# "combat" hkd... sry



## goingd (Jun 21, 2009)

An article I read recently (sorry, I couldn't link it but you can find it as reference link number 11 on combat hapkido's wikipedia article), positively compared John Pelligrini with Bruce Lee........

What is your take on such comparison? (mine was a mix of laughter and disturbance, no honest means to offend)

^~^


----------



## crushing (Jun 21, 2009)

The link was extremely easy to find.  You even said where it was.

Link #11 goes to:  http://www.***************/martial-articles/DISTRACT_DISABLE_AND_DESTROY.html



> If an award were given for stirring up controversy, combat- hapkido creator John Pellegrini of Brandon, Florida, would be the world champion of 2003. His opening statement in the cover story of the June 2003 issue of Black Belt&#8212;&#8220;Forget the fancy high kicks, lose the forms and stop wasting time with healing, meditation and breathing exercises or outdated weapons training&#8221;&#8212;was nearly as bold as the late Bruce Lee&#8217;s infamous 1966 declaration that &#8220;all fixed set patterns are incapable of adaptability or pliability&#8212;the truth is outside of all fixed patterns.&#8221;


As you can see the comparison was about statements made by each.  I can see how each of these statement may upset some people and may be considered controversial.

Out of curiosity, what do you find humorous and disturbing about the quoted paragraph?


----------



## Wey (Jun 21, 2009)

crushing said:


> The link was extremely easy to find.  You even said where it was.
> 
> Link #11 goes to:  http://www.***************/martial-articles/DISTRACT_DISABLE_AND_DESTROY.html
> 
> ...



I don't think forms are completely outdated. I believe there are good techniques to be learned from them, but to get the most out of them is to practice them without a fixed pattern. Just my opinion.


----------



## goingd (Jun 22, 2009)

crushing said:


> The link was extremely easy to find.  You even said where it was.
> 
> Link #11 goes to:  http://www.***************/martial-articles/DISTRACT_DISABLE_AND_DESTROY.html
> 
> ...


Try clicking the link - it doesn't work - that is why I did not post it.

In my minds eye Pelligrini has done Hapkido a disservice in several ways. And in my minds eye Bruce Lee did the world an incredible service. So I thought that something that was so far from my perceived truth was funny. I found disturbing that because of what I think is so much controlled bias throughout the internet and in magazines, Pelligrini may actually go down in the martial history of many people in the same category with Bruce Lee. I should have said that I found it upsetting rather than disturbing.

I may no longer practice Hapkido formally or even as my primary martial art, but I have a heart for it, and most things relating to combat hapkido literally make me sad. I've practiced even less Kenpo but I feel the same way when I see things like that...


----------



## goingd (Jun 22, 2009)

Wey said:


> I don't think forms are completely outdated. I believe there are good techniques to be learned from them, but to get the most out of them is to practice them without a fixed pattern. Just my opinion.



I completely agree with that. We have to first restrict ourselves so that we can become unrestricted, and we have to first limit ourselves so that we can become limitless.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 22, 2009)

I can certainly see the comparision.  They are both advocating a divergence from the traditional - and isn't that really what is upsetting people about GM Pelligrini?  Not that he is doing something new and innovative (because in reality, it ISN'T that new, the novelty is in the presentation and marketing), but because he is using the name Hapkido, as is there is some mystical traditional standard related to that name.  

If he had called his system Combat Aikido, it would be the Aikido people that we up in arms; if he had called it Combat Wing Chun, they would be unhappy.  It is just naming.  The system is based on his background, which is Hapkido.  How much experience he had in it is irrelevant.  He has still created a system which is new, innovative and different from the "traditional" - just like Bruce Lee did.  All Lee did was take the things that he had learned from being an exceptional Martial Artist and created a new way of presenting things that worked better for him and obviously for others.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 22, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> I can certainly see the comparision.  They are both advocating a divergence from the traditional - and isn't that really what is upsetting people about GM Pelligrini?  Not that he is doing something new and innovative (because in reality, it ISN'T that new, the novelty is in the presentation and marketing), but because he is using the name Hapkido, as is there is some mystical traditional standard related to that name.
> 
> If he had called his system Combat Aikido, it would be the Aikido people that we up in arms; if he had called it Combat Wing Chun, they would be unhappy.  It is just naming.  The system is based on his background, which is Hapkido.  How much experience he had in it is irrelevant.  He has still created a system which is new, innovative and different from the "traditional" - just like Bruce Lee did.  All Lee did was take the things that he had learned from being an exceptional Martial Artist and created a new way of presenting things that worked better for him and obviously for others.



I think some of the basic difference is that Bruce could translate his theory into action. There was little doubt that Bruce could show you what he was talking about. He also didn't say he was creating "new" wing chun. He liberally stole from everyone and thought that each should find he own way. Called his method something new because it was something new. 

GM P - attached himself to Hapkido's wagon to sell to a TKD crowd. It was originally to designed as an add on to TKD, something that TKD had been doing for years anyway to fill out their self defense. Even Gen Choi included HKD (represented HKD as TKD) in his book. So there was a standing tradition of TKD leaching of HKD. GM P just changed the marketing so as to have the cash flow to himself. 

Secondly I don't see "How much experience he had in it is irrelevant. " especially if he claims to have streamlined HKD. If it truly a new thing why call it Hapkido anything. He draws a lot of ire from the HKD community also because his HKD basics are terrible. He doesn't have a firm grasp of the art that he has "modernized" - He is imo, the embodiment what is wrong with the MAs. Selling a fantasy.


----------



## clfsean (Jun 22, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> Secondly I don't see "How much experience he had in it is irrelevant. " especially if he claims to have streamlined HKD. If it truly a new thing why call it Hapkido anything.



Same reason BL called it Jeet Kune Do. Aside from a few WC principles & BL speaking Canontese, there's nothing CMA about it. 



Kumbajah said:


> He draws a lot of ire from the HKD community also because his HKD basics are terrible. He doesn't have a firm grasp of the art that he has "modernized" - He is imo, the embodiment what is wrong with the MAs. Selling a fantasy.



Much like a ton of other people from all walks of MA advertising their "new & improved" anything. They're going to get their business regardless of calling what it is or "Bubba Joe's School of Hard Knocks & Mud Stomping".


----------



## Drac (Jun 22, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I think some of the basic difference is that Bruce could translate his theory into action. There was little doubt that Bruce could show you what he was talking about.


 
If you ever bothered to attend a seminar you would discover that GMP could show you what he was talking about also

.





Kumbajah said:


> Secondly I don't see "How much experience he had in it is irrelevant. " especially if he claims to have streamlined HKD. If it truly a new thing why call it Hapkido anything. He draws a lot of ire from the HKD community also because his HKD basics are terrible. He doesn't have a firm grasp of the art that he has "modernized" - He is imo, the embodiment what is wrong with the MAs. Selling a fantasy.


 
This " fantasy" works..I was very wary of CH and GMP when I first encountered them having come from a very strict traditional discipline..I have used his techniques on the streets with great sucess..


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 22, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I think some of the basic difference is that Bruce could translate his theory into action. There was little doubt that Bruce could show you what he was talking about.


 
I don't know if GM P could the flashy kicks that Bruce Lee could do, but I've been his Uke....so I'm not sure how you can say that what he does doesn't translate into action. His techniques are just as effective as the Traditional HKD instructor (4th Dan) that I used to study with. He can show you exactly what he's talking about and does. He is also very good at translating theory into instruction. He is one of the few that I've encountered who can look at what you're doing and tell you exactly how to modify to make it work.



