't get it both ways. Either accept that you are a Korean art and the responsibilities that go with it, or accept that you are a Japanese art and go study in Japan. I suggest you quit deluding yourself that there is some sort of authentic "middle-ground" that exists without benefit of documents and solely on the basis of the intentions of somebodys' marketing scheme. FWIW. "


Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

There is a difference about speaking about religion/strong personal beliefs and attempting to change a person's beliefs.  

My master focuses on ki quite a bit.  It is used to explain why we keep our ki fingers extended during most grappling techniques.  Why you must relax your limbs if you wish to strike quickly.  We are even begining to learn how the rotation of a technique/stike will cause you either to take ki away from or give ki to your attacker.

I'd say I spend a majorty of my training time (70-80%) focusing on what I am doing with my ki.  When I started hapkido, I was very stiff.  I kept my ki activiated thoughout my whole body when I should have only activiated the ki in the limb that is grabbing or striking.  Now I am learning how to only put my ki in two fingers, or my wrist, or two knuckles for a punch.  It causes me to be faster and stronger.

Regards to the circle theory, we believe that circular motion is seen everywhere in nature.  All human motion is circular.  Even a straight punch involves using circular motion from the hips and shoulder.  When examining a technique, we look to see where the circular motion is occuring.  And we try to add strength to the circular component.  As we learn more, we learn to make the circles smaller-or tighter.  This adds speed and strength.

The water therory is still not completly clear to me.  I'd love to hear more people's ideas on this one.

Thanks,
Jeremy


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy: 

"......My master focuses on ki quite a bit. It is used to explain why we keep our ki fingers extended during most grappling techniques. Why you must relax your limbs if you wish to strike quickly. We are even begining to learn how the rotation of a technique/stike will cause you either to take ki away from or give ki to your attacker......" 

Before humanity understood the existence of the neuro-muscular network there were all kinds of exotic ways of explaining why our body does what it does. Nothing wrong with that. People used to think all kinds of things to explain what they couldn't otherwise understand. Some of these things (accupuncture?) still don't get fully explained in terms of modern science. With my recent experience in Korea  have a new-found respect for the very subtle parts of Hapkido execution. There is nothing particularly cosmic about it. Just good solid training done often. For my part I am always comforted to find how closely manipulation of "Ki" goes hand in hand with re-direction, misalignment, unbalancing and untiming. I don't deny the existence of Ki, I just can't see making a Wagnerian Opera out of it. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Before humanity understood the existence of the neuro-muscular network there were all kinds of exotic ways of explaining why our body does what it does. Nothing wrong with that. People used to think all kinds of things to explain what they couldn't otherwise understand. Some of these things (accupuncture?) still don't get fully explained in terms of modern science. With my recent experience in Korea have a new-found respect for the very subtle parts of Hapkido execution. There is nothing particularly cosmic about it. Just good solid training done often. For my part I am always comforted to find how closely manipulation of "Ki" goes hand in hand with re-direction, misalignment, unbalancing and untiming.


Ki means different things to different people. I agree, there may be more western science-based ways to describe some aspects of ki. But like you said, there are things about ki science cannot describe. Like why accupuncture works.

Some people believe it more cosmic than others. I think it can pretty cosmic myself, and I enjoy that aspect. I believe that once I can master my own ki, I can master how to minipulate other's ki. Once I can master these aspects of ki, I can deserve to label myself a hapkido master. But I don't think all people have to view ki as I do.

BUT...I don't think we can take the "ki" out of hap"ki"do. We still need to talk about ki and why it is important. Even if you want to westernize "ki".

I've said before that everyone is allowed their own interpretations of hapkido. Hapkido is different for everyone. 

But someone is not a hapkidoist if they don't strive to understand the core philisophies of the art. These philiposiphies are what makes hapkido different then jiu jits, kung fu, etc.

Jeremy


----------



## iron_ox

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I just did. You simply choose not to recognize it as a connection. You want to be a Korean art but outside of the auspices of Korean culture. Ergo: Looks like you will be doing your follow-up learning in Japan.



Hello Bruce, 

Again, what? You try to put a spin on things that are not there.  I'm happy with the original Choi traditions, that's all I've EVER trained in.  I see myself reponsible for those traditions, not some intangible "KMA" force you want to spook up here.  I think you figure that if you train from a 500 year old book of dead traditions, put on a more Korean costume for training, and throw out the name Ssieurm that makes what you do more Korean than what I do?  You have consistanly NEVER been able to prove any connections to Choi before Choi.  

I have no argument that there are other KMA out there, many probably older than Hapkido - although you seemingly cannot pull a single LIVING tradition out the the multitude of KMA that you are claiming.

You cannot accept that what you have been taught in the art of Hapkido is Japanese in origin (although you seem to be the only one who cares so much about this) - now, maybe Prince Sejin did take martial tradition to Japan from Korea, that I will buy, but the further development of what he took was done in Japan - simple.

I am interested in the Choi tradition, it is fascinating to me how it relates to the Ji traditon and other newer martial styles, all going back to Choi in some way.  That's all.  If you feel a greater responsibility to create connections, bounce over to Beijing for the Chinese connection, well maybe Hong Kong, but don't be disappointed when the well is dry...

Until you can substanciate any of these claims, I am much more inclined to follow Jeremy's line of discussion.  Not that I'm bored, but the I told you it was so and therefore it is, is just cyber ping pong...

Bruce, you want us all to see another side of the coin, for ME that will be through a living tradition, not a book or "comparitive study" where lots of arts have throws.

As always, with respect.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

Turnabout is fair play. Apparently you figure if you keep saying "choi" enough it will erase an entire constellation of Korean traditions of which Chois' material is only one and a relative newcomer with weak bonafides at that. Sure its the one you are interested in. Good for you. But it is not the only one. Nor have you addressed the manner in which you carefully walk the line between not following a Japanese authority or a Korean authority. 

Do you practice a Korean tradition or not? Yes or No 

Do you practice a Japanese tradition yes or no?

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy: 

"......I've said before that everyone is allowed their own interpretations of hapkido. Hapkido is different for everyone...." 

I think thats a crock, Jeremy. I think thats a load of guff that people have been selling each other so that no one holds another person too accountable for whip-stitching together whatever they want and calling it whatever they want to. You have people practicing all sorts of outlandish weapons including nunchukas and calling what they do "Korean Martial Arts". Is this why people like KMA, because they can do whatever they feel like doing and noone will complain? Over here in the States people will talk about this opinion or that personality and its all judgments. But let somebody step in and start asking for proof of this and that and suddenly conversation sorta dries up. My sense is that folks have gotten accustomed to maintaining a certain level of "wiggleroom" in what they say and do and statements like yours seem to be the gas that keep that trolley running.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Turnabout is fair play. Apparently you figure if you keep saying "choi" enough it will erase an entire constellation of Korean traditions of which Chois' material is only one and a relative newcomer with weak bonafides at that. Sure its the one you are interested in. Good for you. But it is not the only one. Nor have you addressed the manner in which you carefully walk the line between not following a Japanese authority or a Korean authority. 

Do you practice a Korean tradition or not? Yes or No ?

Do you practice a Japanese tradition yes or no?

I think you have some good points but you still have not given proof of any credible 500 year old KMA that have survived the ages!!!!  There is a group that has tried to use the MYDTJ and demonstrate it but this was done well after the MYDTJ was long since dead!  I have talked with GM Lim about Hapkidos origins and he always says that through the natural flow of things Mudo traveled through China into Korea then into Japan.  DJN Choi was Korean, He studied in Japan then went back to Korea and taught his interpertation of an outstanding Mudoin who was his teacher!  Korea has its own unique culture that has been heavily influenced by other cultures through wars and conflict.  It is only natural that Koreans would take the strong points of a culture and make it their own!!!!!    Why is this concept so hard for you:  Bruce  :whip:  Please don't take offense Bruce but do you see the problem with your resoning?

We all have different things that we seek from our training.  We just need to promote the groups or kwans that are REAL.  Lets not fight and argue about weather the MYDTJ or the kwan system is in order with what Bruce thinks is correct!

SOX JUST WON THE SERIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Barrie

Dear Todd,

Thanks for the kick list. Both DJN Kim and GM Lim were taught by DJN Choi but they have different numbers of kicks, very similar, said to have been  taught to them. Do you have any reason for the difference? For example did GM Lim modify or drop out some kicks that may have been taught originally? Any ideas.

Thanks for the news about the Red Sox, about time eh?

Regards,

Barrie


----------



## howard

Master Todd Miller said:
			
		

> SOX JUST WON THE SERIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> www.millersmudo.com


well, there's one thing everybody ought to be able to agree on (lol).


----------



## SmellyMonkey

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Jeremy:
> 
> "......I've said before that everyone is allowed their own interpretations of hapkido. Hapkido is different for everyone...."
> 
> I think thats a crock, Jeremy. I think thats a load of guff that people have been selling each other so that no one holds another person too accountable for whip-stitching together whatever they want and calling it whatever they want to. You have people practicing all sorts of outlandish weapons including nunchukas and calling what they do "Korean Martial Arts". Is this why people like KMA, because they can do whatever they feel like doing and noone will complain? Over here in the States people will talk about this opinion or that personality and its all judgments. But let somebody step in and start asking for proof of this and that and suddenly conversation sorta dries up. My sense is that folks have gotten accustomed to maintaining a certain level of "wiggleroom" in what they say and do and statements like yours seem to be the gas that keep that trolley running. FWIW.
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


Bruce (or Kevin, or anyone else, if you wish to answer), if you had 100% power over the world-wide management of hapkido: 

1.  Then what is the "correct" definition of hapkido?

2.  What strikes are and are not hapkido?  What kicks?  What throws?  What joint locks?  

3.  Is hapkido to remain a  static art, or does it evolve? If it evolves, who has the right to evolve the art?

4. Which weapons should be allowed and should not be allowed to be called hapkido weapons?


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Here is my attempt- 


*1. Then what is the "correct" definition of hapkido?*

Hapkido is an art that attempts to balance self defense strategies and techniques with spiritual growth.  Depending on your instructor, it can be balanced more towards self defense techniques OR spiritual growth.  But hapkido requires both parts.

Hapkido is not just defensive or offensive.  It is both.

A hapkidoist must subscribe to the following theories:

a.  The water theory.  Water always flows to the lowest point.  If a hard obstruction is placed in the path, water will flow around the obstruction.  If a soft obstruction is placed in the path, water will flow through the obstruction.  Therefore, do not fight a grappler with grappling.  Do not fight a striker with striking.  

b.  The circle theory.  Circular motion is seen everywhere in nature. All human motion is circular. Even a straight punch involves using circular motion from the hips and shoulder. When examining a technique, we look to see where the circular motion is occuring. And we try to add strength to the circular component. As we learn more, we learn to make the circles smaller-or tighter. This adds speed and strength.  