Kumbajah said:


> GM P - attached himself to Hapkido's wagon to sell to a TKD crowd. It was originally to designed as an add on to TKD, something that TKD had been doing for years anyway to fill out their self defense. Even Gen Choi included HKD (represented HKD as TKD) in his book. So there was a standing tradition of TKD leaching of HKD. GM P just changed the marketing so as to have the cash flow to himself.


 
and? It is a separate way of teaching. A separate style and system of instruction. If you ask me, as another instructor and student, I would rather have some kind of backing behind the "add on" that I'm giving my students than what many TKD instructors have. I have encountered some TKD instructors who integrate HKD, tell their students that it is HKD, but have little to no HKD experience. So what is wrong with that same instructor telling his students that he uses the CHKD system?



Kumbajah said:


> Secondly I don't see "How much experience he had in it is irrelevant. " especially if he claims to have streamlined HKD. If it truly a new thing why call it Hapkido anything. He draws a lot of ire from the HKD community also because his HKD basics are terrible. He doesn't have a firm grasp of the art that he has "modernized" - He is imo, the embodiment what is wrong with the MAs. Selling a fantasy.


 
It works, which is what I care about. Personally, I couldn't care less what it is called. Should it be called "Hapkido" anything? That's a matter of opinion. I think you may have missed the point of what he teaches. Of course, I don't have a very strong background in Traditional Hapkido OR Combat Hapkido, but have attended several seminars from both styles. If what he does works, it can be taught, and people like it....why does his background matter? Every art is descended from another style through repackaging. Many of the "founders" of other styles worked from scratch or from a loose knowledge of other styles based on interpretation and experimentation.

What bothers me most about these discussions is that none of the discussion is based on the style of CHKD itself. It is based on the man who created it and more often than not, the denigration of the man. I have yet to have EVER seen a discussion based on any failings of the art itself. Some very vague assertations of "I've seen it and his basics are horrible." But that says nothing....how many great fighters don't look anything like their parent style? Does it matter? Of course not. Does it matter that what they do doesn't look like the basics that you practice back and forth on the floor? No. It works, that is what matters....and THAT was the focus of what Bruce Lee was trying to preach. Do what works and don't be tied down by tradition.  My opinion is that people are focusing on the wrong basics.  He understands the concepts of Joint Manipulation and Pain compliance and how to use force multipliers against vulnerable targets on the body.  Isn't that the REAL basics of Hapkido?  Please demonstrate his lack of understanding of those basics or how those basics are terrible.  I'm talking about the basics that force an Uke to comply based on manipulation of their body.

So again, I think that the comparison was solid. Both of them stated that the most effective way of practicing Martial Arts is to do what works and eliminate what doesn't. That is the focus of both of their styles, is it not?

Bottom line is, I've been there and experienced it and it works....Plus, he's a really nice guy.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 22, 2009)

I have been through this all before - he doesn't have good basics for any jujutsu based art not just for Hapkido. It's not worth my time to go through it again. It's in the archives. 

My point of being an add on is - HKD is it's own art and deserves to be studied as one. TKD adds HKD - HKD doesn't add TKD. None of the add on is as good as the whole art that it was taken from. TKD should just be the sport that it is and be happy with it. Stop trying to be something it isn't. 

The comparison of GM P and B.L. is just plain silly.


----------



## goingd (Jun 22, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I have been through this all before - he doesn't have good basics for any jujutsu based art not just for Hapkido. It's not worth my time to go through it again. It's in the archives.
> 
> My point of being an add on is - HKD is it's own art and deserves to be studied as one. TKD adds HKD - HKD doesn't add TKD. None of the add on is as good as the whole art that it was taken from. TKD should just be the sport that it is and be happy with it. Stop trying to be something it isn't.
> 
> The comparison of GM P and B.L. is just plain silly.



Taekwondo is more than sport to me, and I respect Hapkido as it's own deep entity. Heh, but that's besides the point.

I knew this would be controversial, but I have to say that I just CANNOT agree that what Pelligrini says has genuine comparison to Bruce Lee...... scary....


----------



## crushing (Jun 22, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I have been through this all before.


 
You beat me to it!


----------



## arnisador (Jun 23, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> The comparison of GM P and B.L. is just plain silly.



With very few exceptions, _all_ comparisons to Bruce Lee are silly. It isn't just that he was very good--it's that everyone is different.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jun 23, 2009)

arnisador said:


> With very few exceptions, _all_ comparisons to Bruce Lee are silly. It isn't just that he was very good--it's that everyone is different.



No only that but really should Bruce Lee be the measuring stick?


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 23, 2009)

Ok, let's clear this up.  I think that the presentation has muddied the waters a bit.  The quote from the article is as follows:



> If an award were given for stirring up controversy, combat- hapkido creator John Pellegrini of Brandon, Florida, would be the world champion of 2003. His opening statement in the cover story of the June 2003 issue of Black Belt.  Forget the fancy high kicks, lose the forms and stop wasting time with healing, meditation and breathing exercises or outdated weapons training was nearly as bold as the late Bruce Lee's infamous 1966 declaration that all fixed set patterns are incapable of adaptability or pliability the truth is outside of all fixed patterns.


 
We are not talking about comparing skills of martial artists or of their impact on the community or any of the many things that it seems people are referring to.  What is being compared is a statement and belief that GM P has and a statement and belief that Bruce Lee had.  Nothing more.

So based on that....how is this not a valide comparison?  

"Forget the fancy high kicks, lose the forms and stop wasting time with healing, meditation and breathing exercises"
vs
"all fixed set patterns are incapable of adaptability or pliability; the truth is outside of all fixed patterns"
Are they not both advocating a divergence from tradition?  Are they not both advocating that effectiveness is more important than forms?

I believe that we need to stop inflating this one sentence literary statement into something that it is not.  Time will tell how much of an influence GM P has in the overall scheme.  Bruce Lee's story is written, GM P's is still in progress.  The writer was comparing a belief and theory, not the men.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 23, 2009)

Actually, I just reread the expert AGAIN and realized that the writer wasn't even comparing the statement, he was saying that GM P's statement was just as bold as Lee's statement.  Basically that they both stirred up controversy.  I know that people are very anxious to put down anything done by GM Pelligrini, but again, this statement is nothing to get upset about.  It is still a solid comparison.  GM P's statement was bold, Bruce Lee's statement was bold.  You can't argue with that.  

Crushing already pointed this out....but the discussion, it seems, is still based on what kind of martial artist GM P is, not about the statement that he made.


----------



## terryl965 (Jun 23, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I have been through this all before - he doesn't have good basics for any jujutsu based art not just for Hapkido. It's not worth my time to go through it again. It's in the archives.
> 
> My point of being an add on is - HKD is it's own art and deserves to be studied as one. TKD adds HKD - HKD doesn't add TKD. None of the add on is as good as the whole art that it was taken from. TKD should just be the sport that it is and be happy with it. Stop trying to be something it isn't.
> 
> The comparison of GM P and B.L. is just plain silly.


 
Sorry but the point about all TKD is is a sport and should be happy that way, well long before it was a sport it was an Art and should be treated like one.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 23, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> GM P's statement was bold, Bruce Lee's statement was bold.  You can't argue with that.



He made essentially the same statement as Bruce Lee did, but 37 years later and with many fewer people taking notice? Eh, not so bold, actually. By that time MMA had thrown away all of that stuff with much less fuss.

I've never met the man and have no first-hand knowledge either way on his abilities. (People whom I respect respect him, so in fact I'm favourably inclined toward him.) But "Forget the fancy high kicks, lose the forms and stop wasting time with healing, meditation and breathing exercises or outdated weapons training" was in no way a bold statement in 2003, well after the Gracies started revolutionizing modern training.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 23, 2009)

terryl965 said:


> Sorry but the point about all TKD is is a sport and should be happy that way, well long before it was a sport it was an Art and should be treated like one.



No before it was children's physical education ala Shotokan. Now it is a sport.


----------



## Miles (Jun 23, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> No before it was children's physical education ala Shotokan. Now it is a sport.


 
Sorry to get off topic, but I don't think that when GM Park, Hae Man (TKD) was working at the Blue House along with GM Ji, Han Jae (HKD), the former was teaching the President's children physical education.  They both were working with the Security Forces.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 23, 2009)

The "Father" of TKD , Gen. Choi was a second Dan Shotokan when he started teaching in Korea. Shotokan was modified Okinawan Te. It was taught  Under the authority of the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai  which was part of of the ministry of education. Compared to the "original" te TKD is thin as an art.


----------



## zDom (Jun 23, 2009)

I am in no position to judge CHKD as I have never met anyone who has practiced it.

I do know THIS, however:

A student who quit MSK hapkido at the dojang where I trained at green belt (our progression is white, yellow, orange, green) reportedly applied for and was awarded a CHKD black belt via mail. I've seen the Web site for the school he opened.

I find that ... disturbing.

Especially since he, by my observations, quit us because it was too hard for him and he wasn't promoting as fast as he wanted to. He was asking at yellow belt after only a couple months of training how long it would take for him to get to black belt so he could open his own school.

I'm not knocking CHKD as I have no personal experience encountering it. But any organization willing to promote gups from another system to chodan without a physical test conducted in person is, in my opinion, lacking integrity.

(shrug) or maybe they just think we are THAT good: that one of our below-average green belts is the equivalent of a black belt in CHKD.


----------



## goingd (Jun 23, 2009)

I my mind it is an invalid comparison. Bruce Lee talked about the disadvantage of set forms, Pelligrini criticized most traditional martial arts by throwing them in a barrel with pure demonstration and flash styles.

On a side note (apparently since part of this thread already diverged a bit off topic), Gen. Choi was not the only one to influence Taekwondo. He named it but did not designate it's concepts and techniques. Just saying. Taekwondo is pure sport when practiced as pure sport. Wushu is pure show when practiced as pure show. Not Taekwondo schools only practice it as sport.

... ^~^


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 23, 2009)

The ironic thing is that Hapkido ( at least Ji's line) is an amalgamation of what the pioneers thought was the most useful. In the Game of Death, Bruce gave GM Ji the highest position in the tower ( i.e. the closest to Bruce's ideal of no form represented by Bruce) The movie was suposed to be an allegory for Bruce's philosphy. GM P is a Johnny come lately selling ideas as his own.


----------



## zDom (Jun 23, 2009)

Apologies to anyone I might have offended with my previous post. I logged back on to edit but it's too late now. Ah well.


----------



## goingd (Jun 24, 2009)

I didn't see any reason to edit your post. It shouldn't have offended - it was just an opinion. ^~^


----------



## Chris from CT (Jun 24, 2009)

crushing said:


> > If an award were given for stirring up controversy, combat- hapkido creator John Pellegrini of Brandon, Florida, would be the world champion of 2003. His opening statement in the cover story of the June 2003 issue of Black BeltForget the fancy high kicks, lose the forms and stop wasting time with healing, meditation and breathing exercises or outdated weapons trainingwas nearly as bold as the late Bruce Lees infamous 1966 declaration that all fixed set patterns are incapable of adaptability or pliabilitythe truth is outside of all fixed patterns.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

I get a little frustrated when I hear quotes by GMP about Traditional Hapkido, not because he is doing financially well, but his blatant attempt at putting down Traditional Hapkido inaccurately.

I say that because his view and classification of what traditional Hapkido is, is false.

The reasons behind that are

1. Hapkido did not/does not have "fancy high kicks or forms." 

2. In addition to that, the only healing that it had was immediate first aid when you messed up your partner during training (muscle spasms, dislocations, getting knocked out, etc.). And to be honest, in our litigious society, how many Hapkido dojang today teach how to reduce a shoulder (putting it back in)? So he didnt have to take much out there either.

3. The breathing exercises, if for nothing less was to help muscle conditioning through contracture of the body's muscles while doing basic movements. We can look at them in a more esoteric view, but as far as breathing exercises being irrelevant is ridiculous using GMPs reasons for getting rid of them. That is unless in CHKD it isnt a benefit to be physically in shape.

4. The use of outdated weapons can be thought of as useless only if you do not think of them outside of the "traditional box." Using a very basic example, swinging a sword repeatedly in an efficient way, as taught traditionally, can definitely increase the strength and accuracy when I swing a basic stick at someone to defend myself.

So, yes, I do find it a little disturbing that GMP is getting compared with Bruce Lee because just from the first two statements I made shows that he knew very little of what made up traditional Hapkido. We've all heard that saying, _"you have to know the rules before you break them."_

Note: to help keep this from getting out of hand, I did not mention anything of GMP skills in this post.


----------



## crushing (Jun 24, 2009)

zDom said:


> (shrug) or maybe they just think we are THAT good: that one of our below-average green belts is the equivalent of a black belt in CHKD.


 
Looks like the key word in your post was "reportedly".  It's tough to tell without confirmation.  All the people I know that are black belts in ICHF trained for years to earn it.  But, since we've all heard of so many schools in the various martial arts where black belts are sold, it would not surprise me if one of these schools that have CHKD as an add-on may do the same for the BB cert as there isn't a national certification board that conducts the testing for 1st Dan.

Anyway, your last paragraph has me wondering why you wouldn't assume your organization is that good, rather than that he other organization must just be that bad.


----------



## crushing (Jun 24, 2009)

Chris from CT said:


> I say that because his view and classification of what traditional Hapkido is, is false.
> 
> The reasons behind that are




Thanks Chris! I appreciate your perspective on the comparison of their quotes and I certainly don't disagree with it.




Chris from CT said:


> Note: to help keep this from getting out of hand, I did not mention anything of GMP skills in this post.


 
:lfao:  It kind of backed in there though, didn't it?


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 24, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> "...stop wasting time with healing..."


 
This isn't directed at MBuzzy, but rather a question of the original quote.  What the hell is wrong with healing?  We all ought to be learning some amount of healing, esp. when we practice a destructive art.  sheesh.  myopic.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 24, 2009)

I agree with you, although I'm not sure that I'd trust my martial arts instructor to teach me.  I have met a few that have genuine knowledge of healing practices...but I've also met a lot that don't know anything, but assume that they do.


----------



## Brian Jones (Jun 25, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> The ironic thing is that Hapkido ( at least Ji's line) is an amalgamation of what the pioneers thought was the most useful. In the Game of Death, Bruce gave GM Ji the highest position in the tower ( i.e. the closest to Bruce's ideal of no form represented by Bruce) The movie was suposed to be an allegory for Bruce's philosphy. GM P is a Johnny come lately selling ideas as his own.