Circular motion is also more difficult for the eye to see compared to a straight motion.  A jab is easier to avoid and block then a ridge hand or knife hand strike. 

c.  The development and use of ki.  In hapkido, we meditate and do breathing exercises to develop the ki.  When striking, we try to move the ki from the tan tian to the striking point on the striking limb.  We try to focus the ki to attack the weakest point of our opponent (see also water theory). 

You cannot focus your ki on another if you are not in control of balance.  Therefore, you must always try to control your AND your attackers balance during a fight. 



*2. What strikes are and are not hapkido? What kicks? What throws? What joint locks?* 

 So long as they meet the theories in answer 1., any are acceptable.

*3. Is hapkido to remain a static art, or does it evolve? If it evolves, who has the right to evolve the art?*

So long as any changes add to and meet the theories in answer 1., the changes are acceptable.

*4. Which weapons should be allowed and should not be allowed to be called hapkido weapons?*

As long as the weapons are used in a manner that meets the theories in answer 1, any are acceptable.


----------



## Disco

SM, right to the point, I like that. I've shy'd away from most of this thread because in all honesty - my confusion level was somewhat pegged. But now here you present 4 open questions that I'll take a stab at.

1. Then what is the "correct" definition of hapkido?

    I'm affraid that nobody really knows. There's to many venues

2. What strikes are and are not hapkido? What kicks? What throws? What joint locks? 

    Again, who's to say. Choi, according to what was listed a few posts back, only taught about 8 or 10. Other's that came after him added more. Is that unto itself bad. Yes and No.... If the kicks are practical for combat then yes. If their for show and have limited - if any practical value, then no. Just my opinion. For me, any practical strike is a good strike. As for throws, I think they kind of weed themselves out - again the practical value, so most styles tend to agree on throws. Joint locks are another item. Depends if you want to do a lot of ground work. To me groundwork should be minimum, so therefor the number of joint locks will be restricted to wrists and elbows, which by their nature have only so many applications. Again, for me the practical application and assessment has to be there.

3. Is hapkido to remain a static art, or does it evolve? If it evolves, who has the right to evolve the art?

    Evolution should be present in every art. The simplist example would be dealing with weapons. When the gun was invented, the arts being used at the time must have adapted to this new threat.

4. Which weapons should be allowed and should not be allowed to be called hapkido weapons?

    That's kind of like dealers choice in a way. In my opinion, weapons training is introduced by some just to seperate themselves from other's. The weapon(s) they may choose to teach has no real businees being taught with Hapkido. My reasoning - Weapons that can assist with the mainstay of what hapkido does - joint locks / throws are an outreach of Hapkido training. The cane (hooked) is considered by many the weapon most associated with Hapkido. It does just what it's intended to do. A stick / baton can be used in the same manner. Any weapon that must be forced to try to accomplish the like is not really a weapon of choice and should be discarded imo.

Hope this was of some assistance...... :asian:


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Thanks for the kick list. Both DJN Kim and GM Lim were taught by DJN Choi but they have different numbers of kicks, very similar, said to have been taught to them. Do you have any reason for the difference? For example did GM Lim modify or drop out some kicks that may have been taught originally? Any ideas.


It sounds like GM Kim has added a few to the original 10 kicks.  This could be that he used the same kick on different targets.  

Does GM Kim do toe spear kick?

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Folks: 

For the moment-- let us all agree that Hapkido is a Korean art and put the Japanese to one side regardless of who is teaching what, 'kay? 

If you accept that premise than it follows that Hapkido, whatever its curriculum, is bound together by Korean culture, and is an integral part of Korean martial science along with all of the other arts, practices and activties. I say this because unless we start identifying those points that we have in common this is not going to go anywhere. 

If people can agree with the first point I suggest that a follow-up is that the Hapkido arts are either 
a.) a Mu-Do or martial system in which the basic principles apply whether one uses a weapon or not

or 

b.) is some distinct art which can be identified as adhering to a select group of principles in its execution, application and deportment.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd: 

".....Bruce  Please don't take offense Bruce but do you see the problem with your reasoning?...." 

What I see, Todd, is that you and Kevin and a number of other practitioners want reality to conform to a very specific view of both Korean culture and Korean history. You state that it is natural that the Koreans would want to make something their own, and then call "dead" anything but what YOU happen to be doing. How very convenient for you. 

Apparently if every other aspect of Korean martial science is "dead" including the literature, the practice and the research then the only thing that is authentic is what YOU happen to be doing. How very politically and commercially convenient. 

I can easily imagine that you do not want to discuss the MYTBTJ and its many traditions because then you would have to network with practitioners such as the Kyong Dang, Ship Pal Gi and even (shudder) Hae Dong Kum Do. Rather than do that you would rather study swordwork that Lim brought back from Japan and now presents for consumption in Korea. 

I can easily imagine that you don't want to talk about the relationship of Chinese traditions as they interface with Korean traditions. I pointed out four traditions all of which are as valid as Chois but there is no room for them in your discussion. Those traditions were in Korea long before Choi. How is it that YOU DO NOT show where HIS tradition interfaces with the standing Chinese traditions? They are still alive and practiced with long lineages. 

I can easily imagine that you do not want to talk about standing curriculum because apparently Lims' curriculum is still a work in progress unlike the other contributions which are readily identifiable and readily available with no equivocation or delay. 

Lastly I find it all but entertaining that you and Kevin are talking from different places regarding Korean culture. Apparently you both want Hapkido to be a Korean martial art. What you do NOT want to do is accept responsibility in the fullest sense for practicing and professing a Korean martial art. There is always that one last qualification that lets you have some wiggleroom just in case you find people are holding you a bit closely accountable for what you teach and what you profess. You only want the art to be Korean just so far as it authenticates what you do and not so far as you are responsible as an actual adept at its values and mores. I can easily imagine that you want everything about Korean martial tradition to be dead---- except that part that serves your personal ends. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

_What I see, Todd, is that you and Kevin and a number of other practitioners want reality to conform to a very specific view of both Korean culture and Korean history._

You, as a professor of Korean culture and Korean History are certainly in a place to tell us that...

_You state that it is natural that the Koreans would want to make something their own, and then call "dead" anything but what YOU happen to be doing. How very convenient for you. _ 

Show one of the items you claim is still living with a current tradition.

_Apparently if every other aspect of Korean martial science is "dead" including the literature, the practice and the research then the only thing that is authentic is what YOU happen to be doing. _ 

Not a single tradition you mention is connected with Hapkido in any way, through Ji or Choi, Myung Jae nam, no one - and you cannot even prove these "ancient" traditions are still in existence.

_How very politically and commercially convenient._ 

You worry so much about commercial schools don't you.  Well hey, didn't you pay to train with Kim, Yun Sang - did you complain about that to him?  All training in your eyes should provided free right?

_I can easily imagine that you do not want to discuss the MYTBTJ _ (Dead Book, crappy drawings of Dead traditions, that probably died because they didn't work or got superceeded by better stuff) _and its many traditions because then you would have to network with practitioners such as the Kyong Dang, Ship Pal Gi and even (shudder) Hae Dong Kum Do.

I do Hapkido, why the hell do I "need" to network with them?  
They don't do Hapkido, they do what they want, good for them.

Rather than do that you would rather study swordwork that Lim brought back from Japan and now presents for consumption in Korea.  

Yes, and doesn't try to mask anything.  You want to cover the Hapkido tracks with stuff it has NO relation to...

I can easily imagine that you don't want to talk about the relationship of Chinese traditions as they interface with Korean traditions.  

You can easily imagine what?  When you can prove a RELATIONSHIP, we can discuss it.  Wing Chun is Chinese, is it also Korean, how about its relationship to French Cooking - maybe there isn't one...I pointed out four traditions all of which are as valid as Chois (but have nothnng to do with Hapkido in any way) but there is no room for them in your discussion.(They are not RELATED) Those traditions were in Korea long before Choi.(So was Shotokan, and Judo, how are they related?)
 How is it that YOU DO NOT show where HIS tradition interfaces with the standing Chinese traditions? Because it doesn't.

 They are still alive and practiced with long lineages. Really?  Where, who?

I can easily imagine that you do not want to talk about standing curriculum because apparently Lims' curriculum is still a work in progress unlike the other contributions which are readily identifiable and readily available with no equivocation or delay.  You are being a bit obnoxious here actually insulting - you gave a list of kicks and got one...the rest is bluster so cool it.

Lastly I find it all but entertaining that you and Kevin are talking from different places regarding Korean culture.  
Professor, please enlighten me where?

Apparently you both want Hapkido to be a Korean martial art. What you do NOT want to do is accept responsibility in the fullest sense for practicing and professing a Korean martial art.  

Responsibility like making it Chinese, or adding stuff that has no place, or training from a 500 year old book of dead traditions, or working to un-commercialize an art you willingly continue to pay for?

There is always that one last qualification that lets you have some wiggleroom just in case you find people are holding you a bit closely accountable for what you teach and what you profess.

OK, straight BS here, we are accountable to the Choi tradition.  WHERE are you accountable?  To history (fantasy) books? Who is holding who accountable?  I practice the Choi tradition of Hapkido, you will not and CNANOT make that claim.  What can you cliam?  TO have spen lots of time looking for Mantis Kung FU where it is not?  Maybe Kuk Sool Kon is more your cup of tea.

You only want the art to be Korean just so far as it authenticates what you do and not so far as you are responsible as an actual adept at its values and mores.

You are so right, I don't eat kim chee and drink soju with every meal.  I would go commit seppuku, buts thats Japanese... 

I can easily imagine that you want everything about Korean martial tradition to be dead----  No, but the stuff you "cite" is 

Bruce, if I couldn't laugh at this stuff, I'd be insulted.  You havbe never proven a link of ANY kind from the short list that you produced.  I didn't provide a list of kicks here because in refection, the idea was rather silly to me, how does that prove anything, or demonstrate anything except that so and so did a front kick too.

A relationship is a connection - you FAIL to prove a single connection to Choi with any of your blow hard posts, and as is your typical agenda, proceed to say that the rest of us should prove a link and that we are not KOREAN enough for your taste.  You seem to think that a martial art is supposed to encompass an entire cultural tradition - where this ridiculous notion came from I do not know...

Your argument has again failed to produce a single salient point that draws anything you say closer to Hapkido._


----------



## howard

hi bruce,



			
				glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Todd:
> 
> ...I can easily imagine that you do not want to discuss the MYTBTJ and its many traditions because then you would have to network with practitioners such as the Kyong Dang, Ship Pal Gi and even (shudder) Hae Dong Kum Do. Rather than do that you would rather study swordwork that Lim brought back from Japan and now presents for consumption in Korea...


bruce, to me you are really beginning to sound very nationalistic and xenophobic (ironically, from a korean perspective)...  please convince me that i'm wrong.

and if i'm not mistaken, didn't you post here or on another board a few months back that you intended to visit daegu and train with master lim?  what changed your mind, and why do you seem so negative toward him now?  simply because he teaches things that have japanese roots?

regards, howard


----------



## Barrie

Dear Todd,

Thanks for the feedback; this thread is going other places but I am still interested in the kick thing and finding out what DJN Choi taught and to whom.