 
Ummm. No.  The Highest level was where Kareem Abdul Jabbar was.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 25, 2009)

Sorry - You're correct. 

Kareem was supposed to represent Jeet Kun Do. The sensitivity to light was his down fall. Maybe we are not supposed to look at JKD to closely - it fails in the light of day. Or by exposing it to the light of day it is revealed as another set system and Bruce is able to trancend it.


----------



## CDKJudoka (Jun 25, 2009)

Chris from CT said:


> I get a little frustrated when I hear quotes by GMP about Traditional Hapkido, not because he is doing financially well, but his blatant attempt at putting down Traditional Hapkido inaccurately.
> 
> I say that because his view and classification of what traditional Hapkido is, is false.
> 
> ...



No fancy high kicks or forms? Last time I checked HKD had some kicks that would rival TKD on the fancy scale.


----------



## Chris from CT (Jun 25, 2009)

DarkPhoenix said:


> No fancy high kicks or forms? Last time I checked HKD had some kicks that would rival TKD on the fancy scale.


 
Those are some nice kicks in the video.

You are talking about Hapkido from GM Ji, Han-jae's lineage (pre or post Sin Moo), which has some unbelievable kicks.  

In my previous post I was talking about Hapkido not from GM Ji's lineage (more from Choi, Yong-sul dojunim).  Here we have very few kicks and 90% of them were below the waist.  Depending on where you stand that could be seen as a positive or a negative.  

I stand by my previous post.  BUT, in hindsight, I could have been more specific.  My bad.


----------



## zDom (Jun 26, 2009)

Chris from CT said:


> Those are some nice kicks in the video.
> 
> You are talking about Hapkido from GM Ji, Han-jae's lineage (pre or post Sin Moo), which has some unbelievable kicks.
> 
> ...




Moo Sul Kwan hapkido also has dynamic kicking.

For what its worth, GM Ji was not alone responsible for adding in the dynamic kicks.

According to Dakin Burdick (and this information is substaniated by other accounts, fwiw):



> Around 1958, both Choi and Suh opened their own schools in Taegu City. Yong-Sul Choi had been teaching privately on straw mats in the courtyard of his home since 1953. Among his pupils were Han-Jae Ji (then a freshman at Taegu City Technical High School) and Mu-Hyun Kim (aka. Mu-Wung Kim, Moo-Woong Kim, Moo-Moong Kim). Around 1958, Choi started his own tojang in an old dancing hall. Suh sold his brewery and opened a hapkido school at Chung-ang-dong, hiring Mu-Hyun Kim (then 21 years old) as his head instructor. Kim later moved to Seoul, where &#8220;he went to some temple to develop his kicking techniques which originally Hap Ki Do never had much of.&#8221; According to Kimm, Mu-Hyun Kim was known as a kicking specialist, and it was during his eight month stay in Seoul at Ji&#8217;s school that Hapkido&#8217;s kicks were finalized.



The Suh is Bok-Sup Suh, Choi's first student.

The Kimm is Dr. He-young Kimm

Kim (Mu-hyun) also taught at the (Korean) Musulkwan founded by Kwang-Wha Won, a student of Suh (and Choi). Dakin writes that:



> Kwang-Wha Won was the personal secretary and bodyguard for Congressman Dong-Jin Suh from 1954 to 1958. Won learned yukweonsul from Bok-Sup Suh. Won moved to San Sun Kyo, Seoul, and opened his own school (Musulkwan) after teaching at Mu-Wung Kim&#8217;s tojang in 1962. Notable students were Lee-Hyun Park (a professor at Southeast Missouri State University), He-young Kimm, Hyung-dae Won (Won&#8217;s son and head of the Musulkwan after his father&#8217;s death). Musulkwan training specialized in short stick, knife defense, powerful and direct armlocks, defense against right hand attacks, big circle throws.




Lee-Hyun Park is, of course, the same late Lee H. Park who founded the (American) Moo Sul Kwan.

FWIW, GM Ji is a giant in the history of hapkido. It doesn't diminish him any to note that Kim was ALSO key to developing HKD's dynamic kicking. 

I would hope that in the future his name is not forgotten in discussion of hapkido's dynamic kicking and that credit is given where credit is due in future discussions.


In my opinion, hapkido's dynamic kicking is "young man's hapkido" that is great for pushing athleticism in training, intimidating to opponents when dealing with multiple attackers, and *extremely* effective finishing techniques for those who invest the time and training to make use of these tools feasible.

I am finding myself transitioning to an "older man's hapkido" where I believe myself to be less and less likely to grab these particular tools (at least, the flashier ones ) if forced to defend myself.

*BUT* I think

(HERE is where I bring it back "on topic" )

that keeping these kicks within the curriculum is very important.

It is true that not everybody will be able to use them. But some can and will, and I don't think we, today, should deprive future generations of hapkido'in with the opportunity to train them and decide for themselves if they want to put those tools to use.

They ALSO have value in pushing us (as hapkido'in) physically. To me, training difficult kicks, makes the basic kicks seem easy in comparison.

Those who ONLY train the easy stuff may end up feeling as if THOSE are difficult &#8212; making even the basic kicks hard and maybe even not useable.

THAT is my objection to decisions by ANYONE to "pare down" and eliminate techniques from hapkido to come up with what THEY believe to be a smaller, practical curriculum.

Just because an individual &#8212; grandmaster or not &#8212; finds a technique not useful for THEM doesn't mean it might not be perfect for a future hapkido'in.

I would not ever presume to eliminate something from MSK hapkido, whether I think it works or not. Maybe the problem is with ME, not the technique.


----------



## Drac (Jun 28, 2009)

I have avoided commenting in this thread much because of my association with GMP and the ICHF.. I see it as just another oppertunity for so called experts tucked safely away in their computer rooms to bash Combat Hapkido and its founder..So rather than engage in a counter productive discussion let me say this..

I have been associated with Combat Hapkido and GM Pellegrini for the past 4 years and I have *NEVER, EVER* heard him put down another discipline or its founder...*THAT *is the mark of a gentleman and a true Grandmaster..


----------



## terrylamar (Jun 28, 2009)

Drac said:


> I have avoided commenting in this thread much because of my association with GMP and the ICHF.. I see it as just another oppertunity for so called experts tucked safely away in their computer rooms to bash Combat Hapkido and its founder..So rather than engage in a counter productive discussion let me say this..
> 
> I have been associated with Combat Hapkido and GM Pellegrini for the past 4 years and I have *NEVER, EVER* heard him put down another discipline or is founder...*THAT *is the mark of a gentleman and a true Grandmaster..


 
Oh, I get it, you mean unlike some of the posters on here.


----------



## Father Greek (Jun 28, 2009)

For those of you who disagree with the original part of this post, please look at the number of posts on MT that have to do with Combat Hapkido and Grand Master Pellegrini. The pure number of posts proves that what the author of the article said is correct.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 28, 2009)

As they say - No publicity is bad publicity


----------



## Father Greek (Jun 28, 2009)

Just out of idle curiosity, what did Grand Master Pellegrini do to you that makes you seem so angry?