DJN Kim has a rising toe kick to the neck in his 16 but no spinning kicks. He says DJN Choi had photos taken of the techniques he taught in the sequence he wanted them taught, including the kicks and strikes. DJN Kim and his training partner were the  models for the photos for the most part. I understand these photos are in his possession along with a lot of other documents. He is a very friendly man and perhaps you could visit and view this material on one of your visits to Korea if you are interested in DJN Choi's various teachings. The curriculum DJN Choi taught DJN Kim has been written down, at least up to 5th degree.

Kind regards,

Barrie


----------



## glad2bhere

OK. Lets take these one point at a time. 

1.) ".....Show one of the items you claim is still living with a current tradition....." 

The following are living Korean traditions still practiced in Korea. 
a.) The Mu Yei To Bo Tong Ji
Is practiced by the Kyong Dang & Ship Pal Gi. Furthermore select forms such as BON KUK GUM BUP and CHOSON SEBUP are either studied by or form the basis for such organizations as HwaRang Gumdo, HwaRang Gum-Bup, and Hae Dong Gumdo. They also continue to be studied by such Hapkido groups as the KUK SOOL WON, HWARANGDO and the Yon Mu Kwan. Stick, Spear, wol do, hyop do, dan bong, soh bong are also infrequently practiced by a variety of Hapkido traditions depending on the guidelines of the teacher. 

b.) Archery 

c.) Ssireum

d.) Taek Kyon 

None of these traditions is DEAD. You may not understand them or you may not know much about them but they were around long before Choi and have in one way or another been integrated into the Hapkido arts by a number of folks. If you still don't know the connection between the Hapkido arts and cane work (which was also practiced by Takeda) or swordwork (which was also practiced by Takeda) or stick work (which was also practiced by Takeda) and yet you espouse a link between Choi and Takeda and Lim teaches Japanese sword there is not much more I can say. If your art is truly Korean as you say you are connected to these traditions.  

Furthermore The O-Gae, which has been a philosophical foundation for martial tradition for 1400 years is still used by TKD, TSD, HKD and a host of other arts as the ethical premise for practice. The guidelines for the organization of martial practice has its earliest records in the SAMKUK YUSA of the 14th Century which was 500 years before your Choi was born. If he was truely the Korean national you say he is likewise bound by that code and those philosophies. If you say your art is Korean you are connected by these philosophies. 

Furthermore, if your art is valid because a Korean national brought it to Korea for Koreans to train in it is no less or more valid than is any of the Chinese Boxing styles I have identified including Praying Mantis, Tan Tui, Long Fist and Eagle Claw. Your art is connected to these culturally and as there is a significant arguement for Japanese traditions proceeding from Chinese traditions through Korean probably historically. If you can't see this connection it is only because you willfully choose not to. Why don't you look these various arts up and do some research into how they relate to both Japanese and Korean traditions? Is it too much work? 

2.) "....You worry so much about commercial schools don't you. Well hey, didn't you pay to train with Kim, Yun Sang - did you complain about that to him?..." 

No I didn't complain because nothing he did degraded the integrity of his own art nor the teachings of his teacher. He introduced no politics, and at every turn went out of his way to imbue what he taught with an ethic and a culture that Americans have little appreciation for. Whatever commerce he expressed did not introduce at any time a desire to avoid accountability, sell standing or rank, market himself as something he wasn't or ask for license to make his art some contrived hierarchy of institutionalized power with himself at the top. 

3.)  ".........I can easily imagine that you do not want to discuss the MYTBTJ (Dead Book, crappy drawings of Dead traditions, that probably died because they didn't work or got superceeded by better stuff) _and its many traditions because then you would have to network with practitioners such as the Kyong Dang, Ship Pal Gi and even (shudder) Hae Dong Kum Do.

I do Hapkido, why the hell do I "need" to network with them? 
They don't do Hapkido, they do what they want, good for them....." 

Thank you for demonstrating how abysmally ignorant you are of the very works you are criticizing. No wonder you can discredit them so freely. What do you know of them?  You, who ask for "connections" now ask why you should seek out the very practitioners I supplied you with to experience those connections. You practice swordwork and report that it is purportedly a mixture of Japanese and Korean sword. Don't you want to connect with people who train in only Korean sword? Isn't that what you asked for--- connections? Well I am giving you connections. Weapons that are used in Hapkido and other places in Korean tradition. Emptyhand techniques that are used in Hapkido and other Korean traditions. Philosophy and ethics that have guided every other activity----- somehow does not apply to the "Korean" art you practice-----aren't these the connections you asked for? No mask, here. These are legit traditions, but you would rather import Japanese material and call it "Korean". You would rather have everyone believe these traditions are dead so you can sell the traditions you favor more easily. 

4.) "..... You are being a bit obnoxious here actually insulting - you gave a list of kicks and got one...the rest is bluster so cool it......" 

No. There IS no insult. This is flat out a question quite to the point. Every Hapkido student I know now, or have known, knew the basic kicking curriculum within monthes of starting their training. Every major kwan I know has published a basic curriculum and that includes Kim. The report is that Lim studied with Choi for 22 years and Todd has been with Lim more than a few years. Whats the problem with laying out the basic kicking material? I was with Kim for 12 days and had his basic kicking material down and laid it out along with four other traditions in less than an hour? Whats the story about this? 

5.) "......OK, straight BS here, we are accountable to the Choi tradition. WHERE are you accountable? To history (fantasy) books? Who is holding who accountable? I practice the Choi tradition of Hapkido, you will not and CNANOT make that claim. What can you cliam? TO have spen lots of time looking for Mantis Kung FU where it is not? Maybe Kuk Sool Kon is more your cup of tea......" 

WELL, AT LONG LAST...... about time you finally got to this point. 

Lets see. Choi learned something (but we are not sure what), from someone (though we are not sure who) and its standard curriculum was never recorded--- not once--- in its entirety as a single tradition--- not once in over 30 years. It comes from another country but you want it to be Korean---- but not beholding to Korean tradition or culture and NOW you tell me that you are accountable regarding this non-specific and unrecorded art to a person who is no longer alive!!  Excuse me. Let me hear one more time. 

WHO??? is it that is living in a fantasy?!?!

 What is apparently most important to you is the very thing that I mentioned many posts ago. All that matters is that you can make some sort of claim ("..... I practice the Choi tradition of Hapkido, you will not and CNANOT make that claim. ....")  that will simply authenticate what it is that you want to sell. Has nothing to do with the integrity of the art. It has to do with the ability to one-up the competition in the marketplace.


Now, how about YOU answer some of my questions? 

How come you won't identify whether you practice a Korean or Japanese art? 

How come its so important to you to make sure that Lims tradition occupies a singularly exclusive place that neatly avoids accountability to either a Japanese OR a Korean authority?  

How come everytime I give you information all you do is ask for more information? When are YOU going to start doing research and answering these questions for yourself. Why are YOU not finding these connections for yourself. The information is out there. Why do I have to spoon-feed this material to you. How come Lim isn't teaching you about these connections instead of teaching you Japanese material? FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce_


----------



## glad2bhere

".......bruce, to me you are really beginning to sound very nationalistic and xenophobic (ironically, from a korean perspective)... please convince me that i'm wrong.............."

I can't convince you that you are wrong. You are going to see what you want to see. What I am writing is in simple defence of a Hapkido that deserves being spoken for.

 I have read way too many times about Hapkido according to some personality, or Hapkido as a Japanese tradition, or Hapkido as a focus of evolution. There is Hapkido which is almost all kicks, and there is Hapkido which is indistinguishable from Aikido. There is Hapkido that is purportedly taught to Special Forces and Hapkido thats puportedly taught to Children. There is Hapkido that uses rope, and stick and sword, and spear, and cudgeol and staff and emptyhand.  But when I pipe-up and ask people to actually stand-up for Hapkido as a Korean martial tradition with documented practice and a standardized curriculum and an integrated place along with the other martial traditions suddenly how is it that people start back-pedaling like crazy? A guy could be forgiven for concluding that folks would rather blab about the image of Hapkido than allow themselves to get pinned-down about what it really is! 

".......and if i'm not mistaken, didn't you post here or on another board a few months back that you intended to visit daegu and train with master lim? what changed your mind, and why do you seem so negative toward him now?..."  

The answer is simple. I train according to the spirit of the kwan. If I do not have the trust of the people with whom I train or they do not have my trust there is no training and there is no kwan----- just people doing stuff in the same room. I was invited to go to Taegu. The person who invited me to go had reservations about me and I backed-off against the time that a better relationship might develope. No big mystery, just people being people. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

glad2bhereI can't convince you that you are wrong. You are going to see what you want to see.[/QUOTE said:
			
		

> hi bruce.
> 
> not so. i'm going to see what's there. i wish that were always what i wanted to see, but often it's not.
> 
> not everybody has preconceptions that bias their perception of reality.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Howard, 

Thanks for clarifying your position. 

For myself, I will stick with my position as well. If there is room for the liberal and even outlandish in the Hapkido arts, there is room for the conservative as well. I don't pretend that my take on the Hapkido arts is anymore or less popular or palatable than anyone elses. I do believe that it needs to be considered and expressed as well as any other interpretation of the Hapkido arts. If there is room for the likes of Pelligrini, Lee, Ji as well as a whole host of "new Hapkido" traditions there is room for someone such as myself who pushes for a a singularly greater focus on the Hapkido arts through the lens of other standing Korean traditions.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## howard

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> ...If there is room for the likes of Pelligrini, Lee, Ji as well as a whole host of "new Hapkido" traditions there is room for someone such as myself who pushes for a a singularly greater focus on the Hapkido arts through the lens of other standing Korean traditions.


bruce, i definitely agree with that.

regards, howard


----------



## Master Todd Miller

The curriculum DJN Choi taught DJN Kim has been written down, at least up to 5th degree.

GM Lim has his curriculum written down as well.  I believe up to 4th dan.  DJN Choi was a member of the Jungki Kwan after he closed his dojang in 1976.  I just got done watching a video of DJN Choi performing some of our blue belt requrements on GM Lim.  I am wondering what GM Kim's curiculum looks like as in Son Mok Paegi, Son Mok Sool, Uh Bok Sool excet.

Take care :asian: 

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd: 

I suppose I could try to describe the techniques right here on this Net, but it would be the hapkiyusool material as seen through the eyes of a yu sool practitioner. Not sure that would do it justice. Now, Jarrod has invited you to experience Dojunim Kim first hand, and I think that Barrie has done the same. And you will be in Korea next year and only an hour from Taejeon. Wouldn't it just be easier to come to Gumsan or Taejeon next time you are in Korea and experience the material for yourself? I am going back to Korea next May (Please God) if there is no way I can get to the Australian event (depends on scheduling right now). Seems like this would resolve a lot of questions. I had thought that I might be interested in what Lim is doing but after various exchanges I think that what I have found with Kim moves in a direction much closer to how I see Hapkido coming together for me. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Bruce,

I would like to see GM Kim at some point but my focus is GM Lims material as he was DJN Chois longest running student it makes more sense for me to focus my energy there but if it works out that I can visit GM Kim I will make an effort just to see his take on the Founders material.

When will you be hosting GM Kim here in the USA?

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Barrie

Dear Todd,



It would be very interesting and informative if you were to visit DJN Kim Yun Sang as you are in a position to objectively compare his teaching to that of Gm Lim.



My interest is in discovering what DJN Choi taught and to whom, rather than the personalities themselves, interesting and talented though they are. To me this is the way to explore DJN Chois art and philosophy. It is entirely possible that Choi taught different students different things above his basic or core material, extras if you like, much as his teacher, Takeda is said to have done. If this is the case then he would have been merely mimicking his teachers methodology.



With this in mind it would be useful to examine and compare the material taught to his senior students  (both curriculum and philosophy), how they interpreted it and what they now teach. The students of most interest would be those that DJN Choi graded highly, whose names are recorded in the records that were held by his sons wife (after they were both dead) and are now in the possession of DJN Kim along with many other relevant documents. Assuming that Choi graded students according to ability and mastery of his art, the rank he conferred is of more relevance than the length of time in training although they are obviously related.



The students we might study include DJN Chan Chin Il, Gm Ji, GM Lim, Master Rim, DJN Kim, and GM Lee Young-Su amongst others. We have very good information about GM Jis curriculum, and that of DJN Kim and while there are similarities, they also differ in the detail (as you would be well aware). Both gentlemen have extensive oral histories of DJN Choi that tell us about his philosophy.   Unfortunately Gm Lee Young- Su (9th degree, DJN Kims training partner) died last march, but I believe one of his students teaches in Texas ( Master Yang Seung-kyu) who may shed light on his masters teachings. No doubt others will suggest other students that could contribute to the search.



If we remain objective in our researches, and put aside the personalities, we may eventually learn the essence and breadth of Chois art and philosophy. 



There may be other avenues to explore also and we should continue to look for them.



The people of interest are getting old and it would be a pity to lose any opportunity to mine their knowledge. 



I hope you find the time and the objectivity to make the most of any contact  you have with DJN Kim.



Kind regards,



Barrie


----------



## Master Todd Miller

If we remain objective in our researches, and put aside the personalities, we may eventually learn the essence and breadth of Chois art and philosophy. 

If the opportunity presented itself I would be interested to meet GM Kim.  GM Lim is my teacher and I am more than satisfied with training with him.  There are many Masters that train at the Jungki Kwan that were students of DJN Choi so I have meet with others along with GM Lim that were taught by DJN Choi.  

Just a side not why does GM Kim call himself Doju Nim?  The Founder gave that title to GM Chang, Chin Il and he is still alive as far as I know.

I will let you know the next time I go to Korea.  You should do the same and train with GM Lim.  I am sure there will be similarities.

Take care

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Black Belt FC

Greeetings,

Hi everyone came by to see whats new and by the looks of things heated debates are underway. 

Has anyone heard about GM West being invited to lead the US Kidohae? Wondering if this is he say she say.....
Lugo


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Todd: 

".......Just a side not why does GM Kim call himself Doju Nim? The Founder gave that title to GM Chang, Chin Il and he is still alive as far as I know....." 


Just for the record, a person does not "call" themselves "doju", "GM", "Master" or any other title in Korean traditions. A "title" is a western hang-up. WE are the ones that are hung-up on titles; us and the Korean Ex-pats who couldn't get their ego-s sufficiently stroked back in Korea. By tradition, a person does what it is that they do and the community in turn identifies them with a title. In my own case I teach YMK Hapkido. If somebody wants to call me "Master Sims", "Sims Saengsanim" or "hey-you-over-there" thats pretty much on them. In traditional KMA people taught material to students and the student learned material from the teacher. If they got good, after a while the community recognized their abilities with some sort of identifier. Is Kim "doju"? Of course he is. The Choi family asked him to become a leader when Chois' son died. He has all the paperwork and such. Does he ask people to call him "doju". Nope. His students do so because they choose to honor him. Chang Chin Il is the same situation. Is HE "doju"? Absolutely, since Choi apparently bestowed it himself. Does he call himself "doju"? Maybe or maybe not. It really doesn't matter. You can have as many "doju", "grandmasters"  and whatall that you want. This is one point that westerners are just never going to get. Titles and ranks and standing are just not that big a thing to Koreans since it is the doing and not the labels that mean something. Why do you think so many people hand these things out like candy. Westerners are making the market for buying and selling rank because WE are the ones that make such a big thing out of it! 

Now, let me ask you. You have asked this question a number of times of a number of people and apparently have not gotten a satisfactory answer yet. What exactly is it that you are fishing for? Whats your vested interest in assigning a title or position to this person or that person? And since you are so invested in this (and traditional Koreans are not) and since the Japanese traditions have this sort of "title competition" (and Koreans do not) and since this is a Korean section (and you have already reported that Lim states that he teaches a Japanese tradition) maybe it would help me and a lot of other folks if you just came out (like Kevin did) and own what it is that you are leveraging for, yes?   FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Just for the record, a person does not "call" themselves "doju", "GM", "Master" or any other title in Korean traditions. A "title" is a western hang-up. WE are the ones that are hung-up on titles; us and the Korean Ex-pats who couldn't get their ego-s sufficiently stroked back in Korea. By tradition, a person does what it is that they do and the community in turn identifies them with a title. In my own case I teach YMK Hapkido. If somebody wants to call me "Master Sims", "Sims Saengsanim" or "hey-you-over-there" thats pretty much on them. In traditional KMA people taught material to students and the student learned material from the teacher. If they got good, after a while the community recognized their abilities with some sort of identifier. Is Kim "doju"? Of course he is. The Choi family asked him to become a leader when Chois' son died. He has all the paperwork and such. Does he ask people to call him "doju". Nope. His students do so because they choose to honor him. Chang Chin Il is the same situation. Is HE "doju"? Absolutely, since Choi apparently bestowed it himself. Does he call himself "doju"? Maybe or maybe not. It really doesn't matter. You can have as many "doju", "grandmasters"  and whatall that you want. This is one point that westerners are just never going to get. Titles and ranks and standing are just not that big a thing to Koreans since it is the doing and not the labels that mean something. Why do you think so many people hand these things out like candy. Westerners are making the market for buying and selling rank because WE are the ones that make such a big thing out of it!
> 
> Now, let me ask you. You have asked this question a number of times of a number of people and apparently have not gotten a satisfactory answer yet. What exactly is it that you are fishing for? Whats your vested interest in assigning a title or position to this person or that person? And since you are so invested in this (and traditional Koreans are not) and since the Japanese traditions have this sort of "title competition" (and Koreans do not) and since this is a Korean section (and you have already reported that Lim states that he teaches a Japanese tradition) maybe it would help me and a lot of other folks if you just came out (like Kevin did) and own what it is that you are leveraging for, yes?   FWIW.



Yet again Bruce you try to prove a point that is not born out by evidence.  Dojunim Chang Chin Il was given the title by Choi himself - yes, given the title Dojunim - so it looks like a Korean (the founder of Hapkido) was actually expecting someone to use this title.  Now, as far as Kim, Yun Sang, the wife of Choi's son apparently gave Kim a piece of paper saying he could call himself Dojunim - a title he calls himself on his web site.  Now, if titles were not a big deal, why did Kim accept a title from someone that has NO authority to give it to him?  In all defference to Kim, he might be a great guy and good martial artist, but falls flat on this one - Choi, Bok Yul's wife has no authority to bestow titles.  Funny, but for all your ranting about "Korean traditions don't follow familial lineage" you ain't screaming about this one (vested interest perhaps?) - and the familial lineage to bestow title here is non-existant. By the way, there can only be one Doju in the Choi lineage, it was bestowed by Choi, to Chang, Chin Il on Korean National Television no less, with Grandmaster Lim acting as the MC for the event...

Just where do you get off saying Koreans have no title competition and the Japanese do?  Again, when did you become a professor of Asian Studies?  If this is just you assumption (which I thnk it is) then say so - but just because Kim doesn't require you to call him Doju doesn't mean he doesn't care about the title.  I have trained with many Japanese over the years and have never had to call any of them any exahlted title.  

It is becoming more and more clear that the reason that you are so biased against single people being important is because the very tradition that you claim - Yon Moo Kwan - is headed by a person that won't travel to teach, and who is not important enough to you for you to go see.  It is unfortunate that Myung is so stubborn, sick, whatever, but the rest of us seem quite content with a small group of highly trained and qualified practitioners at the helm.  

You practice an art that was developed by Choi, Yong Sul, from a Japanese tradition - who taught Ji, who taught Myung - so its Japanese traditions all round - maybe it would help all of us if you could simply, and finally find any link to Hapkido from your "Korean Traditions" diatribe instead of trying to make the average reader here think that "historical evidence" you try to pass off here is anything other than a mask because you have been dumped on (unfairly, I will agree) by a few Hapkido people.


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

NO ONE said that Choi didn't give Chang Chin Il a title. He sold a LOT of people titles, and ranks and what not. How many 10th dans, 9th dans and 8th dans are there? Your point seems to be that there SHOULD BE one exclusive and ultimate source of authority and power. THERE SIMPLY IS NO SUCH INSTITUTION IN KOREAN MARTIAL TRADITIONS. You keep wanting there to be one. If this were true Choi would have to draw HIS authority from some tradition in Japan where he learned whatever he learned. THEN you would have a case--- and--- you, in turn, would be beholding to a Japanese soke. Absent that, anyone has as valid a claim as anyone else. Here in the States we have this thing about power and control that ties into commerce. Why do you keep trying to push an institution on Korean martial traditions which simply isn't part of their history? Listen to what you are writing! 

"Chois' wife had no authority...."! 

What "authority" did she need? If I want to give somebody a title in a tradition that thinks little of such things what do I need? Now if you want to go back to Japan and the Ryu-Ha approach-- well hell, they will adopt poeple into the family to keep the integrity of their lineage. What does this have to do with Korea? Have you even read Palais (pp 442-577)? Do you have any actual idea of the nature of martial tradition in a Korean culture and how it was addressed? How about how it relates to Confucian  thought? You keep banging on Choi as though if you say it long enough it becomes true. The titles you are making so much of are NOT Korean titles ("doju") and the patrilinear succession is only important to you because it would make you and Todd important and exclusive. And authentic labels such a "kwang jang" and "saengsa" are not exclusive enough to be commercially viable.

And where do I ".....get off saying Koreans have no title competition and the Japanese do? Again, when did you become a professor of Asian Studies?..." 

Do I actually NEED to be a professor of Asian Studies? Isn't this just more of your "title thing". If I don't have a title then I can't possibly be well-read or aware of the obvious in daily life, right? The only people fighting about titles are the folks who are worried about security later in life. Most of the time Koreans just split and go their own way. Are you telling me you havn't seen this very thing over and over again? In Japan they can always come back to a single soke, but even THERE people break off now and do their own thing. What the heck is your point? You want something that is not a reality.  