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 28, 2009)

I'm not sure this directed at me but since I posed last, it may be. Gm P doesn't make me angry I just think that there is a lot of misinformation that is posted and I am trying to give a counter view point. First - It's isn't HKD, I know it's combat HKD but few outside make a distinction. Also what he does do I think he does poorly - not just from a HKD standpoint but from a JJ standpoint. He promotes a commercial model, I don't agree with the commercial model. Teaching assault as self defense. Etc and so forth - I just don't think his model of MA is good for MAs as a whole. He is selling what people want, so I expect him to be successful but not giving people what they need. ( making it easier for mass consumption - imo that defeats the the art or do side of MAs)  It's a sticky wicket because I don't think selling MAs is good for MAs. I don't hate the guy or wish him personal ill or anything I just countering acting the propaganda I see. If you applied his model to something like basketball -I think his version would be H.O.R.S.E. with maybe some soccer thrown in, rather than the full game. The full game isn't for everyone but by learning H.O.R.S.E. doesn't mean someone is ready to play in the N.B.A. or even a playground pick up game.


----------



## Father Greek (Jun 28, 2009)

So are you saying because the man has a successful marketing program that it is a bad thing, and that because it does not fall in line with traditional MA that it is not useful as self defense? I have already seen your views on the DVD program from earlier posts, does this hold true for all DVD presentations? I believe that you had posted against DVD learning. If I am wrong please forgive me.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 28, 2009)

Not that he is successful in marketing - I think the selling of martial arts in general is a bad thing. He is at the extreme end of the scale. As a businessman I commend him, he is very good at what he does. 

It doesn't have to fall in line with TMAs - there are things that come from challenging yourself that are part of the "do" of HKD. You can learn and develop these things outside the TMA - MMA, Golf, Basket weaving etc but the point is to stretch yourself to learn about and develop yourself. It's in the name Hap Ki DO. If you are only picking the low hanging fruit you aren't challenging or developing yourself. You may learn some useful skills but it isn't HKD or any "do".  Plus I don't think GM P is very apt at a JJ art. Nor did he have much experience in HKD before starting a "new" art. 

There is a difference between TMAs and self defense. TMA can be used as self defense as well as CHKD - but much of what is taught is "how to assault" - This is a larger discussion. CHKD says they have stripped down the TMA to give just self defense - not true - they still have the destructive techniques from THKD - not legal in most western countries. Once your attacker has stopped attacking so must you. No "finishing" techniques or offensive knife etc. To say pure self defense is a lie. 

Also-  HKD is a difficult art to learn - making it seem prepackaged and easy is  lie and a disservice to students. 

My comments apply to all DVD courses - they are only useful in conjunction with regular hands on instruction. 

SO ... if you are teaching only the low hanging fruit and ignoring the historical and civil context and making it seem easy - I think you are doing MAs and society as a whole a disservice. You are selling the illusion of MA prowess and insight. 

Just my opinion but you know what they say about those. I figure for every "yea! CHKD" there should be a "nay CHKD".  The "nays" marketing budget isn't as large


----------



## Father Greek (Jun 28, 2009)

May I ask what style of Hapkido do you study?


----------



## yorkshirelad (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I just don't think his model of MA is good for MAs as a whole. He is selling what people want, so I expect him to be successful but not giving people what they need.


Isn't it a little egotistical to presume that you know what people need and GMP doesn't? I mean people practise for all kinds of reasons and some just want to be able to protect themselves without the the trappings that traditional arts offer. When I was studying Sin Moo, I was sometimes bewildered by the sheer size of the curriculum and found much of it of no use to me. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy training or that the art is worthless. On the contrary, I learned many skills that I am grateful for, but I was training for self protection skills alone and now believe that if I had taken out the advanced kicking techniques, the Dan Jun breathing and some of the advanced techniques, I could of concentrated more on what I NEEDED for my job-SELF PROTECTION SKILLS. Kudos to GMP for taking away the fluff.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

Father, you put me in an awkward position - I do come from a commercial school but my ideals also come from that school. My Gm was a student of Ji Han Jae at the Blue House and was integral  to the spread of HKD in Viet Nam and Hong Kong, So out of respect for him I'm not going to reveal the name of the school. But I can say he has always put HKD above his personal financial interests, He does have many satellite schools that he doesn't draw income from, He is a man that I admire and respect and I don't want to drag him into this discussion where I am expressing my views not his. He has always been an ideal to live up to. IMO

York,

I think you are missing the point entirely. TMA doesn't inhibit self defense. They include self defense and go beyond, I can't know the life you are living - if you are truly in danger at a daly basis I am sorry, living in fear for your life every day is a rough go. I can only suggest moving or arming yourself heavily. If you want to study a "do" it does transcend basic self defense. It is a way to live your life. "DO" translated most simply means path. It is how you view your life. Some do it through religion, some do it through life experience, some choose to view through the philosophy of "do"

So ( IMO) if you are coming to MA - any MA for simply for self protection - it should include how to escape a situation rather than trying to  dominate or escalate it  and should be congruent with the laws that you are living under. If that is your only goal ( not that any thing is wrong with that ) you shouldn't give it the nomenclature of "do"  "DO" incapsulates much more than simply beating the ***** out of some one. ( again IMO) "DO" means a Life path. I don't see that in CHKD.


----------



## goingd (Jun 29, 2009)

Wowzers, this thread has been busy since I was gone.... and gone quite off topic.

I wasn't looking for a bash Pelligrini session - or a bash anyone anything really. There has been plenty of that, not that new opinions shouldn't be expressed.
I was rather looking for people to express their feelings on the comparison of Pelligrini and Bruce Lee, and then to discuss the opinion... on the comparison. I should have worded the title differently, sorry. ^~^

Now, in my opinion - as I have said - Pelligrini has done a disservice to Hapkido. I believe he has be very deceptive - not that there are not many deceptive traditional masters. He is not someone I would consider a grandmaster or even a master of Hapkido.

I practice high kicks so that my low kicks will be better. I have never seen anything about Pelligrini putting down any other master in any way, but I find it more upsetting how he has tried to relabel traditional martial arts and something heavily excessive. To me - the way he does it - is automatically insulting to tradtional martial artists and masters. So, for this in part I am upset with the idea of him going down in history up there with greats like Bruce Lee.

Greg L.


----------



## Drac (Jun 29, 2009)

goingd said:


> I wasn't looking for a bash Pelligrini session - or a bash anyone anything really. There has been plenty of that, not that new opinions shouldn't be expressed.


 
Yes there has been way too much ignorant bashing..



goingd said:


> I was rather looking for people to express their feelings on the comparison of Pelligrini and Bruce Lee, and then to discuss the opinion... on the comparison. I should have worded the title differently, sorry. ^~^


 
Yes, the compairson of Bruce Lee to GMP or to any MA is idiotic..2 different disciplines and very different people 



goingd said:


> Now, in my opinion - as I have said - Pelligrini has done a disservice to Hapkido. I believe he has be very deceptive - not that there are not many deceptive traditional masters. He is not someone I would consider a grandmaster or even a master of Hapkido.


 
Not even the greatest con-man alive could decieve that many people for so long and prosper..His organization grows stronger every year and attracts notable supporters..Bill " Superfoot" Wallace,Wilem DeThouras( Uncle Bill) and Carlson Gracie Jr etc..etc..Do you lump them all into the deciever catagory as they support GMP and his system??


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

Drac said:


> Not even the greatest con-man alive could decieve that many people for so long and prosper..His organization grows stronger every year and attracts notable supporters..Bill " Superfoot" Wallace,Wilem DeThouras( Uncle Bill) and Carlson Gracie Jr etc..etc..Do you lump them all into the deciever catagory as they support GMP and his system??



I wouldn't confuse commercial success with being "correct." - He is catering to peoples conceptions of the MAs and showing it to be a easy achievable goal - for a price. All the other people you mention are also selling MAs for a living. GM P is just better at it than they are.


----------



## Father Greek (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> So ( IMO) if you are coming to MA - any MA for simply for self protection - it should include how to escape a situation rather than trying to  dominate or escalate it  and should be congruent with the laws that you are living under. If that is your only goal ( not that any thing is wrong with that ) you shouldn't give it the nomenclature of "do"  "DO" incapsulates much more than simply beating the ***** out of some one. ( again IMO) "DO" means a Life path. I don't see that in CHKD.



I can only say in this regard that you have obviously never really looked at the techniques that are taught in Combat Hapkido nor do you know the philosophy that is taught. We teach essentially on the Use of Force Continuum. Walk away when possible, counter the threat and diffuse, counter the threat and respond with appropriate force. No one in Combat Hapkido that I have come in contact with has ever advocated destroying someone once the situation is nullified. This is my last post on this subject.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

I think I wasn't clear in my post. There are things in THKD that aren't appropriate for self defense so if you include them in a "pure self defense " system you are catering to a fantasy. Things in TMAs and THKD in particular can be used for self defense but not all of it. For ex breaking someone's arm  isn't an appropriate legal response to someone taking a poke at you. It's not self defense, it's assault. Fighting isn't legal. Things that were appropriate in Korea in the 50's and in Japan earlier are not appropriate in the the USA in 09.


----------



## Drac (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I wouldn't confuse commercial success with being "correct." - He is catering to peoples conceptions of the MAs and showing it to be a easy achievable goal - for a price. All the other people you mention are also selling MAs for a living. GM P is just better at it than they are.


 
I shall foward this response to Grandmaster Wallace and with his permisson post his response...For the record CH aint all that easy...


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

I would love to hear how his sport kicking style,which he one of if not the best at ( all above the waist per the sports rules ) fits in with GM Ps no nonsense, no high kicks, pure self defense style.


----------



## Drac (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I would love to hear how his sport kicking style,which he one of if not the best at ( all above the waist per the sports rules ) fits in with GM Ps no nonsense, no high kicks, pure self defense style.


 
Gawd, this is like arguing with a grapefruit..I give up..You have your beliefs and I have mine...


----------



## crushing (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> I think I wasn't clear in my post. There are things in THKD that aren't appropriate for self defense so if you include them in a "pure self defense " system you are catering to a fantasy. Things in TMAs and THKD in particular can be used for self defense but not all of it. For ex breaking someone's arm isn't an appropriate legal response to someone taking a poke at you. It's not self defense, it's assault. Fighting isn't legal. Things that were appropriate in Korea in the 50's and in Japan earlier are not appropriate in the the USA in 09.


 
Of course, this is true independent of the MA, or even if the person being 'poked' is not in MA at all.

I have yet to see anyone in the ICHF claim or even suggest that breaking someone's arm is an appropriate response to someone "taking a poke" (unless that poke is with a knife).  De-escalation and calm is the first goal and fighting is to be avoided.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

Really?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6346146385542976175


----------



## Catalyst (Jun 29, 2009)

goingd said:


> .......and gone quite off topic.......
> 
> ........I was rather looking for people to express their feelings on the comparison of Pelligrini and Bruce Lee........
> Greg L.


 
I'll try and stay on the question of the original topic.

The question that I have is what were each trying to acheive?

I think GM Pelligrini was trying to take an existing "-do" (Hapkido) and, in essence, revert it back to the "-yusul" (Hapkiyusul), from which the "-do" developed from. 

I think his situation is different than Bruce Lee's. 

I think Mr. Lee was trying to synthesize a new art from a variety of existing Arts.

Both may have used some of the same methods to acheive their goals, however, their goals were different.

Just my $0.02


----------



## MJS (Jun 29, 2009)

Before this thread goes on any further, I'd like to say a few things.  First, the actions that some are accusing GMP and CHK of, are in no way, shape or form, limited to Hapkido or any of its off shoots.  Second, if someone is not interested in an art, don't train it.  If you're not training it, then it should not effect you, as long as you feel you have the 'real art', whichever it may be.  Third, I'd like to point everyone involved in this thread to the forum rules,  specifically sections 1.10-1.10.3.  Many posts here are right on the line of violating the mentioned sections. 

Mike Slosek
MT Asst. Admin


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 29, 2009)

Catalyst said:


> I'll try and stay on the question of the original topic.
> 
> The question that I have is what were each trying to acheive?
> 
> ...


 
So back to the original topic - this is a really good argument.  Although, it depends what aspect of the comparison you are looking at.  From the standpoint the arts that they created and what they set out to do, I agree, different goals.

But from public reaction and the "novelty" of what they did, I still think that it is a good comparison.


----------



## crushing (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> Really?
> 
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6346146385542976175


 
Nice video, the music was a little loud.  Was it supposed to prove something?


----------



## zDom (Jun 29, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> So back to the original topic - this is a really good argument.  Although, it depends what aspect of the comparison you are looking at.  From the standpoint the arts that they created and what they set out to do, I agree, different goals.
> 
> But from public reaction and the "novelty" of what they did, I still think that it is a good comparison.



I also think it is a valid comparison.

Both decided that TMAs had too much "fluff" and that they should establish their own, new style that focuses on effective techniques.

And (this is not a bash, just a difference of opinion) I think they

were *BOTH* wrong!

I think that idea works on an individual level but is wrong at the system/curriculum level.

Or, to restate, in my opinion, INDIVIDUALS should focus on what works for THEM for their personal martial art style.

But in eliminating techinques from a system, from a curriculum, you may deprive future students for something that would be great for THEM even if YOU find it doesn't work.

For example, low spinning heel kick to someone's calf &#8212; I've just never been very good at. Never quite clicked for me. Jump spinning heel kick to the head? Yep. But the low one? Not so much ...

But I see this not as a problem in the technique, but in *ME*. Maybe I didn't give it a good chance, didn't try hard enough at it, didn't put in the reps.

But I've seen plenty of folk who can whip that out "like ringin' a bell."

Logically, if every generation's instructors eliminate techniques based on what they think works, eventually (over the course of hundreds or thousands of years) end up with what, a couple techniques? Zero? Eventually, each and every technique would be eliminated as there is bound to be SOMEONE who decides they can't make technique X work for them.

This doesn't mean I think CHKD or JKD are bad systems. Clearly there are many folk who are perfectly happy with them &#8212; and that is fine. Ultimately, I think people should train with the best instructor they can who is around &#8212; and if that is a CHKD or JKD instructor, so be it.

But I think slimming down systems based on an individual's proficiency with techniques is a bad idea, overall, for the martial arts. And I DO object to them implying or outright stating that their system is better than MY system because they got rid of "junk" or "fluff." Isn't that, in fact, a roundabout way of bashing me and my instructors? (Silly us, keeping these useless techniques in our curriculum, eh?)

I mean, EVERY martial art system picks and chooses techniques. And the NUMBER of techniques each system decides to focus on is hotly debated: some, like boxing, take it down to only a dozen or so (sorry if I have this number wrong &#8212; never studied boxing, but it seems about that many) while others &#8212; some style of hapkido, for example, study _thousands_.

It's a judgement call, really. Do you just choose ONE technique and limit your options but become really REALLY good at that ONE technique? Or study a kajillion and only get to practice each technique a couple times in a lifetime?

Most of us pick somewhere in between these extremes and are happy with our choice.