And for my money I don't know that I would bring up Ji or Myung because they are perfect examples of exactly what I have been speaking of. When they die, someone else will be identified as mentors for study-groups ("kwans"). Maybe they will have fancy paper and maybe they won't. I can't speak with authority about what sort of fancy wallpaper someone like, say, JR West has, but if he is a person who garners the respect of a following of people thats going to happen regardless of what he has on the wall. On the other side, if somebody, say Chang Chin Il, has all the right wallpaper but doesn't do anything-- or very little--- whats the point? 

My bias against authority collecting in the hands of a individual or exclusive elite is not just that it is not traditionally Korean, but that I have never once seen it do any good for Korean martial traditions---- not once in all the reading, and training and research etc etc etc I have been part of. Not Once. 

The art I practice came to me from Myung, who got it from Ji, who got it from Choi who got it from someone else. True enough. I also train in swordwork which is far beyond what Myung ever taught and proceeds from Korean material --- both Japanese and Chinese influenced. I also train in dan bong which is both Chinese and Japanese influenced. I also train in woldo, chang bong and soh bong which are also Japanese and Chinese influenced. I subscribe to practice which is framed by Korean culture as much as I can honor it in a Western country. For your part you seem bent on selling something once you have proven exclusive rights to market it here in the States. To do that you have to prove exclusivity back to Choi through Lim, then prove that you are not a Japanese tradition (which honors exclusivity) but are the only Korean martial tradition, separate from ALL others, which DOES honor exclusivity--- but only back to Choi. Give me a break. Even "I" can see through this ploy. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Master Todd Miller

Now, let me ask you. You have asked this question a number of times of a number of people and apparently have not gotten a satisfactory answer yet. What exactly is it that you are fishing for? Whats your vested interest in assigning a title or position to this person or that person? And since you are so invested in this (and traditional Koreans are not) and since the Japanese traditions have this sort of "title competition" (and Koreans do not) and since this is a Korean section (and you have already reported that Lim states that he teaches a Japanese tradition) maybe it would help me and a lot of other folks if you just came out (like Kevin did) and own what it is that you are leveraging for, yes? FWIW. 

Bruce:
You are the only one I see all worked up about titles in Korean Mudo!!!!  I feel that addressing senior practitioners with respect is cross cultural NOT JUST Japanese.   GM Lim teaches THE KOREAN MARTIAL ARTS OF HAPKIDO & GUHAPDO.  I am not leveraging for anything bruce, I do feel that it is important for people to know the truth especially with so much dishonesty in martial arts today.

If someone wants to see what I do they are welcome to come check it out.  I make NO false claims and I try to teach with passion as I love Hapkido/Guhapdo and feel that rather than argue about the silly things that you want to argue about we try to hold Freindship seminars where ALL are welcome to come and train NOT TALK like you like to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!  You really should try to act your age!

What is your reasoning behind being insulting to everyone that does not totally agree with you?

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## iron_ox

Hello Bruce,

Yes, I run a commercial dojang, and attempt to make a living doing so.  So YES, I don't want every Tom, Dick, and Bruce to say they teach Hapkido because a guy teachs a few throws, uses circular motion and has a Malaysian Dentist tell him that to him it looks just like hapkido, so it is as you say a "Hapkido Art" - No way.

Hapkido is a single art, now if people decide to do their own thing, great, then when they call it Kuk Sool Kon, or Hwarangdo AWESOME - they do not invoke the tradition of CHOI, and that to me is fine.  There is no such thing as the "Hapkido Arts" - that is a term upon which all your arguments are predicated, but have no proof for.

As a point of further reference, I don't and won't refer to persons (or personalities that currently live) to validate an art that I have spent 25 years doing.  I believe that Todd only does it when asked a specific question about Grandmaster Lim, so to act like we use the name as leverage is simply untrue.  I don't need to leverage the fact I teach traditional Hapkido, it is in my training and technique - the true lineage of Choi, Yong Sul for which I am very greatful.

I have been told over and over, for some 25 years from those that trained with both Choi and Ji that despite your call for "Korean Tradition, responsibility, and whatever, the one trait they admired most in people (that is all people) was humility.  Try some Bruce before you whack out another insult jabbing post.


----------



## SmellyMonkey

To Bruce and Kevin.

Why do these conversations end up like this?  Why do so many threads get locked down in the hapkido area of this forum?

People are too damn narrow minded.  And think that they deserve to spread their narrowminded vision of the world to everyone else. 

This thread switched from being informative information about our art to being hijacked by a few members to *****.  And now we are arguing that one person's master is bad, and another person only cares about money.  

Do you even realize that other people besides you two are viewing this thread and making opinions about hapkido and hapkidoists?  It's arguments and behavior like this that give hapkido a bad name.

I've personally gone from respecting both of you and hoping to meet you someday (since we are all in the same state) to hoping to never cross your paths, lest you will treat me like you treat each other.  And that makes be sad, because I had A LOT of respect for you two.

Would your masters be proud of you?  Would your students?

Humility was mentioned.  I wonder what the other readers think about the level of humility shown.

Jeremy


----------



## iron_ox

SmellyMonkey said:
			
		

> To Bruce and Kevin.
> 
> Why do these conversations end up like this?  Why do so many threads get locked down in the hapkido area of this forum?
> 
> People are too damn narrow minded.  And think that they deserve to spread their narrowminded vision of the world to everyone else.
> 
> This thread switched from being informative information about our art to being hijacked by a few members to *****.  And now we are arguing that one person's master is bad, and another person only cares about money.
> 
> Do you even realize that other people besides you two are viewing this thread and making opinions about hapkido and hapkidoists?  It's arguments and behavior like this that give hapkido a bad name.
> 
> I've personally gone from respecting both of you and hoping to meet you someday (since we are all in the same state) to hoping to never cross your paths, lest you will treat me like you treat each other.  And that makes be sad, because I had A LOT of respect for you two.
> 
> Would your masters be proud of you?  Would your students?
> 
> Humility was mentioned.  I wonder what the other readers think about the level of humility shown.
> 
> Jeremy



Sorry, but what?  Bruce and I speak about every other day, and see each other at least monthly to train.  We have strong viewpoints that conflict in some areas, and I don't feel the need to hold back in my discussion with Bruce.  Now, that being said, we both can get a little over board, and hey that happens.  

*If I offended anyone on this board at all with my tone, I formally apologize - the jabs got a little personal and that was uncalled for - so to the Martialtalk community, I am sorry for that one - I'll be more careful.*


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy: 

Please indulge Kevin and I because there is a little more going on here than what might be apparent from the start. Let me try to explain. 

Kevin and I have VERY strong views about our respective positions with the Hapkido arts, and that fact is out there for everyone to see. Let me make it perfectly clear that I simple do not agree with Kevins' take on things and I would bet dollars to donuts that he doesn't agree with me. In fact, Jeremy, I am COUNTING on him not agreeing. Sound strange? Well lets take a look at history. 

The Hapkido arts have been fractionated for years---decades, really. Its not that people don't talk. They do that rightly enough. The problem is that it always gets up to a single point and then it becomes personal. After that the exchanges are bulls*** threats and challenges and guess what---- the communication breaks down just at the point that maybe we could have  finally uncovered true motives, real intentions and so forth. Kevin is not the first person I have tried to do this with. However, Kevin is the first person who has stuck with it. And to their credit, the folks here at MARTIAL TALK have taken a pretty hands-off approach which allows us to continue. I would like to think that Kevin and I can continue and maintain our mutual respect for each other but that has a lot to do with the WAY we communicate. Heres an example. 

Kevin has never made a secret of being a commercial concern. I think he just said it again in his last post. I have never made a secret that I want no part of commerce in the KMA and that I think its a bain on the arts. Now there is a line that we work not to cross. For instance, as commercial as he might be, it is not fair for me to make it personal and characterize Kevin as ONLY  interested money when I know damn good and well that the KMA means as much to him as myself. Kevin, in turn, might make a lot of cracks about my book-worming but only because he knows that whatever I do with books gets automatically validated out on the mat and is used to benefit the art.

And that last bit "benefit the art" is what ties us together albeit from opposite ends of the spectrum. The key to this discussion is that folks like you can see how two "extremists" can communicate. Do we push the limits now and then? Sure. Read the last few posts and you will see it in a FEW places. But the trick is not to try and covert each other but to demonstrate how Hapkido benefits from each of our respective positions whether it is commerce OR research.  I hope this make sense. 

BTW: I also want to extend a Kudo to Kevin as, though we didn't "plan" to do this, no small part of this comes out of his encouraging me to try this tack one more time after losing a job and getting trashed trying to do this very same thing over on DOCHANG DIGEST. In that particular case, I simply underestimated the toxicity of the personalities that I was dealing with and I don't know that Ray (Terry) could have done much once the ball headed down hill.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

"........You are the only one I see all worked up about titles in Korean Mudo!!!!  I feel that addressing senior practitioners with respect is cross cultural NOT JUST Japanese.   GM Lim teaches THE KOREAN MARTIAL ARTS OF HAPKIDO & GUHAPDO.  I am not leveraging for anything bruce, I do feel that it is important for people to know the truth especially with so much dishonesty in martial arts today................."

Todd, nobody is questioning the use of titles. I use titles all the time. People use titles with me, flattering and not so flattering. The Koreans use titles themselves and standing in the community means a lot to them. 

BUT--- 

the title you are talking about is not Korean. It is not an integral part of Korean martial tradition. Its a transliteration of Japanese. You said yourself that Doju Lim reported to you that he teaches a Japanese tradition. Why not just bill it as such? If it has no place in traditional Korean martial science except that you carve a place out for it why not come up front with it? 

Nor do I have a problem with you teaching what it is that you teach. My point is now and has been for a number of posts on two separate strings that what is being done and how its being represented is very carefully being couched in narrowly defined and selective terms to produce a pre-determined result. The terms, the process and the result are not a function of Korean culture. Its is a function of your desire to market a special product with yourself as the sole and excluse purveyor of that product. 

As far as acting my age--- well, I don't really have a choice. 54 is 54 and theres nothing I can do about!  :ultracool I can also report with little fear of contradiction that if I insulted everyone who didn't agree with me I wouldn't have time in a day to do anything else. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Paul B

Can I pop a question in here?

What exactly do you guys hope to gain from this? Or is it just plain ol' fun for you to argue in circles? (said with a smile)


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin:

"......Yes, I run a commercial dojang, and attempt to make a living doing so. So YES, I don't want every Tom, Dick, and Bruce to say they teach Hapkido because a guy teachs a few throws, uses circular motion and has a Malaysian Dentist tell him that to him it looks just like hapkido, so it is as you say a "Hapkido Art" - No way......" 

I hope you are not holding your breath waiting for me to disagree with you. We have talked about this before and we both know that we share a common disgust for people who slap the term "hapkido" on everything from bad wrestling to kick-boxing. 

I know you want to get Hapkidos' worms back in the box and I wouldn't mind helping you but the fact is that its gone WAY beyond that. What we needed was the original Hapkido players to do a  better job of working together. They didn't and now we have not just Hapkido a'la Choi, but Hapkido a'la Ji and Hapkido a'la Pelligrini etc etc etc. In fact Hapkido has become a generic term and there is no way to go backwards. What we CAN do is stop the deterioration of the arts by stopping the bleeding now. We already have a multitude of versions of the Hapkido arts. We can't roll that back. But we CAN acknowledge that Hapkido, even as a generic term continues to demonstrate and possess qualities unique to what it is and what it has become. Heres a couple that come to mind. 

1.) Hapkido IS a Mu-Do. There is emptyhand and there is weapons work. The weapons work proceeds from a constellation of practices that the Korean adopted by deciding that those adopted practices reflected how they saw things being done. OK so maybe one person doesn't do rope-work and another person "loves" cane. In the kwan I belong to we have 6 traditional weapons. Still, when I do a weapon I do Korean weapon, not the comparable weapon brought in from another culture. 

2.) Hapkido is bound by the Three Principles. This isn't just the Yon Mu Kwan or Myung talking. Every Hapkido tradition speaks of these same Principles though with some variance from group to group. Even Choi reported spoke of these principles, at least thats what each person who trained with him reports. 

3.) Hapkido has both striking/kicking AND grappling. Some traditions more than other traditions. Judging from those lists on the other thread some people have added kicks and some have dropped kicks but there are kicks, punches and strikes and locks and throws etc etc in all of the traditions. 

Now regarding Lim I have to say that we can't rule-out corruption with his material as much as anyone elses. Sorry, but I can't accept that training in Japan didn't corrupt what he learned from Choi any less than Ji's or Lee's or Seos' material was influenced by their alternate teachers. Unless you have an affidavit from Choi specifying every technique (3,000 some-odd?) we are just going to have to agree that your reconstituting the "Choi" tradition is fraught with the same problems as my study of the MYTBTJ.

As far as humility goes--- well, ----I happen to be very proud of my humility which may just happen to be the best practiced humility around!  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Ahhhh. That's more like it. Nice post, Bruce.

Now how do we make this happen? Bruce, are you going to start your own federation? Because to make your dream into a reality, I think you are going to have to. 

(BTW, it's good to know you and Kevin can talk to each other the way you two do and still remain friends. You guys talk to each other like two people who have been married for years...bringing out the old relationship baggage every time the debate gets heated.)

Jeremy


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Jeremy:

".........Now how do we make this happen? Bruce, are you going to start your own federation? Because to make your dream into a reality, I think you are going to have to......." 

With apologies to the memory of the late President Nixon, let me make this perfectly clear--- and I will use very simple words for the kids in the cheap seats. 

I DO NOT want my own organization. I hope that is plain enough for everyone reading this. I fervently believe that we can accomplish what it is we are discussing here if we can just get past the "turf" thing. We need to get past the "turf thing" OR (failing that) find a way to put it in perspective and keep it their. For 1400 years of Korean martial tradition there was never a "turf thing". teachers who hit the end of benefit to a student encouraged the student to the next level, or art, or teacher, etc. There was no rank and no certification. If you wanted to get a job using MA you took a Civil Service exam. The only people I have found who want to push the idea of "turf" are folks for whom the concept of "turf" and its attendent bits like rank and authority has gotten out of perspective. 

And thanks for the kudo-s RE: Kevin and I. maybe the idea of "old married people" isn't so far fetched. Being married doesn't guarentee a working relationship--- tis something that needs to be developed. There are tricks and gimics and what-not but in the end its just hard work. FWIW.   

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Fine!  Don't start a federation!  

So then when are you going to throw a weekend party for all the Illinois (and larger geographic area) to get together, throw down beers, and talk about what each kwan is doing?!!  I'd have it at my place, but I think my two bedroom Chicago condo is too small.  But maybe we can meet in a Chicago Korean BBQ.  Lord knows there are enough of them on the northwest side.

Seriously, it was mentioned before about having friendship gathering.  You poo-pooed it at the time.  But what else do we have?  Those people who are interested will show up and share what they are doing.  Those people who don't show up...well, who cares?  

No one will be the "leader" of the gathering.  It will be open for all hapkidoists (even the combat people). 

Seminars aren't the same because one person is the "leader" and politics get involved.  We just need a freaking party.

Jeremy


----------



## iron_ox

SmellyMonkey said:
			
		

> Fine!  Don't start a federation!
> 
> So then when are you going to throw a weekend party for all the Illinois (and larger geographic area) to get together, throw down beers, and talk about what each kwan is doing?!!  I'd have it at my place, but I think my two bedroom Chicago condo is too small.  But maybe we can meet in a Chicago Korean BBQ.  Lord knows there are enough of them on the northwest side.
> 
> Seriously, it was mentioned before about having friendship gathering.  You poo-pooed it at the time.  But what else do we have?  Those people who are interested will show up and share what they are doing.  Those people who don't show up...well, who cares?
> 
> No one will be the "leader" of the gathering.  It will be open for all hapkidoists (even the combat people).
> 
> Seminars aren't the same because one person is the "leader" and politics get involved.  We just need a freaking party.
> 
> Jeremy



Agreed


----------



## Master Todd Miller

You said yourself that Doju Lim reported to you that he teaches a Japanese tradition. Why not just bill it as such? If it has no place in traditional Korean martial science except that you carve a place out for it why not come up front with it? 


I have never said that GM Lim teaches a Japanese MA!!!  GM Lim studied a Japanese art along with Korean Kumdo or Kum Bup call it whatever is convient for you.  The sword art he now teaches is Korean with Japanese influences, why is this soooo hard for you to understand?  GM Lim studied with the Founder for 22 years IN KOREA, Korean Hapkido.  GM Lim has never said anything about being the only person that teaches Choi's Hapkido.  If you want to you can look on GM Lim's web page where it shows his certifications and from whom.  This is not about carving out some spot in a market place as you put it bruce.  It is about telling the truth about things that others have lied about! :supcool: 

www.millersmudo.com


----------



## Barrie

HI Folks,

My computer hs been down so I have just caught up with the thread.

A point of clarification, Chang Chi Il's Dojonim certificate states that he is "Hae" Dojonim meaning DJN outside Korea. This information comes from the person who drew up the certificate for DJN Choi to take to the USA.

Apparently DJN Choi wanted to appoint a successor in 1980, not his son, who he considered was not ready. However he was convinced that it was appropriate to appoint his son with the condition that he continue to train under one of the more experienced members. When the son died his wife felt obliged to appoint a DJn and chose Kim Yung Sang.

Make of it what you will. Both recipients of the titles received them humbly, from all reports, and appear to respect the honour and responsibilities attached to such, legitimate or not.

Now back to what DJN Choi actually taught and to whom.

Todd, as soon as my doctors clear me for travel I intend to visit Korea and will follow your suggestion. Thanks for your input.

Kind regards,

Barrie


----------



## glad2bhere

Master Todd Miller said:
			
		

> I have never said that GM Lim teaches a Japanese MA!!!  GM Lim studied a Japanese art along with Korean Kumdo or Kum Bup call it whatever is convient for you.  The sword art he now teaches is Korean with Japanese influences, why is this soooo hard for you to understand?  GM Lim studied with the Founder for 22 years IN KOREA, Korean Hapkido.  GM Lim has never said anything about being the only person that teaches Choi's Hapkido.  If you want to you can look on GM Lim's web page where it shows his certifications and from whom.  This is not about carving out some spot in a market place as you put it bruce.  It is about telling the truth about things that others have lied about! :supcool:
> 
> www.millersmudo.com



The problem, as I see it is that your responses are either obscure, non-specific or contradictory. In addition you keep responding to things that AREN'T asked and adding in in emotion-laden bits ("lied"?) along the the way. Why don't you just answer the questions straight out? 

a.) Did you, or did you not say that Lim identifies what he does as what he was taught by Choi? OK. NOW does he identify THAT which he teaches as a Japanese or Korean tradition. This is not a trick question. Its going to be one or the other. 

b.) Did you, or did you not identify the sword that Lim teaches as "Korean, with Japanese influences"? Thats fine. You have also reported that Lim studied Korean and three kinds of Japanese sword. I understand perfectly. If it is a "Korean art with Japanese influences" there is no need to "invent" Guhapdo. The Koreans never used a "quick draw" art after the fashion of Eishin-Ryu. They has SOME quick-draw skills but not a whole separate art. There are a couple of reasons for this we can talk about later if you like. In the meantime, though, I suggest that if Lim wants to introduce Eishin-Ryu to Korea he do so and simply identify it as Eishin-Ryu. If he wants to teach Korea Kum-Bup then he can use his experience to polish or address the limited numbers of quick-draw techniques such as already available in traditional sword. I would be very willing to introduce him to Kwanjang Koo who would undoutedly find his sword skills acceptable enough to make introductions in Korea. Just a thought. 

c.) I understand that 22 years of training and proper papers are very important to you. I, as well, take tham as important indicators. On the other hand everybody reading this post knows how open to intrerpretation paper, time in grade, time on the mat and so forth are. Remember Lee, Joo Bang and his claims? Everybody makes claims and everybody has paper. Maybe I start tallying up those 22 years and I find them suspect. Maybe I don't think the paper is important or authentic. Maybe the next guy you bring it up with is wholly impressed. Its just people being people. Something that would make me feel much more impressed would be adulation or validation by other Hapkido leaders identifying who THEY would back as the identified senior in the Choi tradition. Has Lim ever approached the top 30 ranking Korean nationals for their validation of his standing?  Might be something to consider. Otherwise it would seem he's just one more person making huge claims, right? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

SmellyMonkey said:
			
		

> Fine!  Don't start a federation!
> 
> So then when are you going to throw a weekend party for all the Illinois (and larger geographic area) to get together, throw down beers, and talk about what each kwan is doing?!!  I'd have it at my place, but I think my two bedroom Chicago condo is too small.  But maybe we can meet in a Chicago Korean BBQ.  Lord knows there are enough of them on the northwest side.
> 
> Seriously, it was mentioned before about having friendship gathering.  You poo-pooed it at the time.  But what else do we have?  Those people who are interested will show up and share what they are doing.  Those people who don't show up...well, who cares?
> 
> No one will be the "leader" of the gathering.  It will be open for all hapkidoists (even the combat people).
> 
> Seminars aren't the same because one person is the "leader" and politics get involved.



I think you misunderstood. Let me see if I can make my position clearer. 

I have no problem getting together. What I have a problem with is "business as usual". You are absolutely right that seminars are not the anwer. I ALSO believe that we do not benefit by completely keeping politics out. In fact I think that politics needs to come out of the closet into the light of day and be discussed for the influence (for better OR worse) that it continues to play in what we do. Everybody keeps saying to keep politics out but everyone agrees it is a potent force that keeps influencing things. OK. Lets invite "IT" in and give it a place at the table, yes? 