My final comment is: maybe Pellegrini wouldn't have run into so much negative energy if he had simply called it Pellegrini's Hapkido or stuck with Chon-Tu Kwan Hapkido instead of "Combat Hapkido."

I've always found that name a bit offensive &#8212; it seems to imply that MY hapkido is, what? something not appropriate for combat? "Sport" hapkido?

ALL hapkido is "combat" hapkido (or SHOULD be &#8212; if not, then it isn't hapkido at all!)

So, yea: Lee and Pellegrini are comparable. Except Bruce didn't call his new art "Fighting Wing Chun"


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

crushing said:


> Nice video, the music was a little loud.  Was it supposed to prove something?



That is isn't just "self defense" - the "defender" becomes the aggressor which is Not self defense.


----------



## yorkshirelad (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> York,
> 
> I think you are missing the point entirely. TMA doesn't inhibit self defense. They include self defense and go beyond, I can't know the life you are living - if you are truly in danger at a daly basis I am sorry, living in fear for your life every day is a rough go. I can only suggest moving or arming yourself heavily. If you want to study a "do" it does transcend basic self defense. It is a way to live your life. "DO" translated most simply means path. It is how you view your life. Some do it through religion, some do it through life experience, some choose to view through the philosophy of "do"
> .


 LOl!! You're sarcasm hasn't been wasted on me. Kudos. I was working as Security in a nightclub in Dublin, Ireland during the latter part of my Hapkido training. My life was in no more danger than any other bouncer, but I wasn't interested in meditation, Dan Jun breathing, or kicks that if tried, would have resulted in me getting my **** kicked and probably fired.

We can go into discussion relating to the correct use of the term "Do" in Korean and Japanese martial arts, but in this contents "Do" is meaningless. Obviously GMP used the term Hapkido because his art is based on his Hapkido training. As founder of the system he can call the art anything he wants and teach people any techniques that he see fit as, Choi, Ji and all others have before him.

My take on the whole situation is, that if you have a problem with the system, don't train in it. Obviously GMP is doing well for himself and people want to train in his system. If what he teaches is nonsense then the market will dictate that he fail. His system has gone from strength to strength, so he must be doing something right. I have yet to meet the man and right now funds are scarse. If I do come up woth some excess cash however, I will jump at the chance to go to one of his seminars.


----------



## yorkshirelad (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> Really?
> 
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6346146385542976175


I didn't see anyone get their arm broken in that clip. Where was it?


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

Wow - do you break your training partners arms? Rough School - High turnover.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

yorkshirelad said:


> We can go into discussion relating to the correct use of the term "Do" in Korean and Japanese martial arts, but in this contents "Do" is meaningless. Obviously GMP used the term Hapkido because his art is based on his Hapkido training. As founder of the system he can call the art anything he wants and teach people any techniques that he see fit as, Choi, Ji and all others have before him.



As a practitioner of Hapkido I am free to say what he does isn't HKD, no matter of his reasoning or financial success. It's rather silly to take out the "do" and then call it an enhanced "do" - imo of course. Do you like peanutbutterless peanutbutter and jelly sandwiches? ( sorry a rather American reference don't know the UK version - Tealess Tea? )


----------



## goingd (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> Really?
> 
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6346146385542976175



How dare they use music from 007! Lol, but really I'll post about all this later.

^~^


----------



## yorkshirelad (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> Wow - do you break your training partners arms? Rough School - High turnover.


Again, nobody in the clip got their arm broken. Maybe the "Do" in Combat Hapkido refers to GMP "way" of doing things. You obviously don't like him and his system, so I wish you luck in training in THKD. Let's just leave it at that.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

Of course no one got their arm broken. It was a demo and these are training partners. That is what these techniques are designed to do tho. A outer wrist throw is designed to break the wrist. 

So GM P can co-opt not only a Korean arts name but change the meaning of "DO"- this is getting more ridiculous as this go on. Lets leave it that you are so enamored that you refuse to see it.


----------



## crushing (Jun 29, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> That is isn't just "self defense" - the "defender" becomes the aggressor which is Not self defense.



A demonstration of a technique on its own, such as shown in the video, does not have context. _ You_ have decided to create a context, an assumption if you will, where nothing lead up to the point at which the technique is performed.  Now create a context where the attacker has made an intent to injure or kill clear.  Maybe the attacker has a friend or two that are coming at the defender.  You can only be not aggressive so long before being overwhelmed by attackers.

Do you think the same of this very similar video?


----------



## goingd (Jun 29, 2009)

I do not "lump" Pelligrini's supporters as decievers. I don't know their reasons for working with him, and I just don't care all that much.

My problem with him is not the number of techniques in his system or even the techniques themselves. I have a problem with his performance of those techniques. He has clearly bought his way into a rank that in my opinion does not reflect his ability.

I got more than enough feedback, so I'd be happy if the thread ended about now. But if not, oh well.

^~^


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 29, 2009)

*Attention all users:

Please return to the original topic, and keep the discussion polite and respectful.

jks9199
Moderator
*


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 29, 2009)

crushing said:


> Do you think the same of this very similar video?



Yep- esp the "neck breaking" technique.


----------



## crushing (Jun 29, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> Actually, I just reread the expert AGAIN and realized that the writer wasn't even comparing the statement, he was saying that GM P's statement was just as bold as Lee's statement.  Basically that they both stirred up controversy.  I know that people are very anxious to put down anything done by GM Pelligrini, but again, this statement is nothing to get upset about.  It is still a solid comparison.  GM P's statement was bold, Bruce Lee's statement was bold.  You can't argue with that.
> 
> Crushing already pointed this out....but the discussion, it seems, is still based on what kind of martial artist GM P is, not about the statement that he made.



You really hit the nail on the head with this post!


----------



## yorkshirelad (Jun 30, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> Of course no one got their arm broken. It was a demo and these are training partners. That is what these techniques are designed to do tho. A outer wrist throw is designed to break the wrist.
> 
> So GM P can co-opt not only a Korean arts name but change the meaning of "DO"- this is getting more ridiculous as this go on. Lets leave it that you are so enamored that you refuse to see it.


I've never met the guy. I saw some in the Hapkido world who treated certain Grandmasters as demi-gods. I appreciate what GMP does, I am not in any way enamoured with him or anyone else for that matter and btw, I am not a BB in Combat Hapkido. I am a chudan in Sin Moo Hapkido, I have only seen footage of CHKD and I happen to like it. You seem rather angry. We're talking about Martail Arts here. If you don't like what he does, don't train with him. Good luck with your training mate.


----------



## Catalyst (Jun 30, 2009)

MBuzzy said:


> Although, it depends what aspect of the comparison you are looking at.


 
Agreed, depending upon which perspective you're coming from, you can reach a different conclusion. 


If you approach it from this aspect, 



MBuzzy said:


> But from public reaction and the "novelty" of what they did, I still think that it is a good comparison.


Then I also agree with your conclusion.

Isn't it wonderful when we're willing to look at things in different ways? :asian:


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 30, 2009)

yorkshirelad said:


> I've never met the guy. I saw some in the Hapkido world who treated certain Grandmasters as demi-gods. I appreciate what GMP does, I am not in any way enamoured with him or anyone else for that matter and btw, I am not a BB in Combat Hapkido. I am a chudan in Sin Moo Hapkido, I have only seen footage of CHKD and I happen to like it. You seem rather angry. We're talking about Martail Arts here. If you don't like what he does, don't train with him. Good luck with your training mate.