I also don't see a weekend party as the answer either. I think a slow networking of folks who have roughly the same take on things would be a start. I can't see, for instance, throwing out invitations to 20 or 30 people and spending half the time working to get folks introduced to others and a common agenda. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

Hello all,

Bruce, the biggest difference here is that the other "30" top Korean nationals DO NOT have the papers...


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Kevin: 

Yes, I know what you are saying. What I am suggesting is that maybe its time to quit putting so much emphasis on papers and begin to build concensus from existing leadership about seniority. If after all of these years its still a matter of "me on top", then maybe we need to consider just what it is that we expect when we DO put somebody at the top of the heap. Lets suppose we have a pyramid and we put Lim on top of that pyramid. OK. Now what exactly does that mean and I am talking about across the board in the Hapkido community? How does this change things for practitioners in France? What about Combat Hapkido folks in Montana?  What about Julian in Malaysia? What about Ji in New Jersey or Myung in California? Want a comparable example? 

In many posts I have invoked scholarship to support my positions. What if people don't care about scholarship? See my point? We easily have 15 major players in Hapkido who regularly vie for authority in their own venue and other venues. Each has their own rationale and their own collection of "groupies". Each has their own story and their own history and their own documents. I don't see anyone bending to submit to another persons' authority, do you? And everyone has "real good" reasons not to, right? 
Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 
Bruce


----------



## iron_ox

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Kevin:
> 
> Yes, I know what you are saying. What I am suggesting is that maybe its time to quit putting so much emphasis on papers and begin to build concensus from existing leadership about seniority. If after all of these years its still a matter of "me on top", then maybe we need to consider just what it is that we expect when we DO put somebody at the top of the heap. Lets suppose we have a pyramid and we put Lim on top of that pyramid. OK. Now what exactly does that mean and I am talking about across the board in the Hapkido community? How does this change things for practitioners in France? What about Combat Hapkido folks in Montana?  What about Julian in Malaysia? What about Ji in New Jersey or Myung in California? Want a comparable example?
> 
> In many posts I have invoked scholarship to support my positions. What if people don't care about scholarship? See my point? We easily have 15 major players in Hapkido who regularly vie for authority in their own venue and other venues. Each has their own rationale and their own collection of "groupies". Each has their own story and their own history and their own documents. I don't see anyone bending to submit to another persons' authority, do you? And everyone has "real good" reasons not to, right?
> Thoughts?
> 
> Best Wishes,
> Bruce



Hello Bruce, 

Quite right here. There would probably be 15 pyramids.  My impression is that becasue of a conspiracy of silence (for lack of a better word), there will always be this number. I harkin back to a famous photo taken after Ji arrived in the US with all the big names in attendence -   No one (especially herein the US) wants to spill the proverbial beans about who DOES and DOES NOT have papers - so for example, Joo Bang Lee won't say anything about Ji, Ji won't say anything about Myung etc.  No one wants to upset the apple cart - and looking geographically, it is interesting how all the big names are so conveniently spread out...

I think that the big question many of these guys probably have had for years is "what if someone comes out of Korea and upsets the balance with a "truth" different to ours"...


----------



## glad2bhere

iron_ox said:
			
		

> No one (especially herein the US) wants to spill the proverbial beans about who DOES and DOES NOT have papers - so for example, Joo Bang Lee won't say anything about Ji, Ji won't say anything about Myung etc.  No one wants to upset the apple cart - and looking geographically, it is interesting how all the big names are so conveniently spread out...
> 
> I think that the big question many of these guys probably have had for years is "what if someone comes out of Korea and upsets the balance with a "truth" different to ours"...



OK, so lets take it a step farther. Lets suppose that there is a kind of "conspiracy of silence" such that noone is going to reveal the shortcomings of another person if that person doesn't do the same. I'm just posing this as a supposition (please don't anybody tune-up on me). What we might say then is that we have a corrupted leadership like people can have a corrupted file on a computer disc. Somehow, behind the scenes the authority of these folks is compromised. Where does that leave us? Since the situation has gone on for so long I don't see that generation making-nice and coming together to work for the common good. Using paper to validate positions isn't helping because EVERYBODY has paper. But maybe there is a way to take the personality stuff out of the mix and leave only art itself without assigning a single over-riding authority. Let me give an example. 

A little while ago we had some lists of kicks and everybody noted that there were similarities. Yes some people had one kick and not another but there was a significant number of kicks that everybody shared. Now, if somebody put a gun to my head and asked for a technical definition of Hapkido, I think I could be forgiven for invoking that Hapkido is an art which includes those (say) 10 kicks. A person who says they practice the art of Hapkido would at LEAST know those ten kicks. Maybe they go on to practice another 20 kick in addition. Thats on them. But if they teach Hapkido, then they teach a minimum of those 10 kicks. See where this is going? How about another example. 

YMK Hapkido practices 6 weapons. Four of those weapns I hear mentioned quite frequently. Of those four dan bong and sword seem to get mentioned most often (though cane is pretty close in there as well). I could be forgiven for defining Hapkido as the art that practices those three weapons. Now if I want to practice sword and train to master all five architectures of Korean swords thats on me. But I don't think anyone would shoot my dog for saying that if a person practices Hapkido they will get around to training in Dan bong, cane and sword--- at a minimum. 

Now I know what you are thinking. Whats to keep someone from finding out the absolute minimum standards, becoming familiar with them and representing that they now teach Hapkido. In a word, nothing. There will always be such people. I'm not offering a panacea. I'm just tossing out some thoughts. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Now I know what you are thinking. Whats to keep someone from finding out the absolute minimum standards, becoming familiar with them and representing that they now teach Hapkido. In a word, nothing. There will always be such people. I'm not offering a panacea. I'm just tossing out some thoughts.


So what is wrong about someone learning the minimum techniques (assuming they learn them well) and teaching hapkido?  If we are only judging hapkido by the number of techniques known, then this person satisifies the requirement.  So let them teach and accept it as hapkido.

Students who learn the basic techniques and are still hungry to learn more will move on to a different school that fits their needs.  

I did that.  My old school only had a program up to 1st dan.  It offered nothing for those who wished to continue hapkido.  Now, I am not 1st dan yet, but I've already moved on to a school where the master has a lesson plan up to 4th degree because I want to someday reach the 4th dan level.

In hapkido we will always have the vast majority of students practice the art for a short time in their life.  A small number will train their whole lives and strive to learn more every day.  So the vast majority of hapkidoists will only learn the basics anyway.  It is those who wish to train their whole lives who we should expect to carry on the whole art.

Jeremy


----------



## glad2bhere

Exactly right. 

For those of us who want to practice Hapkido arts we will always be pushing the edge of the envelope. We will go to events and meet other folks who also practice Hapkido. And when we get out on the mat or floor we are comforted that the person sharing our training will have a basic skill set. I would not expect that everyone would do air-rolls on gym floors. (OK, so I'm nuts. I can live with that.) But I think I am within my rights to expect that a person could forward-roll or sit-down out of a technique such that I need not always moderate my technique for THEIR safety. Know what I mean? I teach 5 different kinds of Turning Leaf (J. "Kote gashi). I don't pretend that everyone trains in all 5 and I bet their are people who toss in some that I have not seen. All the same I think its fair that I need not hear my partner in Hapkido say, "oh, we don't do that" or "oh, I've never seen that." I have been to some events and seen folks standing on the edge of the mat because "we don't do breakfalls" in our art. What art is THAT? 

What I am thinking of are the folks who want to lay claim to practicing Hapkido without a standard skill set that allows them to work well with other practitioners. And for you commecial folks, you may want to consider the comfort you will get from having people attend your activities who are up for what will go on rather than be in over there head.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Exactly right.
> 
> And when we get out on the mat or floor we are comforted that the person sharing our training will have a basic skill set. I would not expect that everyone would do air-rolls on gym floors. (But I think I am within my rights to expect that a person could forward-roll or sit-down out of a technique such that I need not always moderate my technique for THEIR safety. Know what I mean? I teach 5 different kinds of Turning Leaf (J. "Kote gashi). I don't pretend that everyone trains in all 5 and I bet their are people who toss in some that I have not seen. All the same I think its fair that I need not hear my partner in Hapkido say, "oh, we don't do that" or "oh, I've never seen that." I have been to some events and seen folks standing on the edge of the mat because "we don't do breakfalls" in our art. What art is THAT?


Holy *#&$! There are people out there who profess to teach hapkido but don't let their students do breakfalls?!!! I mean, I can understand if not all students can do flip-falls. But basic front, side, and back falls? No way!

Ok. Can I go back a few posts and change what I wrote when defining hapkido? 

Jeremy


----------



## glad2bhere

Hey.... you don't have to believe "me". If you ever get a chance to talk to Master JR West  sometime we both saw the same experience at the first International I attended in Jackson (going back a few years). Essentially these folks stood at the edge of the mat the entire weekend and watched. I finally took it upon myself to invite them out on the mat to work with me thinking that maybe they were feeling a little overwhelmed. It was my first Internationale so "I" was feeling a little overwhelmed myself. Had to work hard not make judgements when I got their response. Kinda sad, if you really think about it. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Disco

OK folks, I'm going to kick over the garbage can. There seems to be a contradiction of sorts between this thread and the other thread dealing with the practical application(s). It has already been stated and echo'd that what you do to someone in the street will in no way be the same as what's accomplished in the dojang. That's the reality of what the techniques are designed to do. If you are challenged in the street, it's a good bet it's not going to be by a trained hapkidoin, jujitsu or judo player. If you are attacked, you are trained to deal with that attack. If he/she/they should get thru your defense, you most likely will have a body on yours going to the ground. I have never seen anyone be able to do any type of controlled breakfall with an aggressive body weight attached. Try this on your partner next time when training -- Allow him to be non-compliant and now you are forced to intro duce a persuader. Biomechanics take over and the body responds to the strike/kick/etc. As the body responds you then do your technique. Poof, your partner now has a broken body part and he knew how to breakfall, he just wasen't allowed too. My point to all this is that I personally feel breakfalls are a waste of time and something introduced to stretch out the training time frame. I realize that many out there love this element of training. I've been to enough show and tells and it starts to look like the U.S. gymnastic is in town. Look at the reality of what is being done to the human body. Even in training doing the breakfalls, if either you or your partner are out of sync, somebody will most likely get hurt. There's always the mention of reality training. Don't you think that were glossing over the reality aspect of what this stuff does, if people are flying all over the place and getting right back up to do it all over again. I take my people right to the edge of the technique - slowly, so they can see and feel just what will really happen next. The body positioning is drasticlly altered compared to somebody who anticipates the move and stays ahead to do a breakfall. Even your body position (delivering the technique) will change. The irony of my position is that it was introduced to me by an older Korean instructor.


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Ummm...Disco, I think you missed a few posts.  Start back around post #323 and read the conversation from that point forward.


----------



## Paul B

This is good...how about the flipside of the coin? (ha ha)

The couple of times I have had a "turning leaf" aka kote gaeshi slammed on me and the only reason my wrist didn't break was because of my "unnecessary" breakfall? Huh...huh... 

This is a relative Hapkido Q&A....

quick....hurry...before the politicians come back!:lol:


----------



## Disco

Ok, I went back to page 16, 17, 18, 19 and then came back here. Just what is it that you feel I have missed? The last 2 or 3 posts by yourself and Bruce were in relation to breakfalls or the lack there of. A new thought line was introduced and I responded to it............. :idunno:


----------



## SmellyMonkey

I understand your belief that breakfalls are not needed when practicing joint locks.  (I don't agree with it, but I get your point.)

But does the hapkido you practice not have throws?  Foot throws, knee throws, hip throws, etc.  What about defenses against kicks where you catch the kick and slam the person to the ground?

I can think of many techniques in hapkido where one needs to learn how to fall because the fall itself is whole point of the technique.  I don't understand how you can learn these techniques if you don't know how to receive these techniques, fall down properly, and not get hurt.  And if you don't practice these techniques, you are missing a lot of hapkido.

Jeremy


----------



## whalen

I have had the privilege of sharing the mat with (disco) mike and Do not let him fool you he is very capable and he knows how to fall and his Hapkido is good.....

  Do not sell him short


Hal Whalen

Go  KERRY......... artyon:


----------



## Disco

I can think of many techniques in hapkido where one needs to learn how to fall because the fall itself is whole point of the technique.

The fall itself is not the point of the technique. It's the result of extraneous training. I'll repeat for you and Paul. The only reason the fall happens is because you trained to take the fall which #1 - you know is coming and #2 - you are taught to anticipate or go with the actual technique. I'll repeat this aspect too, If you hit, really hit, even a trained practicioner, you take away their ability to anticipate and or to fully go with the technique. Hasen't Bruce already stipulated how easy it is to do real physical harm? Hasen't Stewart (on the other thread), also stipulated that breakfalls outside of the dojang have serious repercussions. 

But does the hapkido you practice not have throws? Foot throws, knee throws, hip throws, etc. What about defenses against kicks where you catch the kick and slam the person to the ground?

Correct, I'm defensing against the kick and the kicker is being slamed to the ground, same principle(s). Again, these throws that are practiced in the dojang will not be inacted the same way in the street. Again, your not dealing with someone trained to anticipate and or go with the technique. Something is going to break and drasticly weaking whatever leverage point you had, thus eliminating the nice controlled. I've done the breakfall training and at one time I admit that it was cool to be on the receiving end of the techniques and people were very impressed. That old Korean I mentioned said to me, "Why you train, you want be victim"? "You think bad guy fall all over like dojang"? Don't think I'd call him a rebel, but he was very opioniated and to me made sense. He said other things that his contempories would have had issue with.


----------



## Paul B

Hi, Mst. Whalen,

 I do find it very interesting that a senior practitioner would say that nauk bup isn't important.:idunno: 

And as a rule regarding technique,I don't sell anyone short,especially seniors. Otherwise I would probably find out how important Nauk Bup really is...Ha,Ha! :lol:

No disrepect intended to anybody...I try not to take myself too seriously,but I do take Hapkido very seriously. So...I'll shut up now.


----------



## Disco

Hal, appriciate the kind words. Just wish I could do it like when I was younger. Getting old is a lousy way to go.. :uhyeah: 

Just trying to formulate some outside the box thinking here. We all realize the breakfall training has a strong influence within the training criteria. I just think that many put way to much emphasis on that aspect of training and loose track of what really is suppose to happen when the technique is used for real.


----------



## Disco

So...I'll shut up now.

Paul, no need for that. We need your input as well. I learn something new everyday, Well at least I think I do, but it could be just the halfzimeres kicking in. I only forget stuff half of the time. :uhohh:


----------



## Kumbajah

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> I teach 5 different kinds of Turning Leaf (J. "Kote gashi).



Bruce Hapkido is a *KOREAN*  tradition please refrain from using Japonese terms  

Just thought a little ribbing was in order 

Brian


----------



## SmellyMonkey

Disco said:
			
		

> The fall itself is not the point of the technique. It's the result of extraneous training. I'll repeat for you and Paul. The only reason the fall happens is because you trained to take the fall which #1 - you know is coming and #2 - you are taught to anticipate or go with the actual technique. I'll repeat this aspect too, If you hit, really hit, even a trained practicioner, you take away their ability to anticipate and or to fully go with the technique. Hasen't Bruce already stipulated how easy it is to do real physical harm? Hasen't Stewart (on the other thread), also stipulated that breakfalls outside of the dojang have serious repercussions.


I don't know how the debate got here!  Mike, I am sure we are not disagreeing with each other.

I agree, techniques where the defender HAS to jump or throw themselves to the ground voluntarilly are not the best self defense techniques.  I catorigize those as the "art" part of the martial art.  

For a self-defense throw, the whole point is that fast stop at the end called the ground.  It hits harder than any kick or strike ever could.

I've heard it said (or read it) that throwing arts are some of the oldest arts around.  Who can't see the logic in trying to get someone to hit the ground hard enough to mess them up?

And how do you practice throwing someone?  YOU THROW THEM!  And how does the person getting thrown not get messed up themselves during practice?  They learn how to breakfall!

 When Bruce said he met "hapkidoists" who said they never learned how to do breakfalls and therefore couldn't practice whatever technique he wanted to practice, I was shocked.  I don't believe "hapkido" without training on how to take a fall is hapkido.  

Jeremy


----------



## glad2bhere

Dear Brian: 

Point WELL taken. It just shows to go you how badly we either a.) need a common English nomenclature or b.) need a uniform Korean nomenclature. Right now just about every Japanese tradition that does a wrist throw calls it such. Most folks who have been around the block with Hapkido will recognize the Japanese term. For the Koreans, however, even if the same term is used expect that the spelling may not always be consistent. 

Folks, we really need to fix this. Thoughts? For myself I vote for using Han-ja but there is some wicked nasty learning curve to that compared to Han-gul. Some folks simply number the techniques for their curriculum, but that usually only works in a closed group who know the sequence of techniques. Comments?  

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere

For folks still considering breakfalls I would like to reinterate that one need not necessarily do air-rolls to take falls. In fact during my visit to Korea Dojunim Kim dissuaded me from using air-rolls to take some of the techniques, encouraging me to sit-out the technique--- in typical White Belt fashion. However, I will also point out that I saw none of the UPPER ranks use air-rolls at their level either. Does anyone know if the DRAJJ people use air rolls? I know the Aikido folks do. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Paul B

Hi, Bruce,


Yes,they do.

And I would jump up and down in celebration if someone did catagorize the techniques like that. I do tire of using the terminology I know for the techniques in Japanese. Oh,and I never do that in class.:asian:


----------



## Kumbajah

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> Dear Brian:
> 
> It just shows to go you how badly we either a.) need a common English nomenclature or b.) need a uniform Korean nomenclature.
> Bruce



Just giving you a hard time - But I agree that terms need to be standardized. I usually refer to things as "you know this one". I tried to learn the korean term for kuzushi. I was told just use english. Which is ok. But I'm surprised that there is not a standard term for it in Hapkido. And to tie the two sub threads "air rolls" are known as "sky falls" in our federation. I'm sure that you would know what I'm talking about but a standard would be nice. Another thing that threw me (t)dollyo chagi - for us = spinning heel kick - to most TKD guys I've met = round house. If Koreans aren't consistent how does that fair for us Westerners . 

Brian


----------



## glad2bhere

OK, but go back to the original question, for a moment. First of all do we want to use Korean language or English. Once we have a decision there we can begin to make the terminology uniform by simply translating from one to the other, yes? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## SmellyMonkey

glad2bhere said:
			
		

> OK, but go back to the original question, for a moment. First of all do we want to use Korean language or English. Once we have a decision there we can begin to make the terminology uniform by simply translating from one to the other, yes?
> 
> Best Wishes,
> 
> Bruce


I have no problem with romanized Korean....except that I don't know Korean and we don't use Korean in class.  :uhyeah:


----------



## glad2bhere

I'm OK with Korean as well. It would need to be a one-two project, then. 

The first step would be to identify a single label for a single technique and use it consistently. For instance, one persons "front-snap-kick" couldn't also be called "a kick-to-the-front-utilizing-the-foot" just because somebody wanted to be different. 

The second step would be to identify a single Romanized Han-gul and stick with despite whatever changes the Korean government feels like making THIS week or what dialects away from Seoul may prefer. 

Anyone? Thoughts? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## ajs1976

Including a description of the technique might also be a good idea.  I think it is possible that two people could be using the same name for two similiar, but different techniques.


----------



## glad2bhere

.... and to be real honest with everyone, I have some grave concerns here. Let me give you an example using the kicking material. 

I think everyone knows the basic front snap kick (FSK).

In the Yon Mu Kwan we use the in-step, meaning the top of the foot up close to the ankle. Years ago I used to do a FSK using the ball of the foot. I am going to bet that some purist is going to want to use separate terms for each of these kicks. 

Now take it a step farther. Later in the YMK curriculum we have a Toe Kick which comes straight-on like a FSK. There are also the same kick delivered high (under the jawline) and low (into the bladder or inner thigh). 

To make matters worse, that Low Toe Kick can also pass as what we call an Inside Outside Swivel Kick if done just a tad differently. See where this is going? Its like the White Light Spectrum run through a prism. How light can green get, before it stops being green and is actually now yellow. BTW: This is why I took the tact of identifying the MINIMUM standard. Trying to put together and name an exhaustive curriculum everyone would agree on would be damn-near impossible, don'chathink?  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## ajs1976

From what I have seen of Hapkidoin, so far you guys don't seem to agree on much of anything.

At TKD class when we practice the front snap kick, we use either the ball of the foot or the instep.  Same kick, the point of contact depends on the target and its position.  This could be included in the description.

I think it is a good idea to try to define the minimums, because once they are defined it is easier to move past them and to start discussing the midlevel and advanced.  besides the longer you guys keep this discussion going, the more I learn about Hapkido.


----------



## Kumbajah

I vote for english - we, on this board at least are english speakers. I think it would be great to have a curriculum like judo's. If you refer to Osoto gari anywhere in the world people will know exactly what you are talking about. Judo has the Kodokan so all stems from there. There are variations but the "base" curriculum comes from the Kodokan. Hapkido doen't have this advantage. Even differences within Korean arts - dollyo chagi I mentioned earlier. Hapkido = spinning heal kick. TKD = roundhouse. Where the translation is basically turning kick. Could be a host of kicks.

Brian


----------



## glad2bhere

doc clean said:
			
		

> besides the longer you guys keep this discussion going, the more I learn about Hapkido.



Good deal!! I for one have no problem telling you all of our secrets. -----Of course, when I'm done I'll have to kill you. Nothing Personal, OK?  :ultracool 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------