At the end of the day my opinion is just my opinion. I'm not angry, GM P doesn't cross my mind unless I come this discussion board. I thought that was the point - to discuss. I just am pointing out what I find to be misguided in my opinion. I haven't had anyone give me any compelling reason to change my opinion mostly it comes in the forms of "but we like it" or "he's finatially successful so he must be right" never addressing my points directly. People can spend their money on anything they like - Hopefully by discussing it they will more informed.


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 30, 2009)

Ok guys....this is just an unofficialy little reminder here.  We've had two official warnings, seriously, back to topic.  If you want to discuss anything other than the posted article and the comparision, please feel free to start another thread.

On that note, 



> Then I also agree with your conclusion.
> 
> Isn't it wonderful when we're willing to look at things in different ways? :asian:


 
Yes!  Thank you!  Really, my opinion here is that the author probably never envisioned a 3 page philosophical discussion on the comparision that he made and probably put very little thought into it.  It is certainly interesting to compare what the two men have done and haven't done.  

They both created an art from what they knew of other styles...they both focused on what they found to be most effective...they both disposed of a great many traditional practices...and they were both ostracized by their respective previous styles for being revolutionary.  

They have both been pretty successful too...


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 30, 2009)

I don't see how GM P's statement is revolutionary. It mimics BL's and it was made well after BL's. The earth isn't flat and we revolve around the Sun - there I said it. Deal


----------



## MBuzzy (Jun 30, 2009)

It is quite obviously revolutionary because it evoke such a response from traditional hapkido practitioners.  If you didn't think it was revolutionary, would we be having this conversation?  

I think that the comparison to the shape of the earth is a bit difference.  Particularly when both of those statements were made in an effort to "justify" or futher explain the actions that the men took.  It is quite obvious that people still believe that all of the traditional stuff is necessary or useful (myself included, I practice two traditional styles and the traditional part is what I like the most), therefore, saying the opposite is still revolutionary.  

Take for example if during the first American Revoluation, only a small portion of the colonies had gained independence, like...a single state.  Then 40 years later, someone started a new revolution.  I would think that is a better comparison if that's what you're going for.

In both cases though, they created something that is useful to the people who practice it and something that people like.  So let them like it - JKD hasn't "stolen" anyone away from Wing Chun and they've gotten over it.  JKD has proven itself.  CHKD may very well do the same 20 years from now.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jun 30, 2009)

I don't think it revolutionary because nothing GM P is saying is new. 

So I don't think the analogy holds water - So every martial art seeming can have a their own revolution? BL statement was applicable across the board no just for Wing Chun. Cross training is hardly a new concept that predates BL in the modern area as well.Self Defense classes based on MAs but not the full MAs isn't new either. 

I thinks BL's message was to look at what you are doing critically and don't get caught up in the trappings. (his "classical mess") Also BL didn't say he was revising WC - his for the totality of MAs. Much broader than "I'm making a better self defense system out of this outdated one" He was more inline with the zeitgeist of the time - "free yourself" 

For me this isn't a turf war or about stealing anyone if people like spending their money on this - it's their money - I think they are just misguided - I think there is too much bad HKD out there as it is - TKD "add on", distance learning etc. So I think less people doing better HKD is more desirable than more people doing bad HKD. Making it easier for broad consumption is a problem imo not a solution to a problem. So I find the statement more silly than inspiring esp in light of calling his art a "do" and removing the "do" aspects. He seems more Carnie barker then revolutionary. Obviously others differ.


----------



## goingd (Jul 1, 2009)

Bruce Lee had above acceptable foot work. He could show what he claimed to know and then some, from Wing Chun to his own Jeet Kun Do. Bruce Lee believed in low kicks, but his high kicks were outstanding. He did not buy his way into rank.

There is a difference between something that is positively revolution and something that is negatively revolutionary. Revolutionary War, not so great. All I can say is Combat Hapkido is a misguided concept in my opinion. Honestly I would have been more pleased if Pelligrini had promoted himself and gave his system a name other than Hapkido - but that probably would not have sold.

.... ^~^


----------



## Father Greek (Jul 1, 2009)

goingd said:


> Bruce Lee had above acceptable foot work. He could show what he claimed to know and then some, from Wing Chun to his own Jeet Kun Do. Bruce Lee believed in low kicks, but his high kicks were outstanding. He did not buy his way into rank.
> 
> There is a difference between something that is positively revolution and something that is negatively revolutionary. Revolutionary War, not so great. All I can say is Combat Hapkido is a misguided concept in my opinion. Honestly I would have been more pleased if Pelligrini had promoted himself and gave his system a name other than Hapkido - but that probably would not have sold.
> 
> .... ^~^


As a long time practitioner of Combat Hapkido, I would like to thank you for helping me see the way! After taking several of GMP's high kicks and being treated like a puppet on a string during one of his flow drills, I now see that it was nothing but smoke and mirrors. I will now begin to spread the word to the many members of the Military and Law Enforcement communities that depend on the skills that they were taught by GMP, that what they learned is suspect and should not rely on them. Thanks again for making my path clear!


----------



## Father Greek (Jul 1, 2009)

As for being off topic, it is clear that the OP wants to take this direction so in this case I do not feel bad.


----------



## crushing (Jul 1, 2009)

Father Greek said:


> As for being off topic, it is clear that the OP wants to take this direction so in this case I do not feel bad.



The original post did seem kind of trollish, but I gave it the benefit of the doubt. . .unfortunately.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jul 1, 2009)

Father Greek said:


> As a long time practitioner of Combat Hapkido, I would like to thank you for helping me see the way! After taking several of GMP's high kicks and being treated like a puppet on a string during one of his flow drills, I now see that it was nothing but smoke and mirrors. I will now begin to spread the word to the many members of the Military and Law Enforcement communities that depend on the skills that they were taught by GMP, that what they learned is suspect and should not rely on them. Thanks again for making my path clear!



Flow drills aren't HKD - kind of confusing the map for the territory. 

BTW why is throwing high kicks? (in light of his statement n' all)


----------



## jim777 (Jul 2, 2009)

crushing said:


> The original post did seem kind of trollish, but I gave it the benefit of the doubt. . .unfortunately.



The whole thread is an anti-CHK troll, a "this style isn't as good as mine" exercise. And I had just gotten a 4th dan Okinawan stylist i know and respect to join this site because we_ didn't_ do that here.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jul 2, 2009)

Chatting with only people that agree with you isn't a discussion - it's Groupthink or a pep rally.


----------



## jim777 (Jul 2, 2009)

Kumbajah said:


> Chatting with only people that agree with you isn't a discussion - it's Groupthink or a pep rally.



Thanks for that broad generalization. It was....time consuming.


----------



## Kumbajah (Jul 2, 2009)

As was categorizing the whole thread as trollish. Thanks for your addition to conversation - very insightful.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 3, 2009)

Thread locked pending staff review.

Users are gently urged to review sections 1.1, 1.10.2 and 1.10.3 of the Rules while the staff reviews the thread.


> *1.1 Basic Rules*
> 
> Welcome to Martial Talk. This is an open forum for the friendly discussion of martial arts. We welcome all seekers of knowledge to engage in mature conversation.
> 
> ...





> *1.10.2 No Art bashing. *
> 
> No one art is "the best", no one "style" is the best. All have their strengths and weaknesses. Do your research and find what best fits your ability and need.
> 
> ...


----------

